Revised Conclusion

I will rewrite my conclusion in this blog post.

Mrs rockefeller "Collier conclusion" 3/12/08 via Wikipedia. Public Domain.

My revised is much better than the original. The original was pretty much just my thesis so that's not too hard to make a better conclusion than that. That point aside, I was unsure of how this conclusion would turn out as I was writing it but I think it turned out well. I am confident in the direction I am taking with it (the "so what" approach) and I will develop it further and better once my whole essay is revised to make it the best I can.

Original

In his article "Of Mice or Men", Arthur Allen acknowledges that animal testing may have yielded effective drugs but uses historical evidence and experts' studies to claim that animal testing does not have enough merit to continue.

Revised

Arthur Allen's use of refutation, historical records, and experts' studies makes his argument credible. His argument proves that animal testing does not work frequently enough to warrant its continuation. Drug tests in animals do not catch major problems of that drug in humans but its historical use keeps it relevant. As technology advances, there needs to be an emphasis on the creation of a more accurate model of how the human body will react to a drug, not only for the lives of animals, but for humans too.