The Instigator
otaku.miner
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Ragnar
Pro (for)
Winning
7 Points

Should animals be a test subject?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 2 votes the winner is...
Ragnar
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/18/2015 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 786 times Debate No: 68518
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)

 

otaku.miner

Con

1) 1st round is acceptance only
2) 2nd round is both arguments
3) 3rd round is 1st rebuttal
4) 4th round is a brief, short argument and 2nd rebuttal
5) 5th round is closing statements (NO NEW ARGUMENTS)
Ragnar

Pro

I accept.
Debate Round No. 1
otaku.miner

Con

Animals should not be a test subject. There are many reasons why they should not:

1) Now that technology has advanced, we have many other choices.
Don't give me that animals are the only choice bullsh!t. They aren't. Now that technology has advanced much, we can use many other alternative choices. Such are robots with fake tissue paper identical to humans, or even dead people if their families or they wish to it to be. Animals are not the only choice, and that is confirmed now that technology has advanced much since pretty much the start of the world. Instead of using stone tools, we're using mechanical cranes. We have advanced to a much better society. Another example of an alternative to animal testing is Harvard's "organs-on-chips" that contains human cells on a single chip. This option proves efficient and harmless against all.

2) It is basically abuse to animals.
Okay, really? There isn't much to explain about this. Dissecting animals one by one, ripping their guts out. Usually, I'm all with the blood and kill (because of my gothic personality), but animals are a different story with animals. Approximately 108.33+ million are used as experiments- and many mostly likely die as stated in (http://www.peta.org...). Humans are animals, too, whether you like it or not. I get that some of you kill animals for another reason-survival- but they are not for experimenting or killing for entertainment.

3) They are forced to look like idiots.
If you look at some experimental clips, the test animals look like idiots. They insert some drugs, put them in a maze, put cheese on this side and a different cheese on another, and let them go. This is just an example....or does it ring a bell? It does, doesn't it? How would you like to be put on drugs, dumped in a maze, and have more than half the world look at you fail? Not very appeasing, huh? Mmhmm.
In conclusion, animals are not for experimenting! There are alternatives, it is abuse, and you are laughing because you caused this! (P.S. I'm sorry for bad grammar, English is not my first language.)

Ragnar

Pro

Via the rules of this debate, I cannot respond to any claims made by con until next round.

There is always a test subject
The cure for any ailment, no matter how certain we are that it will work, morally there must be a first test subject. Say you had an untested cure for the common cold, and spray it over a city. You just turned everyone exposed into the unwilling test subjects; starting of course with patient zero, the first person (or animal for that matter) to inhale.

Animal ailments need animal test subjects
Some dogs go blind for genetic reasons, and researchers care first about finding a cure for them [1]. Cats get AIDS, should they never get any treatment since the first cat to receive any new form of life extending treatment is in fact a test subject? A ban on animal testing, would ensure neither receive help.

Humans are animals
I do not want this to be a center point of the debate, but I had to mention it in case an argument is put forward that animals should have human test subjects.

Veterinarian School
Along the lines of humans are animals, veterinarians logically in order to be qualified, should be tested, and that test by nature of their job should be on animals.

Benefits of animal testing
Among the countless benefits we enjoy, animal testing has decreased birth defects, improved our understanding of mother to child HIV transmission, and been essential in developing treatments for cancer such as "Herceptin and Tamoxifen, two medicines that have saved the lives of thousands of women and men with breast cancer" [2].

Next round I shall address con's points.

Sources:
[1] http://www.cnn.com...
[2] http://www.amprogress.org...

Debate Round No. 2
otaku.miner

Con

otaku.miner forfeited this round.
Ragnar

Pro

Rebuttals:
"1) Now that technology has advanced, we have many other choices."
Fascinating opinion. Let's see the merits of it… "Robots with fake tissue paper identical to humans," you know The Terminator was a fictional movie right? "Or even dead people if their families or they wish to it to be." Dead people are notoriously unreliable for reacting the same as living, meaning experimenting on corpses will never tell if something results in loss of life.

"2) It is basically abuse to animals."
Let's analyze this reasoning... "Humans are animals, too" but "usually, I'm all with the blood and kill (because of my gothic personality), but animals are a different." What is this non-animal/non-human thing "with the blood and kill," the robots again? Please prove they are real, and then why they should suffer this alleged abuse.

"3) They are forced to look like idiots."
Who forced you into this debate? Because there are many human protection laws against this kind of abuse.

Debate Round No. 3
otaku.miner

Con

otaku.miner forfeited this round.
Ragnar

Pro

Extend all points.
Debate Round No. 4
otaku.miner

Con

otaku.miner forfeited this round.
Ragnar

Pro

Conclusion:
Morally a ban on animal testing, is harmful to animals.
Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Ragnar 2 years ago
Ragnar
Well that was entertaining.
Posted by funnycn 2 years ago
funnycn
Con, you used too much emotion in this debate which is a BAD thing. It's great to fight for what you believe in and by all means debate it on this website but learn how to argue first. Your emotions will be the reason why people think your arguments are silly.

For example "you are laughing because you caused this!" is completely unnecessary.
Posted by funnycn 2 years ago
funnycn
A note to con "Don't give me that animals are the only choice bullsh!t" Con, don't curse even if you "censor" it makes you look like childish and immature.

A little help for pro, a possible few points to refute in the next round.

" Such are robots with fake tissue paper identical to humans,"

Robots don't have organs that can be tested on like animals. Also humans don't have tissue paper, unless you mean skin which in that case tissue paper is nothing like skin. What I mean is how can you observe skin cells when you're given tissue paper? In short, you can't and thus real skin should be used to observe skin cells.

"Dissecting animals one by one, ripping their guts out"

Stop there. You don't know dissection then if you think it involves "ripping guts" out. Dissection is useful in the observation of organs, where they are, and how they function. Scientists don't preform dissections on animals for pleasure. Also the animals are already dead before the dissection takes place. Generally, scientist take animals that died of natural causes and THEN observe it. It's like a human donating their body to scientists for observation. The human wasn't killed by the scientists, they were already dead.

"but they are not for experimenting or killing for entertainment."

Con seems to have fallen away from the topic as they say "for entertainment". Scientists don't conduct experiments to kill animals for fun.

"They insert some drugs, put them in a maze, put cheese on this side and a different cheese on another, and let them go"

This is not done to make them look like "idiots". This is to test the intelligence of animals and whether a drug or not can help their brain understand their environment. If an animal suffers brain injuries, perhaps this drug could help them. That's why they preform experiments and the maze test, they don't do it to humiliate animals.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Krazzy_Player 2 years ago
Krazzy_Player
otaku.minerRagnarTied
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: Forfeit
Vote Placed by Paleophyte 2 years ago
Paleophyte
otaku.minerRagnarTied
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: Con forfeits