Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.
Reward Points: | 2 |
Efficiency:
Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive). Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high. | 100% |
Arguments: | 2 |
Debates: | 0 |
I agree with with your argument regarding the the adoption and containment of the numerous types of exotic animals.
Exotic animals do not make good companions. They require special care, housing, diet, and maintenance that the average person cannot provide. When in the hands of private individuals the animals suffer due to poor care. They also pose safety and health risks to their possessors and any person coming into contact with them.
Individuals possessing exotic animals often attempt to change the nature of the animal rather than the nature of the care provided. Such tactics include confinement in small barren enclosures, chaining, beating “into submission,” or even painful mutilations, such as declawing and tooth removal. http://www.bornfreeusa.org/
I agree with this debate because of the newly advanced ways to test these medications. Also, these ways may be more effective due to the fact that animals may have a different reactions to chemicals than we do.
https://www.neavs.org/alternatives/
For example, experiments on rats, hamsters, guinea pigs, mice, monkeys, and baboons revealed no link between glass fibers and cancer. Only after human studies related the two did the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) label these fibers as carcinogenic. EpiDerm, an in vitro test derived from cultured human skin cells, was found to be more accurate in identifying chemical skin irritants than traditional animal tests. In comparison studies, EpiDerm correctly detected all of the test chemicals that irritate human skin, while tests on rabbits misclassified 10 out of 25 test chemicals—a full 40% error rate.
I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know! |