An alternative for animal testing should be found.

Reading my adversary's arguments, I can see she has essentially conceded. As con, she must prove that an alternative for animal testing should NOT be found. Having said this, she has argued for my side and helped me in this debate.However, I will continue to argue for my side.=Contentions=Contention 1 - Mistreatment of tested animalsIn animal testing, scientists aren't at all careful as to how they are handling animals that they test. Some of these cases can go unreported, and most go on the news." Concerns have been raised over the mistreatment of primates undergoing testing. In 1985 the case of Britches, a macaque monkey at the University of California, Riverside, gained public attention. He had his eyelids sewn shut and a sonar sensor on his head as part of an experiment to test sensory substitution devices for blind people. The laboratory was raided by Animal Liberation Front in 1985, removing Britches and 466 other animals. The National Institutes of Health conducted an eight-month investigation and concluded, however, that no corrective action was necessary. During the 2000s other cases have made headlines, include experiments at the University of Cambridge and Columbia University in 2002." - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia [1]As shown, animal testing can put animals into extremely harsh conditions. For example (shown above), an animal could have his eyes sewn shut. [1] Contention 2 - Animal tests are unreliableHumans and other aanimals are different species, as each species has a different anatomy, organ structure, fixation of DNA and whatnot. Therefore, an animal test with good results can cause the death of many humans. [2]"Species differences in anatomy, organ structure and function, toxin metabolism, chemical and drug absorption, and mechanisms of DNA repair—among myriad other differences between humans and other species—can give us inadequate or erroneous information when we attempt to apply animal data to human diseases and drug responses. For example, penicillin is toxic to guinea pigs, aspirin is poisonous to cats, and the recalled diet drug phen-fen caused no heart damage in animals, while it did in humans." - Neavs [2]In fact, one case actually showed that more than 80 HIV vaccines that were safe for animals, when tested on humans, either had no effect or actually worsened the risk of them geting HIV. [2] This proves that animal tests are completely unreliable, and even dangerous, most of the time.Studies suggest that 9 out of 10 animal tests fail this way. [3] [3]Contention 3 - Despite failed tests, on balance animal tests are extremely costlyAs though the above were not enough, statistics show that $16,000,000,000 is wasted annually on animal tests. [4] (Zoom in for ease of viewing) [4]What's even more major, $16,000,000,000 is enough to do the above actions. Combine that with the fact that $16,000,000,000 is wasted every year, and the world could have been a much better place.=Conclusion=As you can see, for these reasons it is definite that we ought to find an alternative for animal testing.Also, my opponent has essentially conceded, therefore failing to prove her side of debate.(1) http://en.wikipedia.org...;(2) http://www.neavs.org...(3) http://www.buav.org...;(4) http://brandongaille.com...;