Animal Testing

So I guess we started.Just a note: this means no harm to any reader of this debate. Thank you and enjoy your decent into my debate! :)I would like to start my debate off with some defenses of mine."Most people are against animal testing because it kills 'sweet little' animals."...Really? I'm against it because it is wrong to sacrifice their lives for our benefits. This part is entirely pending opinion. And, by the way, it is only 85-87%, just so you know. [1]"These are the same animals that are slaughtered for food, and exterminated for being pests everyday."Rats and mice are slaughtered for food? I would like to know where they test rats and slaughter them. And for the extermination part, they should live in their natural habitat, not our houses. Like we shouldn't be living in the rainforest."Would you be willing to give up cancer treatment, which saves thousands world wide every year, for a thousand rats?"This is what really makes me mad. Look, it's not a thousand. It is almost 265,000... per day. That's well over 100,000,000 per YEAR. And only 18% are rats and mice. 15% are the animals that most of us hold dear, probably in your household right now: dogs, cats, bunnies, and fish. And mice can be pets, too. Believe it or not, so can rats. We are killing the things we love the most. And as for cancer treatment, it doesn't work all of the time. Why are we still dying from cancer if it is such a success? Why is lung and heart cancer a death sentence? Why is my friends mom dying from cancer? "Animal testing is necessary to our society, to ensure that large amounts of human beings can survive."I'm guessing you don't see humans as the same equivalent as animals. I've prepared a ratio for us to show you just how ridiculous animal testing is. I will also make an algebraic expression later on.Animals killed per year in animal testing: ≥100,000,000 per year- worldwide.People saved per year due to animal testing: ≤5,000,000 worldwide is a safe bet. [2]100,000,000:5,000,000A20:H120 animals per human. Are we really that selfish? Lets say x= animals tested and y= humans saved.20x=y. So by solving algebra, an animal is about 1/20th as important as we are. Math defies the logic of animal testing right there.My turn!Argument 1: We aren't using animals only to find cures... [4]The majority of the people, probably you, think that animal testing is only used to find cures. But it is used on shampoo, toothpaste, pesticides, mouthwash, makeup, and other everyday household items. In fact, it is arguable that vaccinations are only a small part of animal testing! When you wash your clothes with the "new and improved" laundry detergent, you are really washing your clothes with animal blood and fur. Animal testing could be greatly reduced if we just stick with one brand of everything. Look at us: I'm pretty sure we have 100 companies destined to toilet paper, or wiping our butt. We have well over 1,000 brands of shampoos and soaps. Do we really have to be so greedy? If we just stuck on one brand, more than 5,000,000 animals would be saved, or the same amount of humans animal testing "supposedly" saves per year. But what are we really being saved from? The deathly stain on your t-shirt that is about a millimeter wide? Those tiny germs on your hands? Those unwashed hair fragments? What I'm saying here is that the world of animal testing goes far, far beyond just finding cures for diseases. In China, every product has to be animal tested for safety. So yeah, it goes a loooooooong was more than finding cures...Argument 2: Are they even reliable? [4]Are animals even reliable? On various sites, it says that 92% of products or cures that pass in animals are rendered useless or dangerous shortly after. This has been responsible for 70,000 deaths in the U.K due to faulty animal testing [4]. That means humans are being killed by animal testing, also! Only 1.18% of all diseases in humans occur in animals, making the vast majority of the diseases we are trying to useless by animal testing [4]. We are also throwing away many good products, as 75% of side effects observed in animals are never found in humans [4]. So I will go as far to ask you: are they even reliable? Argument 3: AbuseIf you think animals are kept on comfy beds, you are wrong. They are kept in cold cages with little food or water, literally like a jail cell. And scientists don't exactly treat them like the Pope, either. If you want, click on the [5] link. But I will warn you, it made me cry and is really disturbing how cold-hearted those people are. They truly hate animals. And here's another thing: after being tested, animals are almost always killed, and it doesn't matter whether they passed the test or not. Think about that, please!This has been a really fun debate for me so far! :)THANK YOU FOR READING AND GOD BLESS! :D[1] http://www.statisticbrain.com...[2] http://www.sanofipasteur.com...[3] http://www.dosomething.org...[4] http://www.vivisectioninformation.com...[5] http://www.peta2.com... *WARNING!!! LANGUAGE IS IN THIS VIDEO. WATCH AT OWN RISK!!!!!