I think part of my general point was that seeking "moral high grounds", at least as a judgmental behaviour, is a trap and can be dumb and can be part of the problem.

In a world rife with deferred ethics, I'd argue moral high ground urges and behaviours are an opiate to help us cope with the realities and difficulties of issues.

I also haven't eaten meat or animal products or driven or owned a car for a while, but personally, I'm wary of wanting to take moral high grounds or being too judgmental of those who eat meat or believe in animal testing to progress medical science. I don't think it helps the issue, argument or any animals frankly.

IMO, to get people to be better at empathy, you have to start with empathy. And then, if someone turns out to be a cunt, then well, call 'em what they are.

Otherwise, beyond all that, I personally am really not sure focusing on animal testing makes any sense if you care about the general state of animal welfare and the way humans treat animals. I personally suspect scientists in lab coats make an easy scarecrow with some subtle prejudices creeping in, and kinda probably judge people would prefer to target testing rather than the animal farming industry and the industries that destroy habitats. Outside of scientific research though, yea animal testing is probably complete trash.

As for my view on animals in scientific research, I think the whole thing could do with a pretty significant clean up where the model of scientific practice is probably in need of reform to be more efficient. Awkwardly, I suspect the scientific industry would find this difficult and for entirely shitty reasons.

Generally, I'm personally not sure where I stand on whether any animal experimentation is justified, but I'd bet much of what does happen is not entirely justifiable at all.