The Instigator
Mickeymouse
Pro (for)
Winning
28 Points
The Contender
KoreaRocks
Con (against)
Losing
15 Points

Animal Testng

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/1/2008 Category: Science
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 3,174 times Debate No: 3009
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (5)
Votes (13)

 

Mickeymouse

Pro

Hello, guys. Hello, Jane.

Well, have you heard about animal testing? Well, if you have, what do you think about it? Now, I'm going to talk about points that why I agree with animal testing.

First, we can save people's lives with animal testing. Every day, thousands of people are saved from painful diseases and death by powerful medical drugs and treatments. This incredible gift of medicine would not be possible without animal testing. Despite these overwhelming benefits, however, some people are calling for animal testing to be banned because of alleged cruelty. Those against the use of animal testing claim that it is inhumane to use animals in experiments. I disagree completely. It would be much more inhumane to test new drugs on children or adults. Even if it were possible, it would also take much longer to see potential effects, because of the length of time we live compared to laboratory animals such as rats or rabbits.

Second, we always eat meat so why they always say that animal testing is wrong?
Some of the tests certainly seem painful, but the great majority of people on this planet eat meat or wear leather without any guilt. Where is their sympathy for animals? Furthermore, animals clearly do not feel the same way as humans, and scientists are careful to minimize stress in the animals, since this would damage their research.

Thirdly, Opponents of animal testing also claim that the results are not applicable to humans. This may be partly true. Some drugs have had to be withdrawn, despite testing. However, we simply do not have alternative methods of testing. Computer models are not advanced enough, and testing on plants is much less applicable to humans than tests on animals such as monkeys. Until we have a better system, we must use animal testing.

Thank you.:)
KoreaRocks

Con

As the science technology develops, there also have been a lot of experiments been made as well - one of them is animal testing, which is what this whole debate is about. About 2.5 million animals are dying per year in United Kingdom, and 4 million animals die each year in Korea, only to do the animal testing.
Greetings everyone on debate.org and MickeyMouse(Jennifer). I am very honored to participate in this debate. This opposition team is against the motion of animal testing. In this round, I am going to talk about 3 arguments why I do not think animal testing is necessary, as well as what the governments has said. First I will going to rebut what the proposition team has said, and second I will then support my 3 arguments.

First of all, she had talked about that by the animal testing we could save people's lives. Yes, we COULD save them, but there is not that much possibilities to do so, since it is not accurate. The result of the animal testing usually does not always apply to actual surgeries humans get. Well, I will be talking about it later on when arguing my points.
Second of all, she has told us that we should not feel sad for the animal which are tested because we have already eaten them as food. However, ladies and gentlemen, the purpose for them - the ones eaten and the ones tested- are completely different. Sorry for the animals, but we kill the animals(here I mean to say animals eaten by the people such as, pigs, cows, chicken, etc.) because we HAVE to eat. We, people, cannot live properly without eating those meat, only eating the vegetables. In contrast, for the experiments, there are more chices to test with, which means animals does not really have to be used when doing the experiments. And, animals to be eaten get euthanasia(mercy killing) when they die, so we can say the case for feeling sad is different.
Third of all, about the alternatives. The government team was being neglegent for the fact there IS another alternatives existing right now, which is, stem cell research. It is apparently true that it is about a human, whose right is more important than that of animal. On the other hand, since the stem cell research is very effective(since stem cell research is the test with actual human genes which applies almost 100%,right?), the scientists can spent the fewer cells(or we could just say 'lives;) for the successful surgery result. In this way, we can keep both rights and effectiveness by using this alternatives. Or else scientists can keep try doing the computer models, because the technology is keep developing.

