Animal Testing

Ok my opponent seems to have gotten more aggressive last round. It's okay. To each their own. Society: First I would like to mention that my opponent contradicted himself. Round 2:"The main point however, that would like to accomplish, is that it doesn't matter how much resemblance to the human DNA animals resemble, as long as the specific tested gene article resembles that of a human." Round 3: "It [DNA] has everything to do with effectiveness. I have proven this. Your point false because it lacks the evidence to support this emotion riddled statement." I'm getting mixed arguments from my opponent. Does DNA resemblance matter or not? Pro doesn't make it clear with his paradoxical arguments. Animals and humans while they may have "similar" DNA the disease each species can have all different. In fact, less then 2% of human illnesses or 1.16% are ever seen in animals. [1] I would also like to mention that I am not the one saying animal testing hurts humas. Most medical experts agree that data from animal tests cannot be extrapolated safely to human patients. [2] Animal can cause birth defects. 88% of stillbirths are due to drugs posed to be safe in animal testing. [1] Not only do people who hurt animals abuse them. Studies show that people who abuse animals for selfish purposes don't stop there, they move on to human abuse. [3] It is interesting to note that 83% of substances are metabolized differently by animals and humans My opponent did not provide a list that says how animal testing does more good them harm. Rathet he just gave a bunch of links, most just take me to the front page of every website. None of those links say "Animal testing does more good than bad" or anything close to that. Some of those links didn't even work from my experience. I gave 50 ways how animal testing hurts humans. Yet the good it has done that I read is AIDS, Polio, Stroke. Beyond that my opponent failed to provide one a link that gives 50 or more ways that says animal testing does more good than harm. Inhumanity and Animal cruelty: My opponent says the animals tested on are kept in a humane enviorment. Yet I have not read that anywhere. I would like an article that says animals aren't mistreated. Most of the animals that are tested are not covered by the Animal Welfare Act. At the end of all the pain they go throught most are killed without consent. 55% of them die from the actual experiments. An interesting as well as an utterly gross fact to be digested, is that an estimated 103,800 animals are not administered with any medication to cease partially or completely, the pain caused due to animal testing. The pain by no means is minimal. The procedure being conducted on the animal may be extremely painful. When humans are petrified at the proposal of getting 'poked' by a medical practitioner, wonder what happens to animals at the idea of being tested upon? These are not given any medication reduce the pain. In a world where humans are entitled to practice their right to freedom and independent living, it is saddening that animals are at the lab assistant's and the tester's mercy. More proof Animal Cruelty exist laboratories: "Eleven "CU-34" Monkeys Transferred to Sanctuary" For years, the Committee for Research Accountability, a project of IDA, fought to secure the release of 34 monkeys from the University of Colorado at Denver Health Sciences Center (UCDHSC). These monkeys, who had lived at UCDHSC their entire lives, were the subjects of cruel alcoholism and maternal separation studies conducted by researcher Mark Laudenslager. In September 2006, the University of Colorado Regents finally voted to relocate 11 of these monkeys from a 100 year old basement to a sanctuary in Texas where they will be able to experience freedom from abuse for the first time in their lives. "Criminal Charges Brought Against Alamogordo Primate Facility" For the first time in U.S. history, a New Mexico District Attorney brought criminal charges for animal cruelty against a research facility for alleged institutional neglect of chimpanzees. The unprecedented complaint against Alamogordo Primate Facility (APF) was prompted by evidence provided by IDA through our network of whistleblowers concerning the deaths of two chimpanzees and the near-death of another. While a conviction was not handed down to those responsible for managing APF's labs, the historic charges remain a searing indictment of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), which bears the ultimate responsibility for these chimpanzees' welfare. Pictures of Animal Cruelty in labs: http://www.aboutmyplanet.com... http://www.aboutmyplanet.com... http://www.aboutmyplanet.com... http://www.aboutmyplanet.com... Philosophy: If animal testing was necessary for humanity, we would've died thousands of years ago. My opponent did not argue that killing an animal an animal for science is like killing an pet. Most Americans see their pets as family. In fact, Americans spend more money anually on their pets than on babies.[4] Animals are our brothers and sisters. We should not kill them, that would be like killing our actual brothers and sisters. Animal rights are not a far fetched idea. Animal rights can be assigned according to animal psychology Jeremy Bentham - "While critics question where the line would be drawn, fearing that animal rights activists would grant rights to single cell organisms, the general consensus in the animal rights community is that rights should be conferred only to animals that can suffer. This is a psychological distinction that is possible to make in acceptable terms. And, the main right being granted is the right to avoid suffering at the hands of humans." Cost: Animal testing cost between 12-16 billion dollars a year.[5][6] That is not out-pocket money. That costs from us taxpayers. This wasteful spending is unnecessary, many alternativas are in place already for use. Less costly, less cruel, more effective. Alternatives: "Only 6% of Animal research is for medical reasons." [1] "Animal testing can be replaced by at least 450 metjods at this time." [1] Alternatives to animal tests are effective, reliable, affordable and humane.ï¿½Proponents of non-animal testing methods in the scientific community have shown that these methods are quicker and cost-effective. Unlike crude, archaic animal tests, non-animal methods usually take less time to complete, cost only a fraction of what the animal experiments they replace cost, and are not plagued with species differences that make extrapolation difficult or impossible. Cell and tissue culture (in vitro) studies are used to screen for anti-cancer, anti-AIDS, and other types of drugs, and they are also a means of producing and testing a number of other pharmaceutical products, including vaccines, antibiotics, and therapeutic proteins. The U.S. National Disease Research Interchange provides more than 120 types of human tissue to scientists investigating diabetes, cancer, cystic fibrosis, muscular dystrophy, glaucoma, and other human diseases. In vitro genetic research has isolated specific markers, genes, and proteins associated with Alzheimer's disease, muscular dystrophy, schizophrenia, and other inherited diseases. [1] http://www.aboutmyplanet.com... [2] http://www.buzzle.com... [3] http://www.21stcenturycares.org... [4] http://www.petfoodindustry.com... [5] http://www.change.org... [6] http://www.change.org... Thank you. :)