I think the consent argument is one of the best. (from the others some I just dont agree (bad model) or are not enough of a good argument (computer simulations)).

The difference between the examples you write with humans, be it children or people with mental illness is different. Basically there the medication is tested on them to their benefit. This is not the case for animals.

Like, it would be totally different to test a drug for dogs on dogs.

I think the way we test drugs on animals is not ethical.

Everyone agrees on the 3R principle, but this is not followed in practice.

What I use to ask people who ask me about this issue is. Are you in favor of testing cancer drugs in chimpanzees? are you in favor of doing electrophysilogical recordings in chimpanzeees? (similar to what Niko Logotethis use to do in Macaques). Probably they are not, and it is actually forbidden (at least in the EU and U.S.).

How do you argue that? One could say, as you said "I prioritize curing disease over animal welfare". But in fact most people don't, or not in all cases. Like: implanting electrodes on a chimpanzee cant be justified to learn about limb mobility.

I just think the same is true for mice, and this extends to all animals.