Fish cannot feel pain say scientists!!!???

DaltheJigsaw

I think this might be a propaganda, or biased? Perhaps more research needs to be done? Thoughts?

A study has found that, even when caught on a hook and wriggling, the fish is impervious to pain because it does not have the necessary brain power.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/9797948/Fish-cannot-feel-pain-say-scientists.html

Arthurbodhi

Pain is a complex state, with a distinct perceptual quality but also associated with suffering, which is an emotional state. Many people believe that the only fully reliable way of determining the presence of pain is by introspection. Because of this complexity, the presence of pain in an animal, or another human for that matter, cannot be determined unambiguously using observational methods, but the conclusion that animals experience pain is often inferred on the basis of comparative brain physiology and physical and behavioural reactions. Some specialists currently believe that all higher vertebrates feel pain, and that certain invertebrates, like the octopus, might too.


http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pain_in_fish

person

Best line of the article

This debate about fish feeling pain has always been a red herring

lobster

Be kind to the fish.

Eating them optional. Hunting them if a monk, mostly forbidden? Lay person . . . use personal morality/discretion?

mfranzdorf

This doesn't add to this topic at all, but did remind me of a saying. "Judge a fish by its ability to climb a ladder and it will live it's entire life thinking it's an idiot. "

Anyway, somebody better tell the sharks this news. Maybe they won't feel so guilty about eating them.

betaboy

Fish feel pain. But they forget about it the next minute, lol. True Buddhists.

Jeffrey

Fish feel pain if they break up with their fishy boy or girlfriend. Seriously fish are spared some pains of the human existence. But the stress (physical) of death must still be hard, just like with humans.

If you disagree with me clamp your nostrils and mouth shut and wait 20 minutes. I think before the 20 is up you will see that death is no bowl of cherries and not a box of chocolates either.

jll

there are some people who cant feel pain too.

LeonBasin said:

I think this might be a propaganda, or biased? Perhaps more research needs to be done? Thoughts?

A study has found that, even when caught on a hook and wriggling, the fish is impervious to pain because it does not have the necessary brain power.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/9797948/Fish-cannot-feel-pain-say-scientists.html

seeker242

How much you want to bet there there are other scientists that disagree? $100? I would not take that bet!

Zero

LeonBasin said:

Perhaps more research needs to be done?

They've already tried injecting acid solution into trout lips... maybe next a pin in the eye and count how many gulps mean 'I can feel this you monkey looking ****'...

lamaramadingdong

"Scientists cannot live under water, say fish"

Chrysalid

So, to summarise the article, fish feel pain but they lack the cognitive capacity to whine and bitch about it like humans do.

FyreShaman

How much brainpower does 'Ouch!' take? Scientists cannot find the mind of a human - how do they expect to find the mind of a fish? Just another meaningless story which people who like to kill and eat dead beings will use to justify it. Sad.

vinlyn

As I read the responses what I see are:
1. people who want to think fish feel pain
2. people who want to think fish don't feel pain

aMatt

3. people who feel pain when fish are harmed?

robot

What I see is this.
When a fish is hooked through the eye, it goes ballistic, so I think it is responding to the pain or the trauma.
When they are hooked through the mouth they fight once they realize they are hooked. I dont think they feel much physical pain from it, just stress.
I often catch fish that have been attacked by a shark and have serious flesh wounds. They are going about their business of feeding and traveling as if there is nothing wrong.
I think they feel shock and pain that causes them to try to escape like any other creature. But they don't seem to suffer for long. They don't dwell on it. They seem to heal very quickly.
If they are too badly injured they don't survive long anyway. Something gobbles them up.

person

vinlyn said:

As I read the responses what I see are:
1. people who want to think fish feel pain
2. people who want to think fish don't feel pain

aMatt said:

3. people who feel pain when fish are harmed?

4. people who tell fish jokes

hermitwin

are we so dead to our instincts that
we need scientists to tell us what is right or wrong?
a fish is a living creature just like human beings.
they want to live and propagate.

vinlyn

hermitwin said:

are we so dead to our instincts that
we need scientists to tell us what is right or wrong?
a fish is a living creature just like human beings.
they want to live and propagate.

