The Instigator
LexRunner
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
1harderthanyouthink
Con (against)
Winning
13 Points

Medical research should be prioritize over the welfare of the pateint

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...
1harderthanyouthink
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/25/2014 Category: Health
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 636 times Debate No: 46761
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (4)

 

LexRunner

Pro

Medical research provide discoveries and medical breakthroughs that may benefit future patients. By advancing medical research over prioritizing patient treatment, doctors and researchers are able to make discoveries that may benefit future patients. The simple concept of "sacrificing one, to save a million" is implemented in this case.
1harderthanyouthink

Con

"Sacrificing one, to save a million." That is terribly incorrect. We've killed thousands of rats in experiments, let's not treat humans the same. If any doctor experimented on a patient without his/her permission, they should be fired, fined, and tossed in prison. We would kill thousands of patients who need a few chemotherapies so we could try out some wacky thing some random guy thought of. This is real life here, don't mess with the welfare of others: especially if they're sick or dying. I cannot imagine this being worth it. We would be treating fellow humans like lab rats: that's a disgrace.
Debate Round No. 1
LexRunner

Pro

LexRunner forfeited this round.
1harderthanyouthink

Con

I have nothing to rebut because pro decided to abandon his instigated debate to restart with someone else, and switch sides, along with a forum. He has utterly wasted my time, and therefore I ask the voters to give all 7 points to me.
Debate Round No. 2
LexRunner

Pro

LexRunner forfeited this round.
1harderthanyouthink

Con

Just posting to end this.
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by Defro 3 years ago
Defro
And concerning your question as to why I am on this debate page, it is because I am reading this debate! Yet there is nothing to read because you quit!
Posted by Defro 3 years ago
Defro
@LexRunner
Yes! You are supposed to debate over this topic! Yet you forfeited the round and immediately instigated another one in which you take the other side! This is incredibly selfish and quite rude to your contender! If you have trouble deciding which side to side with, THEN DON'T DEBATE IT! A debater must commit to his debate! You must try to have a strong stance and not falter! This is not some playground where you can do what you want (like abandoning debates).

Another thing. If you are not sure about which position to take, instead of debate about it, POST IT ON THE FORUM! The forum is there for you to discuss opinions and positions, and that is clearly what you intended to do!
Posted by LexRunner 3 years ago
LexRunner
@Defro
what is you problem? If you're not gonna debate on this topic than what are you doing on this debate page? I am debating over this topic to get a better insight into this argument because I have a argumentative paper based upon this medical issue. Currently I am still having trouble deciding which side to side with, that's why I am on this site debating to see which side I would rather side with and to gain more knowledge in this issue. I have having trouble researching this because the web lacks a direct argument on this issue. So stop criticizing me and mind you own business. I appreciate everyone who's giving me a better insight into this topic.
Posted by Defro 3 years ago
Defro
It appears that the instigator abandoned this debate and started another one under the exact same topic but chose to be Con instead....
Posted by humanright2debate 3 years ago
humanright2debate
Medical research is important for future use.

have to depend what your define on "welfare" of the patient?
social network support?
material well-being?
cost saving? resources ?
Posted by Taylur 3 years ago
Taylur
The whole point of medicine is to save people. It is illogical to sacrifice people to save others in the future, when you can save people right now. Medicine has come a long way already; one could argue that we will never get to the point of actually saving people if we only focus on improving medicine, because medicine can improve pretty much indefinitely.

It's like refusing anybody from eating so that we can save food for future generations. The planet would eventually wipe out from starvation, stopping the future generations ever existing.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Krazzy_Player 3 years ago
Krazzy_Player
LexRunner1harderthanyouthinkTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 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:01 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Actionsspeak 3 years ago
Actionsspeak
LexRunner1harderthanyouthinkTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by iamanatheistandthisiswhy 3 years ago
iamanatheistandthisiswhy
LexRunner1harderthanyouthinkTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro made an error and just left the debate to forfeit. As such all points to Con. Pro you could have apologized and made the debate end quickly.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
LexRunner1harderthanyouthinkTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 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:01 
Reasons for voting decision: F.