Animal testing is a long-running institution in biomedical research that is seen as a necessary step in the development of new drugs and treatments in the United States. Using animal models that have biological similarities to humans, it is assumed that we can ethically perform basic research that is translatable to human health. However, recent years have seen this assumption challenged by the fact that most preclinical research fails to survive the gauntlet of human trials into a functioning treatment on the market. This has marked ethical implications for both the people that depend on new treatments for their health, and the animals used in the research themselves. The purpose of this thesis is to develop solutions for the problems facing animal testing in the United States. First, I identify the political and economic basis of the modern system of animal testing by examining legislation and the IACUCs that govern animal research to understand why the practice continues to be used despite its low rate of success. I then examine factors such as epigenetics and the laboratory environment to explain reasons why animal research fails to translate to humans. Finally, I cover new in-vitro methods such as organoids and organ-on-a-chip technologies to show the potential that alternatives hold for biomedical research. As a result of this analysis, I propose the further integration of alternatives into our system of animal testing to make up for the translational failures the field currently experiences. I also highlight the importance of having IACUCs balanced between animal researchers and members of the public to improve the welfare of animals used in research and increase the transparency of their work. Including more animals into the Animal Welfare Act is also proposed to better standardize our treatment of them and keep experimental results more consistent.