The Instigator
whiteflame
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points
The Contender
missbailey8
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Ban 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 1 vote the winner is...
whiteflame
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/6/2016 Category: Science
Updated: 1 month ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 244 times Debate No: 96748
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (3)
Votes (1)

 

whiteflame

Con

Thanks to my opponent, missbailey8, for having it out with me on this contentious topic. Enjoyed it!

https://www.youtube.com...
missbailey8

Pro

Thank you to whiteflame for the debate! I also enjoyed it.
Debate Round No. 1
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by whiteflame 2 weeks ago
whiteflame
Thanks for voting, Shade!
Posted by TheShadeM 3 weeks ago
TheShadeM
In Round 1, Pro's arguments were:
1. Animals are very different from humans. Gives examples of how tests on mice and chimpanzees which are very close to humans resulted in different outcomes as compared to when the drugs were actually tested on humans.
2. Harms animals. Deprived of water, food. Restrained. Subject to genetic manipulation etc.
3. Animals can't consent whereas humans can.

In Round 1, Con's arguments and rebuttals were:
1. Questions the alternative to animal testing. Surely Pro is not suggesting that we stop production of drugs. The alternatives which are in-vitro, computer simulation and straight away testing on humans are even worst.
2. The poor will be pressured to volunteer as test subjects if there were no animal testing.
3. Those animals were breed for the purpose of testing anyway. They wouldn't even exist without testing.

In the cross-examination and final round, Pro was unable to answer:
1. The alternatives to animal testing. If there were no animal testing, how should we move forward?
2. Pro conceded that if proper enforcement was done, animal testing would be ok.
3. Pro's question on the effectiveness of animal testing was rebutted by Con saying that we can never achieve 100% effectiveness anyway.

Con's best points:
1. The alternatives are worst off.
2. The poor have no realistic choice and will be the victims so EVEN IF they have freedom of consent, they don't actually do.
3. To fail early and fail fast for the sake of innovation, we need to breed specific types of test subjects fast.
4. We should improve regulation, not remove animal testing altogether.

As you can see, I think this is more than sufficient to tell you why I vote Con as the winner. I thoroughly enjoyed judging this debate and please let me know about future live debates. I am keen to practice speeches for uni level debating (I am still in uni and don't have much opportunity to practice).
Posted by Blade-of-Truth 3 weeks ago
Blade-of-Truth
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: TheShadeM// Mod action: Removed<

3 points to Con (Arguments). Reasons for voting decision: I think it's a pretty clear cut decision that Con won this debate. He was able to rebut well all of the points brought forth by Pro. Pro's case was a little bit too simplistic and too brief. Even judging based on the time each speaker actually spoke, a person would get the idea that Pro probably has less substance while Con had a more thorough understanding of the ins and outs of this motion. Anyway, good effort from both sides. It's really great that you guys are doing these live debates. I would love to join too! :)

[*Reason for removal*] (1) Arguments are insufficiently explained. The voter is required to reference specific arguments and/or counter-arguments, and does so for neither side. Pointing out that one side rebutted all of the points well, or that one sides case was too simplistic does not meet these standards.
************************************************************************
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by TheShadeM 3 weeks ago
TheShadeM
whiteflamemissbailey8Tied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Previous vote was removed due to not meeting standards. New vote has been placed. RFD in comments.