A controversal topic...

that is like saying a domestic cat cant feel pain as much as a wild lion or tiger...i don't buy the size issue...humans assume smaller animals are the most stupid and the larger they get the smarter..it is a natural phenomena..i mean how often do you hear about he "personality" of someones neon - not close to as often as someone talks about the personality of their oscar, arrowana, cichlids, and catfish...
 
You have to take into consideration there are 2 main groups of fish- bony fish and non bony fish; bony fish literally have a solid skeleton in them while non bony fish just have a cartilage support to keep them together, i wonder if this has anything to do with their ability to feel pain....
I do think the stage of growth a fish is at also defines its ability to feel pain so a tiny guppys fry is less likely to have a matured pain receptor system as to a full grown oscar, its a wide spread way of life in thousands of other baby animals across the world.
I don't believe not all fish feel pain because not all need to to survive, there are many other successfull methods of survival as stated by me before in a more detailed post which rule out the need to waste energy on a pain receptor system.
 
i would doubt that bone vs. cartilage would make much of a difference since pain receptors are near the skin/scales..

i do agree with you that fry have less developed receptors so are less likely to feel "pain" as we know it...however, it is my belief, that this is made up for with increased senses and action-reaction based on instinct...

it is my belief that over time we "learn" what pain is...it starts out as action-reaction based on instinct...then our minds equate this feeling from certain stimuli as pain...as we mature, we create a database of pain in our minds, if you will...but to say that fish have this ability (or even a similar ability) seems absurd...

to go back to the example of a fish caught underneath a stone...one train of thought says "hey, i'm a fish, i'm supposed to be swimming...this doesn't feel right...i could die...must get free from this rock"..

the other train of thought says "hey, this rock hurts my tail...that's not good and could damage my fins preventing me from swimming..i could even die here if i dont rid myself of the pain..."

now, which do you think is most likely?
 
I think the first is more likely, its like how a fly automatically flys away when you move your hand near it- its a totally instinctive reaction with no thought involved and i guess it would be similar to when fish move away from your hand when you put your hand in their tank unless they are very tame, but for wild fish this is merely an instinctive reaction as fish wouldn't get very far in life if the hung around swimming next to pikes and other prededatory fish all day. Move away first, think later.
 
I think the trouble is, we associate 'pain' as how we feel it. I think all animals, birds, reptiles and fish can feel pain. It just isn't necessarily how we'd interpret it. After all, we do things instinctively but that doesn't stop things from hurting even if reaction kicked in first.
As for consistently getting hooked despite the pain it causes, that could be to do with how their long term memory works.
Hugs,
P.
 
abstract said:
it is my belief that over time we "learn" what pain is...it starts out as action-reaction based on instinct...then our minds equate this feeling from certain stimuli as pain...as we mature, we create a database of pain in our minds, if you will...but to say that fish have this ability (or even a similar ability) seems absurd...
I'm not sure I understand your logic, and maybe I'm just misinterpreting what you're trying to say, but the way I read it the idea seems absolutely absurd (no offense intended, I assure you)
Are you saying we "learn" how to feel pain over time? That our minds aren't already equipped with the ability to interpret certain stimuli as pain? Seeing as how some nerve endings are specialized for the purpose of detecting pain, I seriously doubt that to be the case. You don't have to "learn" how to see, feel, smell, taste or hear... these are senses you come pre-equipped with, and pain is just part of the spectrum of stimuli your senses communicate to you.
 
I would rather decapitate. Say I was to try to bash his brains out and mis and hit the corner of his mouth. I just caused him pain so I would feel bad. Or stabing it, i might miss,a dn just poke a hole in it. I would rather decap if I had to do it...
 
I have taken a lot of this out of my replies from a thread almost a year old now, but it is a summary of some of the scientific literature out there that supports the idea that fish can indeed feel pain:

Oidtmann B, and Hoffman RW. "Pain and suffering in fish" BERLINER UND MUNCHENER TIERARZTLICHE WOCHENSCHRIFT, vol 114, issue 7-8, jul-aug 2001. pages 277-282.

Here is the abstract of that article "The question on the capability of fish to feel pain and of suffering are still subject of discussion nowadays. In the article presented, the information available in the literature to date is summarised. Based on this knowledge, the conclusion is drawn that fish are capable of feeling pain and that they are able to suffer in the sense of the word as used in the German animal welfare law."

