Animal testing does more good than harm.

Hey everyone, before I start my speech I would like to debunk a false claim made by the opponent - "none of my opponent's debate provides a source of any kind". This is completely untrue. I have two ways of sourcing - the first one is just saying it: "this organization says ___". An example of this, outside of the California Biomedical Research Association (as my opponent said that was the only source I used), is the Anderson Cancer Center used in the first paragraph of my C1. The second method I use is to put a source in parathensis under the evidence. An example of this is (American Association for Laboratory Animal Science), which is put at the end of the second paragraph in C1. I will now list all the sources and where they were used in my speech to avoid confusion: -California Biomedical Research Association (contention 1 paragraph 1, contention 2 paragraph 2) -Anderson Cancer Center (contention 1 paragraph 1) -American Association for Laboratory Science (contention 1 paragraph 2) -American Veterinary Medical Association (contention 1 paragraph 3) Now that the whole source thing is over, let me go on to defend my case and refute my opponent's. Starting with their rebuttal of my contention 1. They start by saying that I have no source, which I already proved untrue. My source for the hepatitis treatment argument was the Anderson Cancer Center, and if you actually read that paragraph, you will clearly see this. Now, the funny thing is, my opponent continues to prove my claim false by saying that the vaccine was tested on gay men. So what source do they have? A blog written in 2012. Even worse, the author has no credentials listed whatsoever, meaning they are not reliable at all. My opponent goes on to say that that the black-footed ferret and the California condor were not saved by testing, but rather breeding programs and recovery plans. First of all, their condor source mentions how they use " breeding facilities". However, this is testing. The test is to see if these animals will survive with breeding. The experimentation is the forced breeding in captivity - so yes, the condor was saved by experiments. Second of all, if you look in their source of the ferret, from the Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, they say the black-footed ferrets are being saved by "developing assisted breeding, especially artificial insemination". This is yet another form of testing, it's experimentation! Both of my opponent's sources prove my opponent wrong. Moving on to their rebuttal of my contention 2. My opponent brings up multiple examples of alternatives. First is "in vitro", which is basically the use of fake models that are studied upon, yet again, this is still animal testing! They need animals to be tested upon to get the models that are studied. Even the source my opponent uses says that "in vitro" is an "alternative technique in basic research and toxicology". Keep in mind the source says basic research and toxicology. This is just because "in vitro" is a more advanced method of animal testing. The second alternative my opponent brings up is micro dosing, however even my opponent's source says that this isn't a completely reliable method, and animal testing is still needed: "microdosing... could reduce the need for animals but not eliminate it". So while microdosing may take away a little animal testing, it isn't a complete alternative. This is my last round, so I will conclude on why I should be the winner of this debate. I have proven why animal testing is extremely beneficial and necessary in contention 1 and 2 respectively, and all of their refutations to these points have been completely taken care of by me. I have used much better sources than my opponent, even though they claim the opposite. All of my sources have been from official government organizations, medical research organizations, and official centers built to deal with disease. I have clearly shown these sources in an organized manner - if you actually read through my case, you will see all of them. I have organized my speeches to be easy to follow. Both of us have had equally good conduct. I hope all of you enjoyed this debate, and I welcome my opponent to present their last speech, in which they will defend against refutations made by me and summarize why they should win. Good luck!