Animal Testing

Ok. Last round. Yay. :) Society: I would first like to say that I never denied animal testing in past medication before scientific advancement. I would like to make it clear animal testing WAS beneficial and DID help humanity. However, this debate is about the present and how it benefits or hurts society today. It DID bring polio down and it DID hurt people in the past. However, today in the 21st century it is no longer helping us. Nor is it hurting us. It helped, it hurt. Now it is not helping nor hurting humans. Therefore it shouldn't be persued anymore. Without animal testing scientist would scramble to find even more alternative making more scientific advancements. Animals: Animal testing today is not helping or hurting humans, like I mentioned previously. It is still hurting animal though. Life in a cage is still life in a cage. Quoting the link my opponent gave. "On the other hand, they are still kept in cages. A cage can never be as interesting, stimulating, or open as a natural habitat. This can be a problem especially for the more intelligent animals like dogs, cats, pigs, and primates. They can become tremendously lonely and bored unless they have things to play with or ways to get more exercise." Many of us would hate being subjected to boredom and loniless. While SOME institutions use medicine to prevent physical pain, there is nothing that can prevent emotional or pdychological pain. These animals would rather live free in the jungle rather than in a laboratory where they must wait and wait for a procedure. When these animals are no longer in use they are euthanized involuntarily instead of being set free. I already gave links to that in my previous arguments. Philosophy: The philosphy argument will never lead anywhere it's just what people believe. With that being said I would still like to give my opinion. Animals are not our tools. I have never heard of people take their tools to the groomer, or feed them tool food, I've heard of animal doctors(vets) but not tool doctors. Just like a mother can't hit a child for not listening, a person can't hit their pet for not listening. Sure, we must teach our pets obedience, we must also teach our kids obedience. Abuse of a pet is no better than abuse of a child. Unfortunately, that is what animal testing is today, abuse. I would not want to live with cure it means thousands of animal dies for me. I don't see my life as more important than an animals. I hope I would never have to come to a decision between an animal or my mom. I would choose my mom. But obviously I could rephrase that and say a stranger or my mom. I would still choose my mom. Not because one species is inferior to the other, but because emotion will always play a part in society. We can't base our judgement on 100% facts. It always has to be 50/50. Let's try that again, stranger or my pet. Bye human. :) I don't believe animals exist for humams. I mean why do spiders exist then. We don't eat them we don't use them. Why do sharks exist, we don't eat them, we don't use them. Animals existed millions of years before humans. Why would animal exist if there was no human to use them? Maybe because it isn't our duty to use them. This was just my opinion. As I mentioned in the first sentence of this argument. Obviously, other people would feel different. Cost: As I said in the first round it is not necessary. Those 16 billion dollars are 6.4 times the cost the Mars Rover($2.5 billion). All that money could be used to for patients who don't have health insurance to help them with their disease, instead of hurting another living being. It is still a lot of money. I would not like to see my tax money being used on something that kills many creatures but only saves a few. Alternatives: Animal testing is no longer necessary with over 450 alternatives that work. Scientist are not using alternatives when it's possible. Which is wrong. No alternative can be denied, all of them work, otherwise we wouldn't call them alternatives. Three R's of Animal Testing alternatives: (From the link my opponent gave) Replacement - Whenever possible, we should replace living, feeling animals with other things like tissue cultures and computer simulations. In addition, we should actively search for new ways and try to develop new technologies that can replace live, feeling animals in the lab. ï¿½ Reduction - Reducing the number of animals used in research. While we are trying to replace animals, we need to reduce the number of animals used in research to the smallest number possible. We should use as few animals in an experiment as we can. We should be very careful to be sure that experiments on animals are necessary. ï¿½ Refinement - Improving the lives of animals used in research. If we have to do an experiment that uses animals, then we must improve the living conditions of the animals used in research. The Animal Welfare Act mostly addresses refinement. With these alternatives a tremendous of lives will be saved. All types of lives humans and animals. Sources: http://www.aspca.org... Thank you to my opponent TUF for accepting this debate. He's really good debater. Good luck everyone. :)