English guide
A Band 9.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 sample answer on stem cell research with full scoring breakdown and key vocabulary. Ace your IELTS Writing exam.
What this guide covers
Search answer
A Band 9.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 sample answer on stem cell research with full scoring breakdown and key vocabulary. Ace your IELTS Writing exam.
Related guides:
Some people believe that governments should invest in stem cell research while others disagree. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
Stem cell research is very important for medical progress. Governments should spend money on it because it can help many people. But some people think it is bad because it uses human cells. I will discuss both sides.
Some people say stem cell research is good. It can help find cures for diseases like cancer and Parkinson’s. Many scientists think it is the future of medicine. Governments should support it because it can save lives. For example, in 2019, a study in the UK showed that stem cells helped treat heart disease. If more money is spent on research, more diseases can be cured.
But others think it is bad. They say it is unethical because it uses human embryos. Some religions believe life starts at conception, so they are against it. Also, some people worry that scientists might misuse stem cells. If governments support it, they might be supporting something bad.
In my opinion, governments should invest in stem cell research but with rules. They should make sure it is ethical. Scientists should not use embryos and must follow strict guidelines. If this happens, stem cell research can help many people without causing ethical problems.**
The debate over stem cell research funding has intensified in recent years. While some advocate for government investment due to its potential medical benefits, others oppose it on ethical grounds. This essay will explore both perspectives before presenting a personal stance.
On one hand, stem cell research offers tremendous medical potential. It could lead to breakthroughs in treating diseases like Alzheimer’s, spinal cord injuries, and diabetes. For instance, a 2022 study by Cambridge University demonstrated that stem cells can regenerate damaged tissues, offering hope to patients with previously untreatable conditions. Additionally, funding this research could boost a country’s economy by creating jobs in the biotechnology sector. Governments that invest in stem cell research may see long-term economic and social benefits.**
Conversely, opponents argue that stem cell research raises ethical concerns. The use of embryonic stem cells involves destroying human embryos, which some people consider unethical. Many religious groups oppose this practice, as they believe life begins at conception. Furthermore, there is a risk that stem cell research could be misused, leading to unethical practices like cloning. Some people worry that government funding could encourage scientists to prioritize profits over ethics.**
In my view, governments should invest in stem cell research but with strict regulations. Research should focus on adult stem cells or induced pluripotent stem cells, which do not involve embryos. Governments should also enforce ethical guidelines to prevent misuse. By doing this, they can maximize the benefits of stem cell research while minimizing ethical concerns.**
The question of whether governments should fund stem cell research has sparked intense debate. Proponents argue that it holds the key to medical advancements, while detractors cite ethical dilemmas. This essay will critically evaluate both viewpoints before presenting a balanced conclusion.
Advocates of stem cell research funding contend that it could revolutionize medicine. Stem cells have the potential to treat a wide range of diseases, from Parkinson’s to heart disease, by regenerating damaged tissues. For example, a 2024 study published in the Journal of Medical Ethics revealed that stem cell therapy significantly improved the mobility of patients with spinal cord injuries. Furthermore, investing in this field could stimulate economic growth by fostering innovation in the biotech industry. Countries that lead in stem cell research may gain a competitive edge in the global pharmaceutical market.**
However, critics highlight several ethical concerns associated with stem cell research. The extraction of embryonic stem cells requires the destruction of human embryos, a practice that many find morally reprehensible. Religious groups often oppose this on the grounds that life begins at conception. Additionally, there is a risk of misuse, such as human cloning or unregulated experimentation. Some argue that government funding could inadvertently encourage unethical practices, as scientists may prioritize breakthroughs over ethical considerations.**
In my opinion, governments should allocate funding to stem cell research, but with stringent ethical oversight. Research should focus on non-embryonic sources, such as adult stem cells or induced pluripotent stem cells, which do not raise the same ethical concerns. Governments should also establish clear guidelines to prevent misuse. By doing so, they can harness the medical benefits of stem cell research while upholding ethical standards.**
The contentious issue of government-funded stem cell research has been a subject of intense deliberation in recent years. Proponents highlight its transformative potential in medical science, while opponents cite ethical and moral objections. This essay will critically evaluate both perspectives before presenting a nuanced stance.
On the one hand, stem cell research presents unprecedented opportunities for medical advancements. Stem cells have the capacity to differentiate into various cell types, offering hope for regenerative therapies in conditions such as Alzheimer’s, diabetes, and spinal cord injuries. A 2025 study conducted by the National Institutes of Health demonstrated that stem cell therapy restored neural function in patients with traumatic brain injuries, underscoring its therapeutic potential. Furthermore, investing in this field could catalyze economic growth by fostering innovation in the biotechnology sector. Countries that pioneer stem cell research may secure a competitive advantage in the global pharmaceutical market, thereby enhancing their economic prosperity.**
Conversely, ethical and moral concerns have been raised regarding stem cell research. The extraction of embryonic stem cells necessitates the destruction of human embryos, a practice that many consider morally reprehensible. Religious groups often oppose this on the grounds that life begins at conception, and the destruction of embryos is tantamount to taking a human life. Additionally, there is a risk of misuse, such as human cloning or unregulated experimentation. Critics argue that government funding could inadvertently encourage unethical practices, as scientists may prioritize groundbreaking discoveries over ethical considerations.**
In my view, governments should allocate substantial funding to stem cell research, but with robust ethical safeguards. Research should prioritize non-embryonic sources, such as adult stem cells or induced pluripotent stem cells, which do not raise the same ethical concerns. Governments should also establish and enforce stringent ethical guidelines to prevent misuse. By adopting this balanced approach, they can capitalize on the medical benefits of stem cell research while upholding ethical standards and public trust.**
Task Response (TR): 5.0 - Presents a basic position but lacks depth in analysis. Some ideas are relevant but not fully developed. Coherence and Cohesion (CC): 6.0 - Ideas are logically organized but with some repetition and simplistic linking words. Lexical Resource (LR): 5.0 - Uses basic vocabulary with occasional errors and limited range. Grammatical Range and Accuracy (GRA): 6.0 - Sentences are mostly simple with some complex structures, but errors are frequent.
Task Response (TR): 7.0 - Presents a clear position with relevant, extended ideas but some points could be more developed. Coherence and Cohesion (CC): 7.0 - Ideas are logically organized with clear progression, but some transitions are still basic. Lexical Resource (LR): 7.0 - Uses a mix of appropriate and less precise vocabulary with occasional errors. Grammatical Range and Accuracy (GRA): 7.0 - Uses a mix of simple and complex sentence forms with some errors.
Task Response (TR): 8.0 - Presents a clear position with fully developed ideas and relevant supporting evidence. Coherence and Cohesion (CC): 8.0 - Ideas are logically organized with clear progression and effective use of cohesive devices. Lexical Resource (LR): 8.0 - Uses a wide range of vocabulary with some less precise wording and occasional errors. Grammatical Range and Accuracy (GRA): 8.0 - Uses a mix of simple and complex sentence forms with some errors but generally accurate.
Task Response (TR): 9.0 - Presents a clear, informed position with fully developed ideas and relevant, extended supporting evidence. Coherence and Cohesion (CC): 9.0 - Ideas are logically organized with clear progression and sophisticated use of cohesive devices. Lexical Resource (LR): 9.0 - Uses a wide range of vocabulary with full flexibility and precision, and minimal errors. Grammatical Range and Accuracy (GRA): 9.0 - Uses a mix of simple and complex sentence forms with minimal errors, demonstrating full grammatical range.
Practice makes perfect. Get your own IELTS Writing Task 2 response scored by AI on English AIdol and receive detailed feedback to help you improve.