Help me, please, to write a conclusion according to the structure and text of my speech. The conclusion should not be very big
The sturcture:
1) Thesis restatement
2) Review of main ideas (We told…You now understand…)
3) Clincher / attention catcher (you can come up with some ideas)
(Optional) 4) Call for an action

The text:

The ancient philosopher Confucius once said: "To control oneself so that we respect others as ourselves and treat them as we wish to be treated is what can be called the doctrine of humanity."
So, today we will prove to you that life-term prisoners should not be used for medical testing instead of animals.
We are citizens of our country who care about the rights of other citizens, regardless of their social status.
1. To begin with, we will tell you why medical testing on life-sentenced prisoners, rather than on animals, is leading to an unfair punishment of citizens not sentenced to death
2. then, we prove that medical testing on life-sentenced prisoners will lead to the deterioration of the situation in the world community.
3. And finally, we'll tell you why medical testing on life-sentenced prisoners can lead to unreliable data and results 

Medical testing on life-sentenced prisoners, rather than on animals, is leading to an unfair punishment of citizens not sentenced to death.
Generally accepted standards for testing medical products in humans involve animal testing to minimize the risks to subjects. According to statistics, from 2005 to 2008, up to 50 percent of test-animals (depending on the types of drugs studied) died from medical testing in Europe. The exclusion of the animal testing stage leads to an increased risk of death for the subjects, which can lead to unfair punishment for citizens not sentenced to death.
Tests must take place under certain conditions that cannot be observed in conjunction with the conditions of confinement of prisoners. For example, a sufficiently large number of beds are needed, and the subjects must be under the constant supervision of a doctor. The places of detention of criminals do not meet the requirements, and the rooms corresponding to the requirements do not have sufficient capacity. Violation of such conditions also increases the risk of death and leads to unfair punishment for citizens not sentenced to death.

Medical testing on life-sentenced prisoners will lead to the deterioration of the situation in the world community.
I will cite the second idea: The use of medical tests on life-term prisoners will lead to a deterioration of the situation in the world community.
Here are some arguments to prove this idea.
The first argument: 
If testing is carried out without the consent of prisoners, one of the points of the Nuremberg Code will be violated - an absolutely necessary condition for conducting an experiment on a human is the voluntary consent of the latter. This code was signed in 1947, when the horrific facts of the Nazis' monstrous medical experiments on millions of people were revealed. If we start violating these rules and testing drugs on life-term prisoners, we may repeat the mistakes of the past and worsen the situation in the world community.
The second argument: 
An example of whether medical testing was conducted on prisoners is the testing that was conducted on prisoners in the early 1990s in Australia without the necessary informed consent. This caused international condemnation and discontent in many countries. There have been mass protests in some countries. This example shows the importance of respecting human rights in medical trials, including for life-term prisoners, in order to prevent deterioration in the world community in the future.
The third argument:
In China, medical tests were conducted on prisoners without their consent. In response to such violations, some countries have applied diplomatic pressure and sanctions against China, demanding that they stop using prisoners for tests that violate their rights.
So, these arguments confirm that, in order to avoid deterioration in the world community, we should not use life-term prisoners for experiments instead of animals.

Medical testing on life-sentenced prisoners can lead to unreliable data and results.
A report by Daniel J. Jones from the Senate Intelligence Committee looked into the CIA’s use of torture after September 11. He found that when people are under pressure or in pain, they will say anything to make it stop. This means that information they provide is often not accurate or useful. Similarly, when life-sentenced prisoners are put through medical experiments without their full consent or under the threat of punishment, their responses can be affected by these stressful conditions. As a result, the data gathered from such tests may not be trustworthy because the prisoners’ situations can distort the outcomes.
The Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE) is a well-known study that also raises concerns about the reliability of data from controlled environments. Critics of the experiment argue that participants acted out of situational pressure and encouragement from researchers rather than showing their true personalities. This highlights a problem: if we rely on findings from such research, we may draw conclusions that don’t actually reflect real-life behavior. For example, Erich Fromm noted that only a small number of guards were truly sadistic, suggesting that individual differences play a big role in behavior. This means that using similar methods in medical testing on vulnerable populations, like life-sentenced prisoners, could produce unreliable results, ultimately undermining the quality of the research.
In light of these arguments, it is clear that conducting medical testing on life-sentenced prisoners may lead to misleading data and unreliable results.