The Instigator
oto5631
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
oyj5631
Pro (for)
Winning
8 Points

Animal testing s should be banned.

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 4 votes the winner is...
oyj5631
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/15/2014 Category: Health
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 812 times Debate No: 56634
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (4)

 

oto5631

Con

I agree with 'Animal testing'. It is necessary experiments for human. What if we don't do 'Animal testing' ?? . Which organism will be the subject of experiment ?
Sacrifices can be during experiments. But, it will save more lifes. It must be valueable sacrifices.
That animals are fed to experiment, which is similar to meat. If we ban 'Animal testing', that must work to meat in same way too.
oyj5631

Pro

Before develop our medical system, have you ever think of their life? They alive. It is sometimes more cruel than killing. If I were animals, I would like to die. Also we need to think number of animals which is dedicated for our medical system without their opinion.
Debate Round No. 1
oto5631

Con

How about That animals,which is dedicated for meat? They are also killed by human regardless of their intention. While they are being killed, the number of that animals is quite small. Also, meat is not necessary, but Animal testing is necessary.
oyj5631

Pro

It's just one's choice. I mean it is different kind of matter. In my opinion, animal experiments are not unnecessary.
Think about this. If a experiment finished successfully, then who is the first person? Is it also safe for people? Even a new medicine is proved by animals, will people believe this medicine directly? I am pretty sure it is not good for everyone. If people believe and use the results of experiment after animal experiments, it was effective and useful for our medical system. I mean it's worth, but now the fact is not.
Debate Round No. 2
oto5631

Con

It is different kind of matter. When we need people to experiment, we ask their intention. They support experiments themselves.
What can we do if we don't have Animal Testing?? We can't find alternative way. It must be reasonable
oyj5631

Pro

As I said, people didn't require any intention from animals just because they can't communicate with people. It can causes bad effects to children, because as we do experiment by using animal, people or children can regard animals as a material or a tool. If it is keeping like this ways, it is definitely harmful to children's education.
Debate Round No. 3
oto5631

Con

It can cause bad effects to children, but as i said, there is no alternative way. Education could provide teaching animal testing with the importance of lifes. How can we develop technology without animal testing?? It is necessary and must be keeping in this world.
oyj5631

Pro

There are various way to develop medical systems. Also we have lots of intelligent people in the world and they can think more creative and effective ways to do experiments. It is kind of stereotype about animal should be dedicated for people.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by ejoseph061901 3 years ago
ejoseph061901
oto5631oyj5631Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Arguments
Vote Placed by whiteflame 3 years ago
whiteflame
oto5631oyj5631Tied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Impacts, people, impacts. I see scant few. Con tells me that lives will be lost, but never explains how, just stating that technology is important. Pro tells me that we're devaluing the lives of animals, killing many of them, and that it's somehow going to affect children's education negatively. Neither of you is comparing your cases at all, and mostly you each just assert your points without the necessary warrants. Still, I get just a tad more from Pro, and without any certainty of dramatic harm from Con, I have to go with the better explained case.
Vote Placed by Themba 3 years ago
Themba
oto5631oyj5631Tied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Both were arguing on general terms, that is neither side touched on specifics. Both had the same mentality and had the same depth. The debate is a tie.
Vote Placed by jdean1 3 years ago
jdean1
oto5631oyj5631Tied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Neither of you come up with any decent arguments or accomplish anything. You both have instances of grammar failure and you need to watch out for making claims with NO evidence to support them.