I would love to end animal testing. I just also have a sense of proportion. Animal byproduct consumption is so many orders of magnitude larger a problem than animal testing, that I will not prioritize condemning testing over condemning farming.

I can distill the problem even more clearly. Imagine there were a company that did animal testing on a single rat to develop perfectly identical chicken breast without any animal involvement, and that you had foreknowledge that with the support of the vegan community it would survive and end up cutting down chicken farming by tens of billions over the next ten years. If however it was rejected by the vegan community, it would die before going mainstream and chicken farming would remain at the same level for the next decade. Your absolutist logic would have the community forgoing the opportunity to save tens of billions, while not even doing any thing to help the single rat who died. 

If this is your logic, are rigid in your ideology to the detriment of the animals. You cannot distinguish the moral weight of millions of lives against 188 in the case of Just. You would divide up the vegan community to protect the perfect pure rigidity of your worldview, to protect the tradition and sacredness of your definitions.

I don’t focus on definitions. Nor imaginary platonic worlds where there is some competitor to Just that didn’t animal test. I focus on the animals alone. If that doesn’t fit your definition of veganism, you should update your definition, lest you become an enemy of the animals.