The Instigator
Debate-General
Con (against)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
Awesomedude4013
Pro (for)
Winning
3 Points

Animal Testing

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Awesomedude4013
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/7/2013 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 843 times Debate No: 30029
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)

 

Debate-General

Con

Animal Testing is a bad thing or not ?
Awesomedude4013

Pro

Approximately 95 percent of all lab animals are specially-bred rats and mice. Non-human primates account for less than one-fourth of 1 percent; dogs and cats combined, less than one-half of 1 percent. The balance includes rabbits, guinea pigs, woodchucks, pigs, sheep, armadillos, leeches, zebra fish, squid, horseshoe crabs, sea snails and fruit flies. Rodents are the animal model of choice for modern medical researchers because they have a naturally short life span -- two to three years -- that allows scientists to observe in "fast forward" what happens during the progress or pathogenesis of a disease.
Debate Round No. 1
Debate-General

Con

What if you are the animal getting tested do you rather die or hurt really badly ? DO you feel ashamed of yourselves ? Does Sacrifice to me you're healthy
Awesomedude4013

Pro

You are making a stupid point, if any of us were being tested on for medical stuff. I would prefer to be tested on than letting the world DIE. Plus the animals don't have a choice.
Debate Round No. 2
Debate-General

Con

HUMAN ISN"T THE SUPER POWER IN THE WORLD. We own this world together and we must live equally with other people like different skins, ascent, language, tribe, tradition, countries, etc. But Most of all we need to live equally we nature and animal for this world that we lived in is not only ours. WE SHARE THIS WORLD !!!!!
Awesomedude4013

Pro

First off, we can still respect animals while testing on them, second of all, most of our respect for animals come from animals saving our lives. if we didn't start testing on animals, a lot more will die and less people will have less respect for animals.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by likespeace 3 years ago
likespeace
Another debate where the instigator did not cite statistics/sources in support of their case.
Posted by Lennard 3 years ago
Lennard
Who will win
hint use insults
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by likespeace 3 years ago
likespeace
Debate-GeneralAwesomedude4013Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to Con for, "You are making a stupid point." Arguments to Pro because he said that the utilitarian cost of testing a new drug is typically outweighed by the benefits of that drug. Con has the burden of proof, and did not provide any moral basis by which humans should grant animals equal rights when it comes to the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness. Even if we were to grant them equal rights, he did not demonstrate that the cost of testing new drugs outweigh their benefits. Pro argued it would be justified even if the guinea pigs were human.