This house believes that animal testing should continue.

It is a good idea to keep this because without doing this, because without it many people alive today quite frankly would not without it.Here's a brief list scratching the surface of what animal research has cured for humanity:1790 Vaccine for Smallpox Developed (Cow ), without it 15,000,000 people alive today would be paralyzed1880 Vaccine for Anthrax Developed (Sheep )1956 Open Heart Surgery and Cardiac Pacemakers Developed (Dog ), about 500,000 lives saved annually1888 Vaccine for Rabies Developed (Dog, Rabbit ) 1968 Rubella Vaccine Developed (Monkey ) 1989 Organ Transplantation Advances Developed (Dog, Sheep, Cow, Pig)*, around 170,000For full list visit http://www.ca-biomed.org...This was like a nickel of the list that barely covers it all (I don't want to put them all you can see them for yourselves), and a huge point you are completely looking past is the sheer number of lives (both animal and human) lives were saved with vaccines tested by animals. By saying you want o stop the testing of animals you are literally saying you want to discontinue research on large scale deceases such as Cancer, and Hepatitis C, along with surgical procedures. Long story short, the number of lives saved by these tests are a lot larger than those who were tested.Many vegans and animal rights activists suggest testing people and not animals, but there are many very obvious reasons why this isn't the case, in fact I believe they are just playing dumb when they say this. First off, it is better to sacrifice a rat than a human, you know it is true please don't play dumb with me. Secondly, since people are free willed and can do whatever they want, how would you even obtain them? Kidnapping? What if one escapes that might turn out very badly (for full list on what that would look like, please visit the walking dead). That leads me to my next point, how would that even work? Kidnap everyone named Jeffery? And plus a law legalizing doing that to humans will never work. You may say, "well, why can't researchers just test like human blood cells". They do, that is where a lot of donated blood goes, but there are a few major problems with this approach. This can only really treat blood related illnesses, blood is nothing more than plasma, a couple of white blood cells and a lot of red blood cells, it is not some magical substance that contains all the secrets of life where you can find the full cure of all cancers. Next point: okay great it works on blood samples, now you have to test it on real life living things in order to determine weather it works on that or not. This is self explanatory, what if it has drastic kidney side effects that kill the subject immediately, or maybe it doesn't work because of the vibration of the heart idk I'm not a doctor.Now to address your argument. Animals have been repeatedly used for testing such as in biomedical research before applying to humans. Well yeah, for the reasons I explained above nobody would agree on doing it resulting in the slowing down or even halting of medical research Proponents of animal testing would probably say that animal testing enabled the development of numerous life-saving treatments. However, I am of the view that animal testing is inhumane and can also yield irrelevant results. Therefore, animal testing should not continue. The benefits (life saving treatments) outweigh the detriments (using test subjects)In the end, I believe animal testing should always continue. Mice are yes, 98% human like and primates are 99 % . Doing this increases both the quality and length of life for both humans and animals.