Which two supporting details can the author add to make the arguments in this passage stronger?
experimentation on animals is cruel and unnecessary. it is wrong to test drugs and products on animals. just because animals cannot speak, it does not mean they do not feel any pain or discomfort. also, there is no guarantee that what is safe for animals will be safe for humans. however, these experiments still continue. in today’s world, where science has come so far in what it can do, there has to be a better way to test products.

She took up a scalpel and slit the monkey's abdomen, making a slow and gentle cut, keeping the blade well away from her gloved fingers. the spleen was puffed up and tough, leathery, like a globe of smoked salami. she did not see any bloody lesions inside this monkey. she had expected that the monkey's interior would be a lake of blood, but no, this monkey looked all right, it had not bled into itself. if the animal had died of ebola, this was not a clear case. she opened up the intestine. there was no blood inside it. the gut looked okay. then she examined the stomach. there she found a ring of bleeding spots at the junction between the stomach and the small intestine. this could be a sign of ebola, but it was not a clear sign. it could also be a sign of simian fever, not ebola. therefore, she could not confirm the presence of ebola virus in this animal based on a visual inspection of the internal organs during necropsy.