Pain

[rainbowpuddle]

It seems the jury is still out on this, what do you think?

 

[nurglespuss]

Really the problem with this debate is the badly worded question:

Of course fish can 'experience' pain, so as to avoid painful cirvumstances.

Whether they can however 'feel' pain in a more complex context is debatable for some.

For me the best examples (for aquarists) are:

1. Plecs often hide under heaters, and suffer terrible, slow, large burns on their body, yet given the choice of new cover and the heater, hide under the heater again, and continue this behaviour when a heater guard is present - they want to be there, regardless of 'pain'.

2. A heater broke recently at my local petshop, it did not over heat, but started sending jolts into the water. The fish were all twitching, and half the stock had jumped out of the tank as a repsponse. Is this an attempt to get away from pain? in an undesireable solution?

The ONLY accurate way is to mesure levels of fish hormones/stimulatn-relaxant chemicals etc and brain activity, during such situations in order to quantify pain & feeling.

But this really is a 'non-debate' for me, as fish, just like other animals weigh out the risks/benefits in any given situation before decidng to stay or flee.

 

[andywg]

But this really is a 'non-debate' for me, as fish, just like other animals weigh out the risks/benefits in any given situation before decidng to stay or flee.

I doubt they truly weigh up the pros and cons, but rather react on instinct. those that choose the best way tend to live and breed, those that don't are removed from teh gene pool.

The problem with fish feeling pain is that they completely lack the area of the brain in which other vertebrates feel pain. they experience hurt, but that is dealt with in the spinal chord (you retract your hand from something hot before you actually realise you have touched it).

It is how the information is processed after that which is open to question.

 

[nurglespuss]

Just a point, but yes creatures do weigh up the pros and cons as best they can, in every circumstance. Instinctual reactions are indeed handled by the nerve cord, but the actual response is meted out by the hind brain.

 

[rainbowpuddle]

So pain in fish could be more like an anxiety to change so the stimulus stops?

 

[nurglespuss]

Even anxiety is too human a term

basically its not as simple as 'push button do this' but it isn as complicated as 'pain - hmmm should I move.... ok then'

Puc fish for example, are forced to enter painful circumstances (extreme heat) in search of food, in which they are physically dammaged, but its that or die. So those who were able to follow the food source, and endure the heat, and overide the 'natural' response, survived to breed.

Basically fish have all the right nerves, in all the right places, and therefore must recieve comparable information to other creatures. So regardless of th missing brain part, their brain still has to interpret this data....

 

[andywg]

Basically fish have all the right nerves, in all the right places, and therefore must recieve comparable information to other creatures. So regardless of th missing brain part, their brain still has to interpret this data....

Yet they have no part of the brain to interpret the data.

As our understanding stands at the moment, we know the fish have the receptors to feel pain, but nowhere to process it. The receptors allow the fish to respond to a stimulus, but not to process the psychological aspect of pain. The only way they can process it is to do so in a completely different part of the brain (or somewhere else in the body entirely).

How can you be so sure that the brain processes the data when the part to do so is missing?

 

[JamieBailie]

Certain fish feel it more.

Fish cannot really express pain the same as humans.

I am convinced that fishing does not cause pain to the fish, Unless of course the hook goes into the stomach or something like tha


'Scientists' have done experiments, But the ones I read up on they injected bee sting into fish's lips... Not really testing for pain is it.

 

[merry78]

ohhhnannie, i have a whole lot of issues with a whole lot of posts on this thread! ( absolutely not passing judgement on other people and their opinions, though, so please don't think that i mean to offend....)
1. Regardless of any evidence to the contrary i cannot believe that fishing does not cause pain to the fish....
2. As to anxiety being too human a term, most animal trainers now use this term to describe a state/behaviour exhibited by animals, for the simple fact that too much practical proof in terms of behaviour management supports it, to allow us to limit this to being a purely 'human' emotion, or indeed to draw strong boundaries separating basic emotions from humans and animals....reasoned response is not part of what i mean here.
3. Anthropomorphism (the behavioural scientists' greatest fear) is becoming less and less of a taboo, and starting to be seen as a veil which stops our brains believing what our eyes see (within reason...not saying that fish are worried about interest rate rises or global warming...).

Please understand that i state my opinion with respect to other's opinions, i just feel strongly on this topic, and my emotions (as opposed to reasoned scientific debate), as well as a wealth of observations in handling and training several types of animal do not allow me to leave this topic as i found it. Peace though...no offence intended!


edited to add....for further info on what i mean, check out any of the several books on the emotional lives of animal written by Jeffrey Masson.

 

[nurglespuss]

Basically fish have all the right nerves, in all the right places, and therefore must recieve comparable information to other creatures. So regardless of th missing brain part, their brain still has to interpret this data....

Yet they have no part of the brain to interpret the data.

As our understanding stands at the moment, we know the fish have the receptors to feel pain, but nowhere to process it. The receptors allow the fish to respond to a stimulus, but not to process the psychological aspect of pain. The only way they can process it is to do so in a completely different part of the brain (or somewhere else in the body entirely).

How can you be so sure that the brain processes the data when the part to do so is missing?

