The Instigator
music4424
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Swagmasterpoopoo
Pro (for)
Winning
9 Points

animal testing should be allowed

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 2 votes the winner is...
Swagmasterpoopoo
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/18/2014 Category: Science
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 729 times Debate No: 49413
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)

 

music4424

Con

animal testing is cruel and sick. who are we to have the right to allow this. everyone have their own fun and happy life. why not animals. Nobody' s perfect and its okay to be different. also animals didn't vote . we need to hear their voice. what they want.
Swagmasterpoopoo

Pro

I accept this debate!

Con did not really specify what kind of animal testing, therefore, I am going to assume that ALL kinds of animal testing should not be allowed.

I will be arguing that some forms of animal testing should be allowed, specidically for medical purposes.

Why is the character limit 750?!?!

I have only one point that I will develop in both rounds.

Arguments

Medical Advances

Testing on animals has led to numerous medical discoveries and successes that have cured diseases and cancers for humans. For example, if animal testing was banned, small-pox would not have been eradicated. [1]

http://www.understandinganimalresearch.org.uk...;[1]





Debate Round No. 1
music4424

Con

your website says page not found?!!!

Also animal testing is cruel!!! they have a life for a reason. they want to live. also who are you to decide that these animals get tortured to death? well animal testing hurts them. 99% of the animals that are tested are dead and thrown in the garbage. now imagine someone tested perfume on you. you get a eye rash. then they spay it again. it will get worse and eventually you will die!!! also pro this is not a BRING IT ON. it is a simple debate on animal testing. this is the before and after effect:

after : http://www.independent.com...

before: http://www.santabanta.com...

if you want that to happen then okay well it is not okay
Swagmasterpoopoo

Pro

Rebuttal

"99% of the animals that are tested are dead and thrown in the garbage"

I highly doubt that is true at all. You have no source backing your statement. For all we know, you made up that statistic.

"now imagine someone tested perfume on you."

You made it unclear whether we are talking about animal testing for cosmetics or all animal testing. I agree that testing cosmetics on animals should be banned, but does not merit animal testing for medical purposes being banned.


Argument

[2]
medical progress requires animal testing.



http://www.understandinganimalresearch.org.uk...;[1]

http://www.amprogress.org...;[2]
Debate Round No. 2
music4424

Con

well if i was lying well it is known as that happens mostly all the time. second if it was by medical reasons we all have different blood cells and tissue. in that case the testing can also end up wrong. also the animals have different structure. now the medicines that we eat are not all animal tested.

if you go down it says that Advil is not animal tested and that is all around the world.
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com...

also you agreed that animal testing is wrong. well if you know debate rules you don't do that which just decreased your chances of winning. animal testing is also done for cosmetics. now ask your self; do we really need cosmetics? i don't think so. animals are dying in so many ways
Swagmasterpoopoo

Pro

First, I said animal testing FOR COSMETICS IS WRONG. BoP for me is not to prove all animal testing should be allowed, but some, in this case medical testing on animals.

Rebuttal

"if it was by medical reasons we all have different blood cells and tissue."

Rats have 99% same genes as humans. [1]

Chimpanzees are 96%-98% the same has humans genetically. [2]

Arguments

Animal testing has led to more understanding for malaria, eradication of polio, development of insulin, vaccines, and other cures. [3]

Conclusion

Animal testing is needed for medicine. Not all animal testing leads to abuse.




http://www.nature.com...;[1]

http://genome.cshlp.org...;[2]

http://www.pro-test.org.uk...;[3]


Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Swagmasterpoopoo 2 years ago
Swagmasterpoopoo
can someone please counter the vote bomb from hd1997?
Posted by music4424 2 years ago
music4424
by the way pooper ..........
none of your websites work!!!!!
Posted by SONOFGOD2013 2 years ago
SONOFGOD2013
Alright swagmaster challenge me but if your really as bad as you say your are then we will stop.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by demonlord343 2 years ago
demonlord343
music4424SwagmasterpoopooTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Good job for pro. Con, I would say needs a little better organization and some work on the grammar. Other than that, Good job! Interesting read.
Vote Placed by Ore_Ele 2 years ago
Ore_Ele
music4424SwagmasterpoopooTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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: The conduct is going to Pro for Con not creating a clear topic and/or debating a topic other than the resolution (animal testing in its entirety, while he only seemed interested in cosmetics). The arguments go to Pro for pointing out medical purposes. Con never formed a real refutation for this. Pointing out a single drug not tested on animals (his example was Advil) does not refute all drugs. Normally, I would dismiss what was said by Pro in the final round, as it cannot be refuted or challenged. However, Con brought up the "...we all have different blood cells..." argument in his last round, so it is only fair that Pro is able to address those. No sources were awarded, since Pro had no sources that came up (all were page not found) until the last round but Con had no unbiased sources at all.