Skip header content and main navigation Binghamton University, State University of New York - Patrick
Banner Brandon Evans Brittney Bleyle Trevor Reddick Phillip George Sonya Robinson Maneo Choudhury Daniel Friedman Joe Leeson-Schatz Anna Pinchuk Masakazu Kurihara Joshua Frumkin

Binghamton Speech & Debate

Proposition: Jessica Tian (NEI Education) vs. Opposition: Maxwell Mihalic (Wood River High School)

Judge: Joe Leeson-Schatz (Binghamton University)

Resolution: RESOLVED: The United States Federal Government should ban all testing that requires the use of animals.

  • Jessica Tian
    Jessica Tian
    vs.



    Maxwell Mihalic
    Maxwell Mihalic
    Click to begin

    Speech Details

    Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.

    Posted at N/A by Jessica Tian

    Citations

    Show

    http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/2006/ucm108576.htm

    http://scienceinsociety.northwestern.edu/content/articles/2009/research-digest/thalidomide/title-tba

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2002542/

    http://www.vivisectioninformation.com/index.php?p=1_8

    Posted at N/A by Maxwell Mihalic

    Citations

    Show

    Simon Festing [Executive Director of the Research Defense Society, London] and Robin

    Wilkinson [Science Communications Officer at the Research Defense Society, London], The

    ethics of animal research. Talking Point on the use of animals in scientific research, EMBO

    Reports, Volume 8(6), pp. 526-530. URL=

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2002542/.

    Simon Festing [Executive Director of the Research Defense Society, London] and Robin

    Wilkinson [Science Communications Officer at the Research Defense Society, London], The

    ethics of animal research. Talking Point on the use of animals in scientific research, EMBO

    Reports, Volume 8(6), pp. 526-530. URL=

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2002542/.

    Simon Festing [Executive Director of the Research Defense Society, London] and Robin

    Wilkinson [Science Communications Officer at the Research Defense Society, London], The

    ethics of animal research. Talking Point on the use of animals in scientific research, EMBO

    Reports, Volume 8(6), pp. 526-530. URL=

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2002542/.

    Simon Festing [Executive Director of the Research Defense Society, London] and Robin

    Wilkinson [Science Communications Officer at the Research Defense Society, London], The

    ethics of animal research. Talking Point on the use of animals in scientific research, EMBO

    Reports, Volume 8(6), pp. 526-530. URL=

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2002542/.

    Posted at N/A by Jessica Tian

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Posted at N/A by Maxwell Mihalic

    Citations

    Show

    Please See 1st Opposition Constructive Citations.

    Posted at N/A by Jessica Tian

    Citations

    Show

    None available for this speech.

    Status

    This match has been completed. Show the Decision.

    Submitted at N/A by Joe Leeson-Schatz

    Category Jessica Tian Maxwell Mihalic
    Use of evidence: 4.5 4.7
    Delivery skill: 4 3.6
    Coherence of arguments: 5 5
    Responsiveness to opponent: 4.5 5
    Identification of key points: 4.6 3.8
    Comments: Good opening speech. I'd potentially spend some more time talking about other mechanisms than animal testing that could be used. Don't wait til the second speech. Avoid using terms like "not good." Instead just as "bad."

    Rewatch your video before posting. It was very soft and difficult to hear even with headphones for me.
    The music in the background is more distracting than beneficial, as is your moving around. The argument that the alternatives to animal testing are being improved helps the proposition out more than your side. Focus more on why animal testing is needed and/or an off-case argument as to why banning testing at the federal level is problematic.

    You spend a lot of time focusing on UK v US cites versus spending more time on the arguments that are more important to winning your side.

    Explain why extremism is bad and impact out the need to test on animals more than you do.

    The decision is for the Proposition: Jessica Tian

    Reason for Decision:

    If alternatives are coming there's no reason to test on animals to advance human self-interest since we can just use alternatives instead. The opposition should argue that alternatives are ineffective for certain things or that the time-frame for alternatives to become effective would take too long. However, absent this there is no reason why animal testing is needed so any risk of it being immoral is enough of a reason to ban animal testing because other options exist.

    The opposition's first speech was better than his second in outlining points as to why to negate. The second speech did not impact out extremism as much as needed for it to function as a dis/ad to banning animal testing in a world there was no evidence extended into the final speech as to why testing is necessary.


    Add Comment

    Please Create an Account or Log-In to post comments.

    Connect with Binghamton:
    Twitter icon links to Binghamton University's Twitter page YouTube icon links to Binghamton University's YouTube page Facebook icon links to Binghamton University's Facebook page Pinterest icon links to Binghamton University's Pinterest page

    Binghamton University Online Debate Platform powered by:

    PHP MySQL SUIT