14 lines
3.2 KiB
JSON
14 lines
3.2 KiB
JSON
[
|
|
{
|
|
"query": "People will die if we don\u2019t do animal testing Every year, 23 new drugs are introduced in the UK alone.[13] Almost all will be tested on animals. A new drug will be used for a long time. Think of all the people saved by the use of penicillin. If drugs cost more to test, that means drug companies will develop less. This means more people suffering and dying",
|
|
"response": "animals science science general ban animal testing junior Many of these drugs are \u201cme too\u201d drugs \u2013 ones with a slight change that doesn\u2019t make much difference to an existing drug. [14] So often the benefits from animal testing are marginal, and even if there was a slight increase in human suffering, it would be worth it based on the animal suffering saved."
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"query": "Survival of the fittest It is natural for human beings to farm, kill, and eat other species. In the wild there is a brutal struggle for existence as is shown by Darwin\u2019s On the Origin of the Species. The fact that we humans have succeeded in that struggle by exploiting our natural environment means that we have a natural right over lower species. The concept of survival of the fittest may seem outdated but it is still the defining order of nature. In fact farming animals is much less brutal than the pain and hardship that animals inflict on each other naturally in the wild.",
|
|
"response": "The claim of human entitlement over other species based on 'survival of the fittest' is flawed. While Darwin's theory highlights competition, it doesn't justify exploitation. Our capacity for empathy and moral reasoning surpasses mere survival instincts. Farming still inflicts suffering, contradicting the notion of human superiority. Ethical considerations should guide our treatment of animals, not outdated notions of natural selection."
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"query": "Underground Nuclear Storage is Expensive. Underground nuclear storage is expensive. This is because the deep geological repositories needed to deal with such waste are difficult to construct. This is because said repositories need to be 300m underground and also need failsafe systems so that they can be sealed off should there be a leak. For smaller countries, implementing this idea is almost completely impossible. Further, the maintenance of the facilities also requires a lot of long-term investment as the structural integrity of the facilities must consistently be monitored and maintained so that if there is a leak, the relevant authorities can be informed quickly and efficiently. This is seen with the Yucca mountain waste repository site which has cost billions of dollars since the 1990s and was eventually halted due to public fears about nuclear safety.",
|
|
"response": "While initial construction and maintenance entail significant costs, advancements in technology offer more cost-effective solutions. Modular storage designs and improved monitoring systems mitigate expenses. Collaborative international efforts can also distribute costs. Additionally, public concerns can be addressed through transparent safety protocols and community engagement, ensuring responsible nuclear waste management without exorbitant expenditure. Underground nuclear storage isn't inherently prohibitive."
|
|
}
|
|
] |