The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
3 Points

Should Animal Testing be Banned?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/5/2016 Category: Health
Updated: 8 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 638 times Debate No: 86116
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)




I think animal testing should be banned. Mankind has already created problems like deforestation, pollution, global warming, so testing designer makeup on animals like cats, dogs, monkeys, rabbits, rats, mice and birds is not even close to fixing the problems we have inflicted so far. We must remember that our needs are not most important especially with cosmetics. Mankind was not on this planet first, animals were, so think about how we are hurting the things that may have had a part in the foundation of humans. Look at the label of your Maybelline "Violet Intrigue" or your "Lavender Voltage" and really search for the label saying "NOT TESTED ON ANIMALS". Hairspray, eye shadow, foundation, lip stick, lip gloss, eye liner, anti-wrinkle cream, blush; all of these cosmetics are tested on animals who are raised in cages and being confined to a lab with nothing but metal and concrete to walk on.


Before I get into the thick of things, I'm going to go ahead and make one specific point: I'm going to concede that testing on animals for cosmetic purposes should be banned. My defense of animal testing is going to be on the grounds that it should be around for the purposes of medical testing and experimentation for the purposes of developing enhanced medicines and medical practices.

Why Not Testing on Animals is Bad:

This one is simple enough: think of all the great medical advances we've had in the past century or so. For pretty much every medical advancement in the past century, there's been an animal behind it. Let's just take a look at how far we've come just from animals alone.

The University of Minnesota actually published a small, but not insignficant, list of medical advances due to animals, along with what animal was credited for the discovery[1]. I won't cover them all, but let's just get some of the highlights for the road:

1990 - We developed more advanced organ transplant technicques thanks to dogs, pigs, sheep, and cows.
1982 - We developed a treatment for leprosy thanks to the armadillo.
1964 - We discovered ways to regulate one's cholestoral, thanks to the rat.
1956 - We developed ways to perform open-heart surgery and invented pacemakers thanks to the dog.
1954 - We made a vaccine for polio thanks to mice and monkeys
1921 - We discovered insulin thanks to dogs and fish.

It even goes back further than the past century, going all the way to 1881 where we developed a vaccine for anthrax because of sheep and 1796 where we developed a vaccine for smallpox thanks to cows.

Furthermore, the impact of animals in medical testing is incredible. The medical breakthroughs that have come as a result that have drastically improved the quality of life of both humans and animals. The road to a better life for both animals and humans is is through animal testing. Still[2] explains:
  • "Biotechnology companies have depended on animal research to develop more than 160 drugs and vaccines approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration ... Those discoveries have helped hundreds of millions of people worldwide and prevented incalculable human suffering. In addition, BIO has reported, animal research has led to 111 USDA-approved biotech-derived veterinary biologics and vaccines that improve the health of ... animals. ... Biotechnology has improved the way veterinarians address animal health issues through the use of biotech vaccines and diagnostic kits and improved breeding programs that can help to eliminate hereditary diseases."


[1] -
[2] - Tom Still [Tom Still is president of the Wisconsin Technology Council. He is the former associate editor of the Wisconsin State Journal in Madison].Animal testing: Beyond the protests, instances of mistreatment are rare. WTN News.
Debate Round No. 1


Thank you for including extremely great points supporting your argument. I am aware of medical testing on animals, but I feel the issue is makeup testing. Although some, if not most designers do not test on mine, rats, etc. But my mission is to abolish testing and remove animal from the equation. I do feel it is necessary to test animals medically. But do we really need cosmetics? Companies like Estee Lauder do test mascara on rabbits, resulting in draize eye irritation, that can grow into moderate infections, blindness, agony, and when the testing it over, the injuries and effects are recorded , and the animals' fate is sealed for death. Is it worth it? The test subjects are also being treated with abuse and cruelty. Some are held in cages with concrete floors and have no chance to be an animal.
Numerous Companies who Test on Animals:
Bobbie Brown,
Cle de Peau,
Givenchy, etc.


So the only real argument that gets made is that companies do really bad testing on animals and it hurts the animals, as well as the conditions that the animals are housed in are really awful.

First, these aren't reasons to actually ban animal testing, rather it's reasons to fix the way we go about performing animal testing. Cross-apply the medical benefits to animal testing to both humans and animals as we test on them. The benefits we gain from it are far too important to lose. Rather, we should work on improving the quality of life for test animals rather than just stopping testing altogether.

Second, I've already conceded that cosmetic testing should be banned for it's lack of benefits to society overall. But to say that cosmetic animal testing is bad, therefore all animal testing is bad is way too far of a leap.

Outside of that, there's no real response to the negative case. Extend it across. The benefits of medical testing on animals is far too great to just ban it away entirely. She even concedes that medical testing on animals should be okay, this means that we keep animal testing around.
Debate Round No. 2


Kaeli forfeited this round.


Extend I guess
Debate Round No. 3


Kaeli forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4


Kaeli forfeited this round.


Aaaand we done here.
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by whiteflame 7 months ago
>Reported vote: U.n// Mod action: Removed<

3 points to Con (Conduct, Sources). Reasons for voting decision: Pro forfeited 3 turns; Con forfeited 0 turns (conduct point to Con). Con cited web links; Pro did not (source point to Con).

[*Reason for removal*] Sources are insufficiently explained. The voter has to do more than simply state that one side cited sources while the other didn't, and must at least state how Con's sources contributed to the debate.
Posted by tejretics 7 months ago
The resolution requires that Pro defend a ban on all animal testing and Con argue against such a ban.

Pro's sole offense is towards banning cosmetic testing, which- while topical- doesn't fully fulfill Pro's burden which is to argue that all animal testing should be banned (not merely cosmetic testing).

Con concedes the cosmetic testing offense and argues more from an angle of keeping clinical testing. Con shows that clinical testing of animals has created life-saving drugs; link: without animal testing those drugs wouldn't have come up, impact: those drugs saved lives.

Pro and Con implicitly concede to a util-based weighing standard, and Pro drops Con's points. Con's case is pre-fiat by conceding cosmetics.

Vote Con
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by tejretics 7 months ago
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: RFD in comments