Jump to content

Fish and no Pain? True?


Guest trickydavies

Recommended Posts

Guest trickydavies

Look guys I'm really sorry to post this but I'm new on here and thus have probably missed this sort of thread before now - but I would really like to be pointed to the paper written about fish and pain. I'm a fishing guide and didn't KNOW they didn't feel pain until I read the thread about selfish fishermen - even if they did I can live with it but understand the morale stance of some. Point is, if we could direct PETA (who are they? never heard of them) to the scientific papers on this subject that prove they don't then the argument is over - on the other hand if all we've got is " scientists have proved " type comments then that is just plain nonsense. Who are the scientists, where and on what species did they do the tests etc?

 

I hope this isn't a pain (pardon pun) but I would love to say "go to journal tiddly tiddly and read the paper written by proffessor tiddly tiddly and you'l find that in fact the neurological tiddly tiddly required for pain sensation is not part of the fish anatomy" You know what I mean.

 

If there is no evidence then maybe a rethink.

 

Sorry - I must know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest trickydavies

Will someone please answer this or even just admit they don't know because I feel like a numpty not knowing when it's my job to take people out fishing. If I'm not alone in those blindly saying fish don't feel pain then I'll feel a bit better. I believe they do feel pain but am almost certainly wrong as I base this on the way they fight for diffewrent hooking points in the mouth. Nothing scientific - pure subjective viewing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest waterman1013

Tricky

 

Send me your snail mail addy by private e-mail and I'll put some info in the post for you.

 

Mike Heylin

Specialist Anglers Alliance

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Simon Newbould

You probably won't get too may replies Tricky....

 

I think the only guy that's gonna be able to help you (possibly) is Bruno.....

 

The thing with PETA or PISCES or whoever is that they can and will produce scientific papers that say the total opposite.....

I'm not sure how it works but it seems that there is no such thing a scientific "fact"....

 

Simon...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Simon Newbould

You probably won't get too may replies Tricky....

 

I think the only guy that's gonna be able to help you (possibly) is Bruno.....

 

The thing with PETA or PISCES or whoever is that they can and will produce scientific papers that say the total opposite.....

I'm not sure how it works but it seems that there is no such thing a scientific "fact"....

 

We can produce papers scientifically "proving" that fish do not feel pain (if we look hard enough for them) and the anti's can produce papers scientifically "proving" that they do!!!!

 

It all comes down to which scientist has the most credibility I guess....

 

Simon...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest trickydavies

Thanks for the pointers and yes I'l post my email to you Mike. In a minute.

 

I thought there was something odd as no one seemd to give real evidence and the writngs seemed a little defensive for those who KNOW they are right.

 

I'll check out the links also.

 

Tricky

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Leon Roskilly

It's scientifically impossible to prove a negative frown.gif

 

eg If somone is convinced that fairies exist, you cannot scientifically prove that they don't.

 

You can only point to a lack of evidence that they do.

 

But if the believer has read a book that states that they do indeed exist, and chooses to believe it, you'll never be able to present them with positive evidence that they don't.

 

Same with pain in fish.

 

Point out that we know where in the brain humans feel pain, and that some children are born with damage in this area who simply can't feel pain; burning their skin away if left next to a radiator, nibbling their fingernails to the bone, causing damage to other children because they have no concept of pain, or the guilt one get's from inflicting it.

 

Point out that those areas simply don't exist in the primitive fish brain - you might as well try to convince someone that fairies don't exist.

 

Why did animals develop the ability to feel pain?

 

On the land environment, we are subject to gravity. The ground and the things we sit on are full of sharp and dangerous things.

 

we run, we fall, we swing in trees, lose our grip and hurt ourselves - pain teaches us, and our brain is capable of true 'learning'.

 

Fish live supended in water, water plants are soft, not composed of sharp sticks etc,

 

Their environment does not damage through natural movement as much us ours.

 

They don't have a mammal's ability to learn from pain - the ability to suffer pain is of no use to them.

 

Evolution had no reason to give them a sense of pain (but it did give them a lateral line, which we mammals don't have, because it's of no use in our environment).

 

When I go into my garden, I have to be careful.

 

Land based flora and fauna have evolved in the presence of creatures who can feel pain.

 

They have evolved strategies using the infliction of pain to defend themselves - nettles, prickles, thistles; wasps with stings which advertise the fact that they can deliver pain with black and yellow stripes.

 

If aquatic life had developed the ability to feel pain, don't you think that aquatic flora and fauna would have developed similar strategies?

 

Where are the prickles on water plants, the marine equivalent of wasps?

