The Instigator
debate-master1
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Maliza
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points

Are cell phones safe?

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 1 vote the winner is...
Maliza
Voting Style: Open Point System: Select Winner
Started: 8/30/2015 Category: Education
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 677 times Debate No: 79181
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (1)

 

debate-master1

Pro

Hello, today we have 3 rounds.

1. Acceptance
2. Arguments
3. Rebuttal

We will be talking about if cell phones are safe. I will say they are safe, and my opponent will say it isn't

Rules

1. Acceptance Only( No definitons or Status Quo.)
2. No forfeiting
3. No trolling
4. No flaking
5. If you not follow the rules, 7 points will go to the opponent.
Maliza

Con

I accept. :)
Debate Round No. 1
debate-master1

Pro

Thank you for the acceptance. I hope we have a nice and smooth debate.

Definitions

1. Cell Phones: a small telephone that people can take with them and use outside their homes

2. Safe: not able or likely to be hurt or harmed in any way : not in danger

Status Quo: Many people such as students or adults like having there cell phones with them. They use it to use many different kind of things too.

Aim of the Debate: The aim of the debate is that Pro has to say that cell phones are safe, and Con should say they are not. Also the aim of this game is to have fun.

Arguments

1. First you might get lost or be in danger.
First If you are lost. If you are lost in the middle of the woods for example, then you just have to find a way out or might get lost at never come back. However if you have a phone, first you can see the GPS and can find your way through the woods and safely get back home, or you could just call the police or your parents and they could come and rescue. But if you do not have a phone it is not safe and you are in danger, but it is safe if you had phones. Also if you were getting bullied or attacked you could call anyone and they can rescue you when you need help.

2. Numerous peer-reviewed studies have found that cell phone use is not associated with an increased risk of brain tumors. An Oct. 20, 2011 study of 358,403 Danish citizens – the largest study of its kind to date – concluded that "there was no association between tumors of the central nervous system or brain and long term (10 years +) use of mobile phones." "A July 27, 2011 study found that there was no association between cell phone use and brain tumor risks among children and adolescents. Numerous other studies published from 2001-2013 have similarly concluded that there is no association between cell phone use and the development of brain tumors.

3. There is some education. There is some education in phones. You can search up something in the internet for a school project and there are now many apps that you can learn stuff. There are also dictionaries too.

Maliza

Con

Thank you for presenting your argument.

I have lots of reasons to support my argument of cell phones being unsafe.

1. If you really are lost in the middle of the woods, I doubt you'd find signal there if we're being honest. There are so many stories of people who this has actually happened to. Having a phone has made no difference since there's no signal there to use a GPS or call anyone, which is why people still get lost in the woods. The only place you'll find signal everywhere is Estonia as far as I know.

2. Cell phones might not be the cause of someone developing a brain tumour but they CAN be the cause of damaging ones eyesight. The light coming out of a cell phone is called a blue violet light, which causes damage to the back of the eye. This can cause "Macular Degeneration", one of the biggest causes of blindness. They can also be a cause for developing short-sightedness and it was proven that those who spent more than 30 minutes a day (which almost everybody nowadays does) on a computer/reading are one and a half times more likely to develop myopia (short sightedness).

3. Scientists have not said that mobile phones cause no damage, they only THINK this and have said they haven't found much proof of it YET. They have also said that regarding younger children, it has the potential to cause damage as waves can cause damage to their brains as they have thinner skills and so it's best not to let younger children use phones.

4. Cell phones don't have to necessarily cause damage within the body to be ruled as unsafe. 1 in 4 car accidents in the US happen because of 'texting and driving'. Furthermore, every year, an estimated 1.6 MILLION crashes happen every year due to the driver being distracted by their phones. Along with that, 11 teenagers die everyday while texting and driving.

Sources:
http://www.bbc.co.uk...
http://www.nhs.uk...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk...
https://www.edgarsnyder.com...
Debate Round No. 2
debate-master1

Pro

Con had some arguments and rebuttals, when he only had to say his arguments. Voters should be in mind that if you do not follow the rules, you lose the debate.

Now I will go in my rebuttals

Rebuttals.

1 and 2 are rebuttals and 3 and 4 are arguments

1. In his 1 argument, which was that it has no damage. Also we have no proof that it causes damage. Most of the people in the world use phones. Does that mean that every child or adult has a disease such as cancer or diabetes? Why do you say that cellphones promote damage. Which damage? Ear damage? Your ear won't be damaged if you use it correctly.