Now I would like to move on to my arguments why I believe animal testing has negative aspects rather than affirmative points. They are :
1. Animals has rights that even humans have to respect
2. Animal testing is not accurate
3. It can damage ecosystem, or the nature itself(a lot of animals get harmed a lot)
Firstly, about the rights. To tell the truth, human is also part of the animals but having more developed brain, meaning that both they are the same. So why do we kill them without respecting them? It is true that they have less-developed skills since their brains are not that good. However, it can be true that they are able to think and feel. They can fear, they can be happy, they can be sad, and so on. Just because they cannot express what they feel, we should not do whatever we want to them. For example, there became such a big issue on the Internet in Korea and Japan because there were some photos about rabbits with no eyes, dogs with blooded body, monkeys with mouth of each side ripped off. In addition, the animals get tested when they are conscious. Just suppose that we are that animals being used for the experiments, then we would know how cruel that is.
Secondly, it is about accuracy. As I said at the rebuttal, animal testing is not as accurate as we think. According to Seoul University, it has said that the possibility for usual scientists/doctors to make the result 100% successful takes too much time, and even they spent a lot of time, only about half(50%) are failed to get the successful result. I will now mention another example. Although Grass(which are plants) and humans have 50% same genes, look very different, even having different system in them. Besides, even though half of their genes are same, humans are alive and grass is abiotic ones. Then, even for the animals that gets tested-let's say about primates such as monkeys, which is the closest one to human-they have about 99% same genes in them. However, ladies and gentleman, the 1% that is different from them, can make the huge change. The primates body can reflex differently from how human's body reflexes, making the surgery result different. If it does so, it means that for the actual surgery that sick patients are taking, it can give harmful effects on them as well.
Thirdly, I am going to talk about the nature problem. Not only do garbages and polluted gas harm the environment we all live in, but also animals getting damaged can harm it. One of them is about ecosystem. If people(here, doctors and scientists) get a lot of animals, there will be fewer and fewer animals consisting an ecosystem. Then, in a long term, the lack of animals number may give bad consequence for that ecosystem, causing other kinds of organisms to die out. Also, as I said at the first argument, there can be the animals without proper organs. For example, a rabbit which got surgery, its offsprings can get 6 legs because of animal testing. Then, the animals with weird appearance can increase a lot, which doesn't affect that good for the environment.

In conclusion, because of the rights, accuracy, and the ecosystem, I am proud to oppose the motion strongly. Thank you..
Debate Round No. 1
Mickeymouse

Pro

Mickeymouse forfeited this round.
KoreaRocks

Con

To Jennifer(MickeyMouse) :
I'm sorry that you did not get to finish your argument in time. You must have been very busy. Why don't you just put up a comment with your argument? Anyways, it was just nice debate which I've enjoyed very much. And you are such a good debater, aren't you? ^_^;;

Well, for this round I will just summerize 3 arguments for the animal testing.
First, it was about animals' rights that people have to respect.
Second, it was about the inaccuracy of animal testing which can also harm the patients when having the actual surgery.
Lastly, it was about the ecosystem and nature getting damaged because of animals getting harmed.
In summary, because of these reasons, I am very proud to propose the motion strongly. Thank you very much, everyone.
Debate Round No. 2
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by or8560 9 years ago
or8560
I vote for KoreaRocks; First of all, Mickeymouse forfeited the round. Second of all, what's this thats related to this debate? "Second, we always eat meat so why they always say that animal testing is wrong?" Of COURSE we do, but in an ethical issue, and as you as a Christian, animal testing is WRONG. I think that animal testing is NOT effective at all nor ethically right. If anyone wants to debate me on this, please debate with me on this topic.
Posted by yoon172 9 years ago
yoon172
lololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololol
Posted by KoreaRocks 9 years ago
KoreaRocks
Oops.. Sorry for the second round.
I meant to say "arguments AGAINST the animal testing", not "arguments FOR the animal testing".
Posted by Mickeymouse 9 years ago
Mickeymouse
Hi Jane^^
Thank you for allowing it and sorry for forfeitingㅠㅠ
Posted by KoreaRocks 9 years ago
KoreaRocks
Hi Jennifer, I am Jane...Long time no see!!
Well, I am enjoying this debate, and thank you for challenging the debate. I really like it.
13 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by atheistman 8 years ago
atheistman
MickeymouseKoreaRocksTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by advanceh 9 years ago
advanceh
MickeymouseKoreaRocksTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30 
Vote Placed by yoon172 9 years ago
yoon172
MickeymouseKoreaRocksTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30 
Vote Placed by Renzzy 9 years ago
Renzzy
MickeymouseKoreaRocksTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30 
Vote Placed by paulsckwon 9 years ago
paulsckwon
MickeymouseKoreaRocksTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30 
Vote Placed by Mickeymouse 9 years ago
Mickeymouse
MickeymouseKoreaRocksTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30 
Vote Placed by midason 9 years ago
midason
MickeymouseKoreaRocksTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Vote Placed by skyjune01 9 years ago
skyjune01
MickeymouseKoreaRocksTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:30 
Vote Placed by or8560 9 years ago
or8560
MickeymouseKoreaRocksTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Vote Placed by littleninja 9 years ago
littleninja
MickeymouseKoreaRocksTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03