Yue, Moccia and Duncan, Applied Animal Behavior Science 2004, talks about training trout, and their response to fear.
From Yue et al. 2004:
Although the term ‘fear’ is used in everyday vernacular to describe the negative affect that
most animals are assumed to feel during, or in anticipation of, some frightening stimulus,
this term is more cautiously used today when referring to fish. This is partly due to the disbelief,
by some, that fish have the capability to experience conscious feelings. Rose (2002)
believes that conscious experiences like fear and pain are neurological impossibilities, due
to the lack of a neocortex in fish—the presumed place where consciousness dwells in higher
vertebrates. He therefore proposed that behavioural responses to noxious stimuli are separate
from psychological experiences (of fear for example)—behavioural responses to frightening
or aversive stimuli are merely reflexive responses and are not accompanied by a negative
feeling. Nonetheless, the term ‘fear’ has been widely used to describe fish behaviour for
some time (Pinckney, 1967; Gallon, 1972; Huntingford, 1990; Ledoux, 1990; Noakes and
Baylis, 1990). Others have put forth the idea that fish derive conscious experiences through
some mechanism other than the neocortically based consciousness of humans and other
highly evolved mammals (Verheijen and Flight, 1997). Recent anatomical, physiological,
neuropharmacological and behavioural data suggest that fish are likely to feel subjective
experiences, like fear, in much the same manner as tetrapods. A full review of
this evidence is beyond the scope of this paper, but briefly, the major argument lies in
the fact that the neuroanatomical structure and function between fish and higher vertebrates
are more similar than previously thought (Rakic and Kornack, 2001; Chandroo et al.,
2004).

Here is the reference to the Chandroo et al. article:
Title: Can fish suffer?: perspectives on sentience, pain, fear and stress
Author(s): Chandroo KP, Duncan IJH, Moccia RD
Source: APPLIED ANIMAL BEHAVIOUR SCIENCE 86 (3-4): 225-250 JUN 2004

There are detractors, A Prof. Rose is one of the most prolific. (quoted in the article above and several of the previous threads has works by Rose)

One of the more interesting points is that Rose wrote his articles for the fish farming industry (and is often cited by sport fishermen websites, too) and the conclousions he draws supports their pratices. Is there a chance that the funding is driving the results of the research? Or, is it a question that the research agreed, and then got the funding? The former is far too often the case on issues like gun control or the affects of global warming.

Either way, it is fair to say that this is a very open debate, and even the most recent articles (2004) say that there is much more experimentation that will need to be done to more definitively answer this question.
 
Synirr said:
I'm not sure I understand your logic, and maybe I'm just misinterpreting what you're trying to say, but the way I read it the idea seems absolutely absurd (no offense intended, I assure you)
Are you saying we "learn" how to feel pain over time? That our minds aren't already equipped with the ability to interpret certain stimuli as pain? Seeing as how some nerve endings are specialized for the purpose of detecting pain, I seriously doubt that to be the case. You don't have to "learn" how to see, feel, smell, taste or hear... these are senses you come pre-equipped with, and pain is just part of the spectrum of stimuli your senses communicate to you.
you aren't misinterpreting it...i just didn't state it clearly, sorry...i did not mean that we learn what pain is, more that we learn what things cause pain...i don't really know what my point was with that statement anymore to be honest - something along the lines that "pain" is as much psychological as it is biological....

yes we come equipped with senses of touch, taste, smell, hearing, seeing - but for us to say that something "smells sweet" is learned....just as we learn that something "feels like pain", "feels good", etc ... i understand that their are receptors specialized for pain and other sensations, but what is pain?

it is a man-made explanation for a specific sensation (a response to stimuli)....to say that fish have the same explanation, if you will, was the absurd part. what i was thinking is that fish may "feel" the same types of things that we do, but are not neurologically able to equate the sensations to feeling "good," or "painful" as we know it.

instead they act based on instinct - although if you look at it, we also act based on instinct when it comes to pain, except that we have the capability to "learn" what this feeling of pain means and what things cause it.

i feel like i am chasing my tail in circles, lol..it is REALLY hard to explain my understandings and beliefs. in summary, i do believe that fish have the same ability to sense certain stimuli, but to pin a human emotion (or whatever you want to call it) to an animal does not make sense. when it comes down to it, our minds do interpret pain from the beginning of our lives, and over time we can manipulate that "feeling" to mean many different things - look at all the people that find pain pleasurable out there. i do agree that we come equpped with senses, but part of the usage of these senses is understanding how to intepret, understand, and to predict what these feelings really mean - an ability fish simply do not have IMO.

hope that helps to understand my train of thought a little more clearly, although i probably am digging myself a deeper hole everyday lol
 
I understand where you are coming from abstract and how it is very difficult to describe how fish feel pain based on how we interperate it, let alone human emotion like happyness, affection, misery and agression etc...

I think some fish feel pain but not to the extent and the same way that we do, here's an example of a a freinds fish and pain;


A freind of mine who keeps swordtails in particular, last year bought a male swordtail. The swordtail had an unusual habit of always hanging around the tank heater despite the tank being at 25degrees(about 77 farenheit) which is a good temp for swordtails.
The swordtail never ever left the side of the heater despite there being plenty of females to chase around and mate with.
My friend started to notice a blotch on the side of the swordtail that was always next to the heater and one day, he found the swordtail dead. It appeared the blotch was a burn caused by the heater and had been getting worse over time and i looked at the fish and i would say it was definatly a burn caused by the tank heater.