2. In Con's second argument which was that texting and driving. If you use it correctly there will be no damage, and also how do you know it is 11? Why not 10? Also as I said, if you use your phone correctly then nothing will happen. Also then does that mean everyone should not have phones because, everyone will have a accident when you drive?

Conclusion

I believe that I won because of a lot of reasons. First my arguments were stronger than Con's and also I rebutted all of Con's points by saying if everyone who has a phone has damage. Also Con did not follow the rules so the 7 points has to come to me.

VOTE FOR PRO!!!
Maliza

Con

Sorry about that, only my second argument yet (just joined).

1. Firstly, there IS proof that it causes damage to the eyes. Like I said before, it doesn't have to be brain tumours to be counted as damage because cell phones are known to cause damage to the eyes, as proven by many scientists along with being on the NHS website too. They do cause damage, just not necessarily to the brain.

2. Pro says if you use it correctly, there's no damage, but then again that can be said about almost everything, if everyone drove properly, no one would be in accidents. This is why no one says that cars are completely safe. ACCIDENTS happen, no matter how careful someone is trying to be. And how do I know it's 11 teens? Because I've found the same statistics on a few websites, which I put in the sources.

3. Lastly, does that mean no one should drive cars because people have accidents? No one should go on a plane because there's a chance of it crashing? No one should go swimming because there's a risk of drowning? No, because there's a chance of it happening and sometimes no matter how careful you are, accidents just happen. It's just fact that around a million people die because of their phones distracting them from their phones and that is quite a big figure.

Conclusion
I don't think Pro's arguments were that strong, especially in round 2, plus his grammar wasn't so great. So vote CON!
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: MagicAintReal// Mod action: NOT Removed<

7 points to Con. Reasons for voting decision: Conduct was equal. Sources were equal. Grammar didn't effect anything on either side. Pro wins on cell phones being tumor free, but Con wins on cell phones causing more accidents. Unfortunately, Pro's refute to the 1.6 million phone-caused-accidents is that phones can be used correctly and incorrectly. You could contain a deadly virus, and use it correctly...still not safe. Because Pro cannot overcome the 1.6 million statistic, Con wins arguments.

[*Reason for non-removal*] While the vote is relatively restricted in its analysis, it is clear as to what argument played the biggest role and how it played out in the debate. Hence, it is sufficient.

Note: This is the second time this vote has been reported by the same person. Further reports of this vote will have to either include more detail on what is lacking, or will be ignored entirely.
************************************************************************
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: MagicAintReal// Mod action: NOT Removed<

7 points to Con. Reasons for voting decision: Conduct was equal. Sources were equal. Grammar didn't effect anything on either side. Pro wins on cell phones being tumor free, but Con wins on cell phones causing more accidents. Unfortunately, Pro's refute to the 1.6 million phone-caused-accidents is that phones can be used correctly and incorrectly. You could contain a deadly virus, and use it correctly...still not safe. Because Pro cannot overcome the 1.6 million statistic, Con wins arguments.

[*Reason for non-removal*] The voter explains the argument points sufficiently, examining the major arguments from both sides and determining the winner based on a reasonable view of their weight.
************************************************************************
Posted by Maliza 1 year ago
Maliza
"Everyone will have a accident" and "7 points has to come to me" grammar isn't just spelling it's AN accident and have to come to me. And yeah because I messed up second round so I only included rebuttals in third round like it said. Most of your arguments weren't strong.
Posted by debate-master1 1 year ago
debate-master1
sir, I checked all my spelling, and no arguments in last round, so you lose
Posted by lannan13 1 year ago
lannan13
No, it causes brain tumors and strengthens silcon molecules causing some serious damage.
Posted by asi14 1 year ago
asi14
what's flaking
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by MagicAintReal 1 year ago
MagicAintReal
debate-master1Maliza
Who won the debate:-Vote Checkmark
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct was equal. Sources were equal. Grammar didn't effect anything on either side. Pro wins on cell phones being tumor free, but Con wins on cell phones causing more accidents. Unfortunately, Pro's refute to the 1.6 million phone-caused-accidents is that phones can be used correctly and incorrectly. You could contain a deadly virus, and use it correctly...still not safe. Because Pro cannot overcome the 1.6 million statistic, Con wins arguments.