 

(the spines of stickle-backs and perch don't deter predators with any ability to inflict pain - they simply prevent engorgement. That's why perch are one of the best live-baits, despite their spines).

 

We humans, and a few apes, are thought to be unique in that we are 'mind-readers'. That is we see someone else acting in some way, interpret their actions and are able to 'put ourselves into their mind'.

 

We see someone drive a hook into their thumb and wince 'knowing' what they are going through.

 

We see a fish with a hook in it's mouth and wince - but WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IT'S GOING THROUGH!!

 

After fish came reptiles, with newer brain structures. It's in these brains that the first primitive 'emotions' were born.

 

Then came the mammals with a well developed cortex (as well as the reptilian brain structures, able to use memory and true learning (as opposed to habituation, which even primitive cellular life forms display)

 

And then the apes, able to use reasoning.

 

To try to 'read' the mind of a fish, using a human mind as a model, well you might as well believe in fairies!!

 

Amputate a man's leg, and see what effect this has on him, physically, psychologically, socially.

 

Amputate a dog's leg and marvel at how he hardly misses it!

 

Try not to confuse what fish go through with what humans go through!!

 

As for scientific papers, how about this?

-------------------------------------

 

Neil Boyce, reporting from the American Association for the Advancement of Science in New Scientist (6 Feb 1999) writes:-

 

Painful choices

 

FROGS could help resolve one of the toughest dilemmas in animal experimentation. Because they lack the brain structures which allow mammals to feel pain, they might be used as a less contentious way of testing new painkilling drugs.

 

The crux of the problem is that you can’t find out how well an analgesic works without first inflicting pain. In a typical experiment you would compare how long it takes for a rat on a hotplate to raise one of its hind legs before and after it receives a new drug.

 

Now Craig Stevens of Oklahoma State University in Tulsa has developed the first amphibian model for testing pain-killers. He drips acetic acid on the hind legs of the leopard-spotted frog, Rana pipiens, and times how long it takes the frog to wipe the acid away. His studies show that well-known painkillers such as the opiates morphine and codeine have similar effects on this response as they do in the rat hotplate test.

 

“It does have an ethical advantage,” says Stevens. “Frogs don’t have any of the structures that in humans and other mammals are used for pain perception.” They have no limbic cortex, which is responsible for emotional responses like dread and fear, and also can’t be conditioned to learn to expect the acid application. “They don’t jump away. They don’t show any of the fear responses,” he says.

 

“If it proved to answer the same questions, pharmaceuticals companies will be embracing that,” predicts Kerry Taylor of the Southern Research Institute in Frederick Maryland. Stevens also says he can buy and keep six frogs for the price of one rat, so his model is cheap as well.

 

www.newscientist.com

 

-------------------------------------

 

But then there will always be those who argue that it's been 'scientifically' proven that fish feel pain (Scientists read the RSPCA commissioned Medway Report and weep!)

 

And there will always be those convinced that fairies really do exist.

 

For my part, I don't believe that fish feel anything which we would label as 'pain'.

 

If they do,I don't believe that they have the ability to 'care' that they are in pain.

 

And anyway, they have no memory of their experience, which is just as well considering the number of pike I've played, lost, and hooked again just moments later, on the same lure smile.gif.

 

 

Tight Lines – leon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest davidP

As has been stated, science is a wonderfull thing and there is always someone with letters after their name who'll prove the exact opposite no matter what you say.

 

On a personal level I've never thought the 'fish feel pain' issue is one that we'll ever win, at least not with the unwashed masses. It doesn't matter how much science or biology we produce, even if it indisputably proves our case, because people will always view the issues in human terms. Their view is that if it would hurt a person then it must hurt the fish, and I really don't think we'll ever overcome this view of animals.

Look at the other animal welfare issues - fox hunting, fur farming, livestock farming methods, zoos, vivisection etc etc. Every single one is overidingly subject to the humanizing of the animals and no amount of logical or scientific argument has or will overcome it. This doesn't mean that the arguments arn't valid, it's just that in many cases they're completely swamped by the protestors playing on peoples emotions by humanizing the animals (ie PETAs singing cows, shagging cats etc).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The strongest argument I have heard that fish don't feel pain is this.

 

Fish spend many months of the year in temperatures of around 2-4 degrees centigrade. If they felt pain they would not be able to stand this, but they do and for many months every year.

 

----------------

 

Best Wishes

 

Andrew Webster

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We and our partners use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences, repeat visits and to show you personalised advertisements. By clicking “I Agree”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. However, you may visit Cookie Settings to provide a controlled consent.