How can you not? Different parts of the brain have different functions in different animals. E.g. something that control hormone regulation during pubescence in humans, is suspected be a control centre of circadian rythms in crocodiles, yet both parts are essentially the same.

Not many creatures retain too many disadvantageous physical attributes, and virtually none divelop disadvantageous ones. For fish to have the corrct receptors, they must have either A: lost the part of the brain/ability to recieve the data and interpret it, or B: never had it to begin with and developed the receptors without the means to interpret the data.....

Also check out this recent research:

Title: Ouch! A new finding that fish feel pain has set off a tortured debate about the ethics of angling
Author(s): Parfit M
Source: SMITHSONIAN 34 (8): 24-+ NOV 2003
Document Type: Article
Language: English
Publisher: SMITHSONIAN ASSOCIATES, 900 JEFFERSON DRIVE, WASHINGTON, DC 20560 USA
Subject Category: Humanities, Multidisciplinary
IDS Number: 736HN

ISSN: 0037-7333

 

[Lynda B]

I prefer to live my life believing that every living creature experiences pain on some level. Although I don't attribute human emotions or responses to animals, I've never looked into the scientific aspect of how their pain might be evoked or on what level.

 

[andywg]

ohhhnannie, i have a whole lot of issues with a whole lot of posts on this thread! ( absolutely not passing judgement on other people and their opinions, though, so please don't think that i mean to offend....)
1. Regardless of any evidence to the contrary i cannot believe that fishing does not cause pain to the fish....

But if fish do not have the ability to feel pain, how can anything cause them pain. Injury and temporary discomfort, yes, but pain? Hard to be sure. However, you yourself have stated that you refuse to believe they don't feel pain, no matter how much evidence is presented.

2. As to anxiety being too human a term, most animal trainers now use this term to describe a state/behaviour exhibited by animals, for the simple fact that too much practical proof in terms of behaviour management supports it, to allow us to limit this to being a purely 'human' emotion, or indeed to draw strong boundaries separating basic emotions from humans and animals....reasoned response is not part of what i mean here.

...

Please understand that i state my opinion with respect to other's opinions, i just feel strongly on this topic, and my emotions (as opposed to reasoned scientific debate), as well as a wealth of observations in handling and training several types of animal do not allow me to leave this topic as i found it. Peace though...no offence intended!

But which animals are these? I am willing to bet you haven't handled and trained that many fish, or non mammals for that matter. Remember that mammals will all contain the area of the brain in which we process pain, and therefore can quite conceivably feel pain. A fish does not have the area of the brain that deals with pain, leading to the belief that they cannot feel it.

This is much the same as someone who has a problem with the part of his brain that deals with sight. He will have eyes, but not the brain to process the signals, and therefore he cannot see.

 

[JamieBailie]

IMO most cold blooded living creatures don't feel pain on the same scale warm blooded creatures do.

 

[nurglespuss]

""I am willing to bet you haven't handled and trained that many fish, or non mammals for that matter. Remember that mammals will all contain the area of the brain in which we process pain, and therefore can quite conceivably feel pain. A fish does not have the area of the brain that deals with pain, leading to the belief that they cannot feel it "".


OK I dont wishto repeat myself, but there is physical evidence that fish do indeed feel pain, using a different part of their brain.

Title: Ouch! A new finding that fish feel pain has set off a tortured debate about the ethics of angling
Author(s): Parfit M
Source: SMITHSONIAN 34 24-+ NOV 2003
Document Type: Article
Language: English
Publisher: SMITHSONIAN ASSOCIATES, 900 JEFFERSON DRIVE, WASHINGTON, DC 20560 USA
Subject Category: Humanities, Multidisciplinary
IDS Number: 736HN

ISSN: 0037-7333

So, no offence, we can probably drop the 'lacking part of brain' information, as it seems a little irrelevant now.

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

I am familiar with Masson's work, and fully respect your opinion, however, it does have no real scientific merit, and for me Anthropomorphosm still gets in the way of understanding animal behaviour, this is especially important, as we cannot understand even human behaviour fully, due to this problem. Thanks again though.

 

[andywg]

How can you not?

How can I not what? How can I not be so sure that the fish feel pain? Because there is some science to back that claim (that the fish do not feel pain) up, while there is also some research (as indicated by you below) which indicates they might feel pain.

I assume you are not trying to make the statement that because I do not agree wholeheartedly with your view I must be firmly in favour of the opposite, especially as I have not stated any views on this yet.

Different parts of the brain have different functions in different animals. E.g. something that control hormone regulation during pubescence in humans, is suspected be a control centre of circadian rythms in crocodiles, yet both parts are essentially the same.

And it is only suspected, so we cannot be sure what it actually does.

Not many creatures retain too many disadvantageous physical attributes, and virtually none divelop disadvantageous ones. For fish to have the corrct receptors, they must have either A: lost the part of the brain/ability to recieve the data and interpret it, or B: never had it to begin with and developed the receptors without the means to interpret the data.....

Just because a fish does not have the ability to process the long lasting reaction to noxious stimuli (the second part of any test on feeling pain) does not make the pain receptors (or nociceptors) useless. By having pain receptors a fish is more able to recognise, and react to, noxious stimuli; thus increasing that fish's likelihood to breed.




Aaah, if only the science forum was up and running