The Instigator
Nut
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
ExiOrca
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Animal Testing

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/1/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,038 times Debate No: 30872
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)

 

Nut

Pro

I believe animal testing is good because it saves human lives.
ExiOrca

Con

I will debate against the resolve animal testing is good.

Animal testing is not good but also wrong.
Animal testing means using an animal for testing purpose, whether it is medical or science. You take a harmless animal away from its natural habitat and then force drugs or machine on it. After testing, the animals are then killed and is disposed. Many animals have been used and brutally disposed off in the progress.
In addition, animal testing isn't reliable. Drugs' effects are varied from species to species. For example, aspirin is a very safe pain-killing drugs that has been used for many years by humans. However, aspirin is extremely toxic to cats and dogs and can cause possible deaths [1].
My third argument is that no matter how much testing we done on animals, we will eventually have to test it on human. Drugs that proves safe on animals can still have hidden side effects on human. The Food and Drug administration has determined 92% of the drugs that have proven safe and successfully tested on animals is considered ineffective or dangerous in human trials. [2]
[1]http://goo.gl...
[2]http://goo.gl...
Debate Round No. 1
Nut

Pro

Nut forfeited this round.
ExiOrca

Con

Extend all my arguments.
Debate Round No. 2
Nut

Pro

Nut forfeited this round.
ExiOrca

Con

It's a shame my opponent couldn't follow through with his debate.
I extend all my arguments.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Jebediah-Kerman 3 years ago
Jebediah-Kerman
If con can't rebute you, I guess I'll try.

1. Why is this wrong?
2. Most animals, like rats, are bred to be tested, so it isn't taking it away from it's natural habitat. Prove for the last part?
3. Were dogs and cats used to test asprin?
4. So you'd rather stick a random chemical into yourself and hope it'll work? Also, what about all of the medicine it did produce?
Posted by LetiziaPallara 3 years ago
LetiziaPallara
Unethical for using animals in an innatural and cruel way, I think animal testing is very dangerous for humans. With animal testing the pharmaceutical factory can ask more public money saying that they have to pay for the animals they have (animal experimentation is expensive!). And using animals the researchers can select the species of animals on the basis of the results they want obtain. Ex. some animals die with diossine, other don't. And when their drugs on the market will begin to kill people or to cause horrible diseases and reactions, the researchers will say that with animals the result was different, so it's not their fault. They want be paid! They don't care about human or animal welfare, rights etc. They are horrible people.
Posted by toolpot462 3 years ago
toolpot462
So you're going to attempt to justify all animal testing by focusing on the beneficial kind?
No votes have been placed for this debate.