This house would ban animal testing

My opponent is a skilled and came prepared with his research, and for that I consider him a worthy. In my second round I would first refute my opponents arguments, back up my existing arguments and present a possible new argument. Although I must say that some medical advances has been made, there is no doubt about that. But the real question is at what cause? Over 100 million animals are burned,crippled, poisoned, and abused across the US. You heard that correctly, the numbers are staggering. If there are already 100 million animals being treated like this and these numbers are only for the US, what about globally? The next logical question would be to ask, what happens to these animals who are not necessarily dead but close to it. I'm glad you asked, in most cases that these animals suffer, and scientists do not put them out of their miseries, leaving them to die along with their dignity. A slow and not to mention extremely painful death. But once again I must say, some advances has been made such as the ones my opponent has stated before me. the next question is. Is it ethical? any rational human being would say no. Is it ever ethical to test on living things? The fact that my opponent has mentioned and made a detailed list about medical advances, doesn't make it anymore ethical. Because by his logic I can also say that the Nazi experimentation went well because they were able to find medical breakthroughs while experimenting on camp inmates aka jews. This proves my point that even though some results has been made, that doesn't make it ethically okay. According to the Humane Society, registration of a single pesticide requires more than 50 experiments and the use of as many as 12,000 animals. Which brings to my next point, Inefficiency. How many more animals are we going to let them die for us until we finally realize that testing on animals isn't the answer? We are fortunate enough to live in a time when unbelievable technological advances are made on the daily, mankind has never witnessed growth this fast, this large. And you're telling me that there isn't any other way we can find vaccines, do medical research, or even test cosmetics, than using defenceless animals? Mankind has been testing on animals for far too long, we must realize we are not the same as we were hundreds of years ago, we are civilized, we have the technology to find better ways and more efficient ways. My opponent claims "This is just a blatantly false claim. Animals exist whose organ systems share very close similiaries with humans, allowing us to target those systems for testing. This gives us accurate results. Murali explains[3]: ..." I regrettably must inform him that 92% of experimental drugs that are safe and effective in animals fail in human clinical trials because they are too dangerous or don"t work according to "dosomething.org" 92% is a pretty high failure rate for something that's apparently "effective" By now you should know 1) animals are suffering, and for the small amount of research we are learning, millions of animals would have to die. For every positive result my opponent can list, I can list 50 negative results, deeming it inefficient and irrelevant. 2) Just because there are results doesn't make it okay (Nazis) 3) We simply have better technology if we are willing to spend the money. In an ideal world labs would follow protocol and give painkillers to these animals, and treat these animals with care and respect. Not to say that ALL labs disregards the rules, but the sad reality is that most of these labs do ignore standard protocols, because standard protocols would cost a lot of money, to buy painkillers, proper shelter, food, etc. The same money they could use for alternative ways to test, such as using human tissue and cells. If labs are given the extra funds to follow protocol for animal testing, they might as well use new technology that has faster and a lot more precise answers than animal testing. Deeming it completely pointless, There are obviously pros for testing on animals, but the fact still and will always remain that the cons outweighs the pros in a landslide. sources 1. http://www.peta.org... 2. https://www.dosomething.org...