no, i don't think it's 100% true, but to some level, analgesia does a good work on pain relief during the test, and it's unfair for animals to suffer.
Yeah, so I was saying you have to watch out because you are trying to make a strong argument. If you are trying to make a strong argument and you say something that is not necessarily true, the people watching the argument will have less confidence in you and your opponent will be able to spike the volleyball on you. :-)
And also, that other thing about less important uses, like cosmetic products... that is a common part of this debate over animal testing, so your paper is incomplete without it.
BTW I really doubt that a lot of money gets spent on anesthesia, because how would such regulations be enforced? People are always trying to cut costs. They don't anesthetize animals at the slaughterhouse, and they probably don't sufficiently anesthetize them for animal testing. Paralyzing them to make the work easier is not the same as anesthetizing them. So... this is an interesting subject! Important, too. I don't want to reincarnate as a cat and have people putting shampoo in my eyes!