Bonjour a tous !!!
Je veins d'ecrire un commentaire pour l'ecole en anglais...Mais je suis sur qu'il reste plein de faute...N'étant malheuresement pas bilingue j'aimerai que quelqun puisse me corriger mes fautes.ce travail est noter est trés important pour mon année...
Bref si quelqun a l'amabilité de le faire je le remercie d'avance.
Voici le texte :


It’s really an important question because nowadays, more and more experiments are use on animals, and medicine is in progress. Of course research is important but it should not be carried out at any costs.
They is two major type of point of view: the first, the one who wants medecine to progress at all cost, even if it’s mean that animal might die; and the second one, who’re animal's protector. They are totallly against the use of animal in experiments and clame that it’s an imorale act.
I will explain, in the first part why animal should not be use in the pharmaceutical industry and in the second time the benefice of using animals in experiments.
Next I will deal with the opposition and problems between the two camps. To finish I ll will try to find some solutions which could convice the two parties.

Among the europe union countries, great Britain has the record number of animals used in experiments and every years a lot of animal suffer and die in British laboratoies in cruel and pointless experiments According to the video more than 4745 dogs died every year. This number is far too high.. This pet is one of the most sacred animal in our country so it’s logical that people can't afford their lovely-home pet can suffer in experiment.I think it's a bad thing to use dog, because it's too much important in our civilisation, maybe another animal can be accepted but not dog. Futhermore, dog’s DNA is not the same as the one from human so experiments might be use in vain. Even if an animal’s life is not an human life it’s still a life and we can afford to throw it away so easily. It’s too unmoral for our civilisation.

Now let’s explain the scientifist point of view.
Among issue that have recently received attention we learn that scientifist have found an alternate remedy to BSE.So, we can affirm that experience are not use in vain. With a lot of work, they can reach their aim and create some vaccine which could save a lot of human life. thks to these experiments,many of the world's top medecine were discovered.So we can say that
The use of animals was an obligation for drug safety procedures and chemical activity.
As Mr barton said:Experimentation on animals was the price to pay to remain innovative and discover new medecine.
But, it’s important to say that scientifist are also sensible to the way they threat animal. Before all, they are human, and they only wish to save some life…Animal are not use for sociological research by example because those type of experiments are too awful. Showing their good will the company said that experiment have to be continued but promised animals will be threated better.They don’t want any useless sufferings.

The conflict between scientifists and the animal’s protector deal some problems.
First, this feeling against science could lead to difficulties in recuiting employees.By being threat as murderer, people don’t want anymore to work for science…
Altought its supported animal rights, the governement now has to protect jobs in the pharmateucital industryIn the video we saw that animal right's campaigners have organised a demonstration to fight againt a laboratory.They have threaten the compagny's staff and the chairholder.Scientifist are target to some violence... The company's managing director want employees to be protected and their privacy to be respected...

In conclusion I wished industries did not but profit first For my part, i think that's gouvernment should not ban experiments on animal because, animal's life can save lot of life but i agree with the fact that animal should not suffer from those experiments.If they are expose to some suffer, the scientifis must find some way to diminish the suffering...

It’s really an important question because nowadays, more and more experiments are MADE on animals, and medicine is in progress...THERE ARE two major POINTS of view : the first, THOSE who WANT medecine to progress, even if IT MEANS that animals might die and the second, those, who ARE PROTECTING ANIMALS... TOTALLY... IMMORAL ACT... I will explain in the first part why animals should not be USED

In the European Union... and every YEAR...a lot of ANIMALS...dogs DIE every year...it's too important (pas de "MUCH" )... so experiments might BE DONE in vain... it is too IMMORAL.

...SCIENTIFIC... SCIENTIST... the way they TREAT ANIMALS. ANIMALS are not USED ... will be TREATED

SCIENTISTS ... RECRUITING..... People don't want to work for the science anymore beaucause they are considered as murderers...
...The compagny's managing WANTS

I (je toujours avec une majuscule en anglais)... that government... because animals' life can save a lot of human lifes... It they are EXPOSED to suffering... a way to reduce it.



Remarques :
1) Quand tu utilises la voie passive, le verbe qui suit est un participe passé et pas un infinitif
exemple : they are expose <---- FAUX
they are exposeD <---- CORRECT (participe passé d'un verbe régulier)

2) Il y a = There is/ There are
is ou are en fonction de la suite de la phrase
There are many birds = Il y a beaucoup d'oiseaux
There is a bird = Il y a un oiseau

3) vu l'heure tardive je ne garantis pas a 100% le manque d'erreur et même si il n'était pas 1h40 je ne pourrais pas le garantir ^^


Courage pour la suite, je trouve que tu t'en sors vraiment pas mal du tout

en tout cas merci beaucoup de tes remarques
J'en prend bien note !!!
Miciiiiiiiiiii