Burning alive or even getting burnt is quite and unbearable experience for humans, so surely if it caused pain for the fish, why did it spend so much of its life swimming as close as posible next to the tank heater?
My only explanation for this is that the burning sensation was not painful for the fish and thus it enjoyed spending so much of its time clinging to the tank heater- if anyone can explain this behavior i'd much appreiciate it as i have always wondered why the fish would want to burn itself in such a way.

An interesting point that somone made earlier on the debate was that the sensation of itching is just a dulled down sensation of pain and it may be likely that fish feel this or somthing on a similar level rather than agonising pain.
 
MAybe he was just an incredibly stupid fish Tokis. :lol: We had a cat who acted in muich the same way. She'd climb inside the boiler and come out with singed fur and smelling of burning but it never stopped her.
All animals, bird, fish can feel pain. We, as humans, jst find it hard to see since they don't cry or react as we do. One of my Tetras accidentally got in the way when I added the water when doing the water change this morning and it obviously dazed him. He bumped into the side of the tank and blundered onto the filter (which happily cannot suck in anything but possibly a highly unlucky tiny fry) and he panicked. He really was afraid. I don't doubt for a second that he really was scared for a few minutes just by the way he was acting afterwards. Withing 5 minutes he was fine again and being his usual aggressive self (hence his new name of Brutus). They have recognition abilities too. They know if it is me putting my finger in the tank to when it is someone else. They will come to my finger and avoid theirs. An obvious sign of intelligence. All fish have personalities of their own and that, in itself gives rise to a higher conciousness that we'd all recognise in many mammals.
To end (in order to actually shut myself up) to say a fish cannot feel pain is obviously wrong, in my view, just because we don't see them react in a way we'd interpret as pain or because they can't cry or shout out. And as we all know scientifically prooven results often get disprooved some years later so I hold no faith in scientists at all. :p
Hugs,
P.
 
I havent read the whole thread but this is my take on the fish and pain idea.

Fish do not feel pain in the same way as mammals do, i have personally seen large catfish with burns right down to the bones from sitting against unguarded heaters in the tank, these same fish are still feeding and acting as if nothing is wrong, a mammal would be dead or dying.
I am a fisherman and until recently regularly fished in angling tournements where the main quarry are carp, i have witnessed carp that i have caught and placed into the keepnet less than 5 minutes earlier swimming up into the mouth of the net to feed on bait that i have accidently dropped into the net, hardly the reaction you would expect from something that has just had a metal hook stuck in its lip.
Just a few weeks ago i got up in the morning to find that one of my catfish had been nearly bitten in half by another fish in the tank and yet it was still swimming around the tank, a few weeks later and what would have certainly been a mortal wound on any mammal has now healed up without even a scar.

If fish do feel any kind of pain then they must be some of the toughest animals on the planet.
 
I dont know why this is even a "myth".

Fish are classified as chordates, who in turn are placed in the kingdom Animalia. The diagnostic features of the kingdom animalia are that the folowing are present (with exceptions)...

-nervous tissue
-muscle tissue
-embryonic developemnet

Now most of the fish we are talking about are osteichtyes, which are "bony fishes".

These have a nervous system much like ours. With a notochord, and brain. To think they do not feel pain is ridiculus. Its whether or not they feel the same AMOUNT as we do.

We would feel far more pain than them in comparison.
 
mr_miagi32 said:
I dont know why this is even a "myth".

Fish are classified as chordates, who in turn are placed in the kingdom Animalia. The diagnostic features of the kingdom animalia are that the folowing are present (with exceptions)...

-nervous tissue
-muscle tissue
-embryonic developemnet

Now most of the fish we are talking about are osteichtyes, which are "bony fishes".

These have a nervous system much like ours. With a notochord, and brain. To think they do not feel pain is ridiculus. Its whether or not they feel the same AMOUNT as we do.

We would feel far more pain than them in comparison.
As to bony fish, only a small percentage of fish that live in the world today are bony- at the very start of this thread i mentioned of a study done on salmon and how they concluded that salmon only have pain receptors in their mouth and spinal cord.
If such an advanced huge growing fish like a salmon only has pain receptors in 2 parts of its body, they why should other fish have pain receptors in the whole of their body?

The controversy with fish and pain, is that many fish lack the part of the brain that interperates pain in their bodys so are unable to feel it- if this scientific theory is right it would mean that fish like small tetras for example do not have the ability to feel pain(there are many other fish for example that are believed not to have the ability to feel pain but there are too many to list etc).
 

Most reactions

trending

Staff online

Back
Top