Which is a funny point; I remember an article about how France's health care system provides postpartum psychotherapy and vaginal exercise trainers, after discovering that the investment of assigning women a therapist and a personal trainer is vastly cheaper than the costs associated with postpartum depression and recovery. There's a brass tax argument to be made for a lot of things when you look at medicine or research on a macro level. Which is, again, why I found this to be such a frustrating event; protesters rescue approximately a hundred ish lab animals, and destroy the research projects of a handful to a dozen graduate students, potentially destroying the careers of a couple of scientists, and set back the field.
But, anyway, I place the value of animal life quite low, and at least some of the imperative to reduce suffering as a cost/requirement/effort to be undertaken by humans *for* humans; it takes a type of person I'd rather not associate with to be comfortable causing 'unnecessary' suffering to animals. I'm a fan of scientists remembering that the pursuit of knowledge is noble and grand and dandy, but that we are empathetic social creatures who are ultimately trying to improve the lives of other empathetic social creatures.
EDIT: Mind you, me setting the value of animal life low is by no means a suggestion that we should disregard animal life. 'Value' here is a fuzzy term.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.