ATTN. PETA..........
- Thread starter oddballer
- Start date
JD_MAN said:
You've missed my muttered point
So are domesticated dogs, and gold fish, etc...which were inbred for our enjoyment, and neutered, etc....unless you support no pet keeping period! Think people breed similar animals to each other or even worse different species, like flowerhorns, etc... 
Cyclop3000 said:
Look up Harris Ranch, probably supply a great portion of the tasty angus on the west coast. I've driven past the farms, would hardly say its a quality life. In all honesty, probably vegetarianism is better for all. But too bad, I like eating fish
this is in response to scientific arguments posted on the site as to the ability of fish to feel pain. I will try to keep the language simple, but I am happy to define anything that I accidentaly leave in.
1) Assertion: Fish responses to negative stimuli (those that non-influenced humans would identify as pain) are purely on the reflexive level, being generated on the sub-concious region of the brain, i.e. the brain stem and spinal cord.
Refutation: The argument is incorrect on several levels, and assumes several more things. The argument that fish have no pain reaction because they lack certain subcortical pathways is flawed. The reason that fish have no subcortical pathways is because they lack the frontal cortex (or 'lobe'), the area of the brain affected in a lobotomy. I will get to the human aspect of it later. Fish do, however, have what is known as a 'forebrain' this part of the brain is associated with learning behaviors, and is directly connected to olfactory sensors. Olfactory sensing in fish occurs on a flat/positive/threshhold system, where the fish can either sense no stimulation, some stimulation, or enough stimulation to warrant action. The threshold in individual fish varies widely depending upon location and available stimuli. Therefore, as fish can learn from positive olfactory stimuli, and as any aquarist who has seen fish 'beg' for food, fish can most likely learn by visual and gustatory stimuli as well. Given that fish can experience positive learning, it is foolish to believe that fish can not experience learning in response to negative stimuli. Negative stimuli when determining a reaction in a learning curve are manifest as unpleasant sensations in the concious region of the brain. In humans, negative learning stimuli are present most obviously in taste, smell, touch. Therefore, because fish experience learning behavior, they experience negatives in the concious brain, and do not rely solely on reflex. Saying that because fish react to some negative stimuli reflexively is the same as saying that because you kick when you tap your kneecap, you can never learn to avoid, say, guns, or certain threatening-looking people.
2) Assertion: The frontal lobe is the only way that organism can feel pain; a lobotomy in humans removes their sense of pain.
Refutation: A lobotomy severs the connection from the prefrontal cortex to the thalamus, or simply destroys the cortex tissue. The result of the lobotomy is a very calm, unemotional person. Lobotomies were generally performed in the first half of the century, often to control dissidents or to 'fix' people like homosexuals or even jews. However, many people, though calm and without the least spark of personality, still were able to talk, learn, and feel pain. Howard Dully, who was lobotomized at the age of twelve transorbitally (through the eye), is now 56 and has a job. However, the lobotomy did have some effects, so even a successful lobotomy patient can feel pain. The frontal cortex (with the medula oblongata) in humans deals more with emotions and what creates personality than pain. This is consistent with the lack of the prefrontal cortex in fish, as you can observe that they don't have much personality.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5014080
3) Assertion: The size and type of fish doesn't matter when considering its ability to feel pain, or other emotions, or intelligenece.
Refutation: As brains go, the bigger the better. But, of course only big differences matter, usually cross-species differences. The larger a brain is, the more complexity it has, the greater range of emotions/sensations it can feel. Smaller organisms rely on threshhold effects, wile the larger the organism gets, the more gradient effects it can have, and the more it can match reaction gradients to those stimuli gradients.
I hope i have been clear enough.
1) Assertion: Fish responses to negative stimuli (those that non-influenced humans would identify as pain) are purely on the reflexive level, being generated on the sub-concious region of the brain, i.e. the brain stem and spinal cord.
Refutation: The argument is incorrect on several levels, and assumes several more things. The argument that fish have no pain reaction because they lack certain subcortical pathways is flawed. The reason that fish have no subcortical pathways is because they lack the frontal cortex (or 'lobe'), the area of the brain affected in a lobotomy. I will get to the human aspect of it later. Fish do, however, have what is known as a 'forebrain' this part of the brain is associated with learning behaviors, and is directly connected to olfactory sensors. Olfactory sensing in fish occurs on a flat/positive/threshhold system, where the fish can either sense no stimulation, some stimulation, or enough stimulation to warrant action. The threshold in individual fish varies widely depending upon location and available stimuli. Therefore, as fish can learn from positive olfactory stimuli, and as any aquarist who has seen fish 'beg' for food, fish can most likely learn by visual and gustatory stimuli as well. Given that fish can experience positive learning, it is foolish to believe that fish can not experience learning in response to negative stimuli. Negative stimuli when determining a reaction in a learning curve are manifest as unpleasant sensations in the concious region of the brain. In humans, negative learning stimuli are present most obviously in taste, smell, touch. Therefore, because fish experience learning behavior, they experience negatives in the concious brain, and do not rely solely on reflex. Saying that because fish react to some negative stimuli reflexively is the same as saying that because you kick when you tap your kneecap, you can never learn to avoid, say, guns, or certain threatening-looking people.
2) Assertion: The frontal lobe is the only way that organism can feel pain; a lobotomy in humans removes their sense of pain.
Refutation: A lobotomy severs the connection from the prefrontal cortex to the thalamus, or simply destroys the cortex tissue. The result of the lobotomy is a very calm, unemotional person. Lobotomies were generally performed in the first half of the century, often to control dissidents or to 'fix' people like homosexuals or even jews. However, many people, though calm and without the least spark of personality, still were able to talk, learn, and feel pain. Howard Dully, who was lobotomized at the age of twelve transorbitally (through the eye), is now 56 and has a job. However, the lobotomy did have some effects, so even a successful lobotomy patient can feel pain. The frontal cortex (with the medula oblongata) in humans deals more with emotions and what creates personality than pain. This is consistent with the lack of the prefrontal cortex in fish, as you can observe that they don't have much personality.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5014080
3) Assertion: The size and type of fish doesn't matter when considering its ability to feel pain, or other emotions, or intelligenece.
Refutation: As brains go, the bigger the better. But, of course only big differences matter, usually cross-species differences. The larger a brain is, the more complexity it has, the greater range of emotions/sensations it can feel. Smaller organisms rely on threshhold effects, wile the larger the organism gets, the more gradient effects it can have, and the more it can match reaction gradients to those stimuli gradients.
I hope i have been clear enough.
the overall verdict is that yes, fish feel pain. There is also a blurb on it in this month's Aquarium Fish Magazine. I am withholding judgement on whether or not it is moral to dye fish, as that would for me determining how much pain is caused, and I don't feel like going in to the lab and monitoring fish brainwave levels, though I could.
thats disgusting 
maybe we should chop off its tail too, wouldnt that be awsome...
http://www.practicalfishkeeping.co.uk/pfk/pages/item.php?news=957
maybe we should chop off its tail too, wouldnt that be awsome...
http://www.practicalfishkeeping.co.uk/pfk/pages/item.php?news=957
I am no expert or anything, so dont anyone get offended when I say that I feel that fish can feel pain to a degree, although they cant voice it like other animals can. I mean, you catch a fish with a hook, right? All of a sudden, they figure out "damn this hurts like hell" and try to get away, or do you think that they are figuring " OMG, I am screwed" and try to get away? As for the tatooing of a fish, I feel that it is total B.S. that someone can do that just to make more money when all it is doing is damaging the health and integrity of the fish. My rant is now over.