Hold on. How do you know what fish think?

karmablues

When we try to grab at them, fish will swim away. So at the very least, we should assume they feel fear and wish to stay alive.

mfranzdorf

@LeonBasin you said it might be propaganda. Propaganda for what?

Florian

vinlyn said:

hermitwin said:

are we so dead to our instincts that
we need scientists to tell us what is right or wrong?
a fish is a living creature just like human beings.
they want to live and propagate.

Hold on. How do you know what fish think?

Exactly. It is insanity to imagine that we can establish 'scientifically' whether fish feel pain. The 'other minds' problem, very well known in philosophy, prevents us from succeeding. If a scientist doesn't know this then they are a button-pusher and not a thinker. We can ask whether fish behave as if they feel pain, but thats' all. Any further claim would be, appropriately, cod-science.

Zayl

Fish can feel pain. They have a developed nervous system, after all. Try gutting one while it still has some life in it, and tell me that it does not respond to the pain, I dare you.

robot

The fish we catch on my boat are always killed and bled before being cleaned and frozen. Often the nerves will twitch, sometimes violently, long after they have been cleaned and headed.
I don't really understand the issue. I dont think that determining that fish feel no pain is used as a justification for killing and eating them. Most people dont relate to fish the way they do to mammals and no one has tried to prove that pigs dont feel pain.
Of course fish feel pain. Why wouldn't they?
We shouldn't torture them. Like any other creature we feed on they should be handled with as much respect as possible.

Tanda

vinlyn said:

hermitwin said:

are we so dead to our instincts that
we need scientists to tell us what is right or wrong?
a fish is a living creature just like human beings.
they want to live and propagate.

Hold on. How do you know what fish think?

Hold on. How do you know that I think?

Tanda

Zayl said:

Fish can feel pain. They have a developed nervous system, after all. Try gutting one while it still has some life in it, and tell me that it does not respond to the pain, I dare you.

This assumes that except by way of central nervous system there is no way to feel pain. It is like birds thinking that since humans do not have feathers they cannot fly.

BTW the old news of Buddhist monk who immolated himself before Cambodian embassy in protest against Vietnam's christian govt: He is reported to have been 'simply' sitting in lotus pose; not a muscle twitched, not a cry raised. Did he not have central nervous system?

vinlyn

Tanda said:

vinlyn said:

hermitwin said:

are we so dead to our instincts that
we need scientists to tell us what is right or wrong?
a fish is a living creature just like human beings.
they want to live and propagate.

Hold on. How do you know what fish think?

Hold on. How do you know that I think?

I never made that assumption!

Zayl

Tanda said:

Zayl said:

Fish can feel pain. They have a developed nervous system, after all. Try gutting one while it still has some life in it, and tell me that it does not respond to the pain, I dare you.

This assumes that except by way of central nervous system there is no way to feel pain. It is like birds thinking that since humans do not have feathers they cannot fly.

BTW the old news of Buddhist monk who immolated himself before Cambodian embassy in protest against Vietnam's christian govt: He is reported to have been 'simply' sitting in lotus pose; not a muscle twitched, not a cry raised. Did he not have central nervous system?

So the monk had extraordinary self control.

What exactly is your point here? just asking because I don't see one.

Cinorjer

He concluded that fish are able to experience unconscious, basic instinctive responses, but that these did not lead to conscious feelings or pain.

I think we have mostly the problem with a science article that attempts to "dumb down" the research for the masses. The research actually seems to conclude that the fish don't have a brain developed enough to be conscious. What brain they do have will respond to external stimulus and try to escape from anything that touches them, for instance. We'd think of it as reflexive reaction, not something driven by a conscious mind. Try to catch or hold onto a fish with your bare hands and see the reaction.

But you don't need a consciousness for this level of interaction. People with brain damage will pull away from a sharp object poked lightly on their skin. Touch a hot stove and the hand is jerked away before you're even conscious of the pain. Avoiding damage is basic enough to work on an unconscious level.

