I've never seen a more text book example of changing the subject when you don't have a real answer. sk0g and hobofan point out a key benefit of animal testing,

I've never seen a more text book example of changing the subject when you don't have a real answer. sk0g and hobofan point out a key benefit of animal testing, explain why there is no alternative at present, and rather than addressing that or acknowleding the point, you respond with non-sequiturs. Try to learn to separate what you want to be true "animal testing is pointless" vs what is actually true "animal testing has benefits that cannot be sensibly found any other way". Then we can productively move towards eliminating animal testing. But if you won't even listen to others points, how do you hope to convince them of anything?