The Instigator
Zillacha
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
prodigyofaristotle
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Should we test on animals?

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/22/2016 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 10 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 239 times Debate No: 92999
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)

 

Zillacha

Con

I don't believe animals should be used in tests for our good. There are many reasons why I believe this.
1. There are many more efficient ways to tests products than animal testing. Some examples being growing human cells to test on and using aborted babies.
2. Since when is it an animals job to make sure we as a species survive.
3. We use animal testing on stupid things like makeup that we don't even need at all
4. One of the main animals subjected to animal testing are rats which are highly intelligent creatures (smarter than dogs) and we still do awful things to them
5. A lot of the things done in labs are completely horrible and if it were ever done to people it's bad enough to make into a horror movie
Animals are not on this world to be used by us (I don't care what the bible says)
prodigyofaristotle

Pro

First off, thank you for posting your debate. I look forward to a fun and intellectual exchange of ideas. First I will attempt to disprove your points and then I will offer my own opinions.

1. Although human cells could be a very realistic substance to test certain things on, it is not cheap and efficient. It takes a long period of time and a lot of work to grow/ culture human cells for use. Many companies do not have this kind of money and time. Overall it would not be efficient. As for aborted babies, this idea is completely irrational. Regardless of whether it would work in the first place, which depending on the product being tested it may not, there are severe moral and ethical problems associated with this alternative. In conclusion animals are the most efficient test subject.

2. Your statement suggests that we should care more about the survival of lower life forms than the survival of humans. Animals are in no way equal to human life. And depending on your religious beliefs, animals were in fact created for our use. But even if you are an atheist, there is nothing immoral about using animals for the gain of humans.

3. Regardless of whether we need certain things, economics shows us a supply and demand. And since there is a demand for these needless products, we must supply them. Now, would you rather ave untested products that could endanger people put into the market, or would you want safe and tested products?

4. Intelligence does not determine a beings worth. If I am trapped on an island I can bring a goat that can give me milk, meat, and fur. Or I can bring a rat because it is smarter. Overall, the rat has more value. And the rat's intelligence does not mean it endures more pain. Any animal put in the same situation would have to endure the same amount of pain. This entire premise is foolish.

5. Sadly, what happens to animals during product testing is a walk in the park compared to the immense amount of cruelty and evil that happens across the world. Humans often suffer more than these animals. And even if it is horrible, it is still necessary and needed.

OK now that I have attempted to disprove your points I will briefly share some of my own opinions on the matter.

1. If one is to object to the idea of animal testing, than one is to object to the idea of animal use at all. This means no meat, milk, eggs, or any animal products. This is irrational considering that humans are omnivores.

2. Animal testing is not wrong ethically or morally. And if you claim it is then the fault lies in people who buy these products. Do not blame the people who test on animals, blame the people who buy their products.
Debate Round No. 1
Zillacha

Con

Zillacha forfeited this round.
prodigyofaristotle

Pro

Considering my opponent presented no new argument, neither will I. Although it may not be favorable, animal testing should be used based on my evidence presented in my previous argument.
Debate Round No. 2
Zillacha

Con

Zillacha forfeited this round.
prodigyofaristotle

Pro

prodigyofaristotle forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Zillacha

Con

Zillacha forfeited this round.
prodigyofaristotle

Pro

prodigyofaristotle forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Zillacha

Con

Zillacha forfeited this round.
prodigyofaristotle

Pro

So I guess my opponent gave up XD. I think I presented a good argument. So vote based on debate, not preset bias. Thanks.
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Janerover 10 months ago
Janerover
I am against animal testing. However, in my profession I must admit I have experimented on animals.
We use animals for surgical training.
Not for suturing or anything trivial. But to learn life saving skills. ie. it is used for the Advanced Trauma Life Support Course. We learn to put in chest drains. Perform a surgical airway. And yes, animal anatomy is different. But there are also quite a lot of similarities. And in this situation, you can't practice on a person. It's not the same practicing on a mannequin.

I can't say in 20 years I will look back and regret this.

But I can honestly say that having done the course, it does increase confidence for the real thing.
Posted by Couchgolfer 10 months ago
Couchgolfer
I am against animal testing.

1- The subject animal is either injured or induced with a human disease to mimic our everyday life.
2- The testing can be composed of vaccines, hormones, or any other type of genetic testing.
3 - Most rats and mice are bred just for research.
4 - Cats and dogs used in testing come from shelters or breeding mills that were raided by Animal Services.
5 - Birds and fish are also used in testing.

Data has shown that animals do react differently to medications or other artifical enhancers than humans will react to them.
No votes have been placed for this debate.