But I'm not sure it makes much of a difference to us as Buddhists. Avoiding killing sentient beings means avoid all killing when possible or spend our time arguing over what animals are and are not sentient. It's for our spiritual benefit because a callous disregard of life is not conductive to following the 8-Fold Path. At an extreme, we have the Zen Monks in Japan during WWII supposedly claiming if killing was done with no thought by the Buddhist soldier, there was no bad karma involved. At the other extreme, we have Buddhists who refuse to kill a mosquito that is drawing blood and perhaps infecting the person with disease. Most of us strike a balance somewhere inbetween.

Tanda

vous system, after all. Try gutting one while it still has some life in it, and tell me that it does not respond to the pain, I dare you.

This assumes that except by way of central nervous system there is no way to feel pain. It is like birds thinking that since humans do not have feathers they cannot fly.

BTW the old news of Buddhist monk who immolated himself before Cambodian embassy in protest against Vietnam's christian govt: He is reported to have been 'simply' sitting in lotus pose; not a muscle twitched, not a cry raised. Did he not have central nervous system?

So the monk had extraordinary self control.

What exactly is your point here? just asking because I don't see one.



I meant to say:

The whole fish research revolves on the premise based on central nervous system and stimulus- response. I am doubting validity of extending it to all other species.

karasti

Even if they can't feel pain, should it change how we think or feel about them as Buddhists? None of the teachers I've spoken to have ever minced words where this topic comes up, and have always said "all beings, are sentient beings, for the sake of Buddhist practice." Of course other teachers may say different things, but overall, that is the gist I come away with when others talk about their teachers as well. So even if science says they don't feel pain, I don't think it impacts how most of us think of fish, or any other animal. I may still choose to eat meat, and I may still occasionally choose to smack a biting bug, but I never excuse it by saying they aren't conscious or can't feel pain. I just choose to take on the responsibility of my actions.

Florian

Cinorjer said:

He concluded that fish are able to experience unconscious, basic instinctive responses, but that these did not lead to conscious feelings or pain.

I think we have mostly the problem with a science article that attempts to "dumb down" the research for the masses. The research actually seems to conclude that the fish don't have a brain developed enough to be conscious.

Yes, this is usually the problem with strange scientific reports. The provisos and subtleties get lost on the way to the popular press. I'd like to read the part where he explains how developed a brain has to be before it can support consciousness. I'll bet he doesn't have the faintest idea.

Cinorjer

Florian said:

Cinorjer said:

He concluded that fish are able to experience unconscious, basic instinctive responses, but that these did not lead to conscious feelings or pain.

I think we have mostly the problem with a science article that attempts to "dumb down" the research for the masses. The research actually seems to conclude that the fish don't have a brain developed enough to be conscious.

Yes, this is usually the problem with strange scientific reports. The provisos and subtleties get lost on the way to the popular press. I'd like to read the part where he explains how developed a brain has to be before it can support consciousness. I'll bet he doesn't have the faintest idea.

I'd hate to take that bet, because I'm pretty sure you're right. Or rather, he has his own theory of consciousness that he's working on, and what he's doing is saying that reaction to stimulus isn't enough to prove consciousness.

You'd think something as basic as consciousness would be pretty much pinned down by now. We know what being conscious feels like because it's our state of mind for most of the time. To us, it's like a switch. You're asleep, and now you're awake. Scientists have been studying the human mind for centuries and there's an entire branch of medicine devoted to understanding our aware and conscious human mind (not to mention the many amateurs who play around with altered states of consciousness). Even ancient religions like Buddhism distinguish sentient from non-sentient objects and declare consciousness one of the skandhas or processes that make up our mind. Animals are conscious. Trees are not. Or are they?

My own favorite definition is that consciousness is awareness, of ourselves and the world around us. That does require a certain level of biological complexity. Yet when looking at animals we have the same problem as trying to define when a computer might be declared conscious. Something can mimic a conscious mind but be reacting like a machine with sensors, totally unconscious.

Fascinating, as Spock would say. Live long and prosper.