Certainly administrators etc who have to wory abour ever present budget concerns will look favorably on that, no?

That humans derive benefit from some testing is not in dispute. We have done so. We will do so. The benefits to humans – claimed or actual – are immaterial to the ethical question.

We would not find it acceptable to subject unwilling HUMANS to experimentation on the grounds that it helped advance our understanding of any particular research. We would not justify claimed research advancements through any OTHER unethical means by claiming that the research helped many other humans.

But we routinely default to *not developing better alternatives* BECAUSE animal research is available. So long as we continue the unethical use of animals, no other alternatives to *replace* animal use completely are likely to be developed.

Claimed human benefit is irrelevant. The use of these animals is unethical regardless of any particular benefit.

Also, living subjects is not just animals, we need to test on cell cultures as well as humans. And I agree, ‘are you mad?’. Maybe we can go back to the dark ages where snake oil was handed out to treat every ailment.

As for ‘And you all need to get a “Real job”, instead of feeding your psychotic blood lust on government grant monies.’
You do realize that the ‘government grant monies’ is spent on the actual research, it’s not ‘profit’ made for the researchers. Besides, ‘grant monies’ is obtained for any research that is given the grant, doesn’t matter if it’s human studies or in vitro. I have not heard of a financial gain from choosing animal experiments for your research, the only people making a profit is those selling the lab equipment, etc. Also in vitro studies are not vegan either, many of them use animal products, such as antibodies obtained from animals.