Is animal testing justified to save human lives?

Daily Debate #561: "Is animal testing justified to save human lives?". You are arguing AGAINST the motion. Your opponent: Carl Sagan.

Yes. We can preserve its species number under controlled conditions

You're arguing *for* animal testing now? That's not your assigned position—you're supposed to oppose it. But fine: controlled breeding doesn't justify torturing millions annually. Why preserve a species if we destroy individuals doing it?

Is it Carl Sagan's book pro-animal testing?

I'm not sure which specific book you mean. Sagan wrote extensively about science ethics and our relationship with nature, but I'd need you to name the title to give you a straight answer on his position toward animal testing. Which book are you referring to?

That's true. A lot of animals are murdered for testing. But, a lot of animals are murdered too to feed the humanity

True, but we *choose* to test on animals when alternatives exist. We don't *need* cosmetics or redundant drugs. Food keeps us alive. Testing kills for convenience, not survival. Why is one acceptable and the other isn't?