New Research says fish feel pain

[fshhub]

do fish feel pain?
probably
do I care?
well, if it is my adoptees, yes. I do everything I can for them.
if it is for fishing and eating, Heck no!
Just like, do birds feel pain, I am 100% sure
Again, do I care, Yes, I love our conure
But, I also eat chicken, I also hunt and eat pheasant and duck and turkey. Who does not? Even most vegetarians do, as I understand.
I agree with all of these points. kgrimes has some good points as does elan(i definitely agree with being a responsible fishreman).
Did we spend milllions to research whether or not Birds feel pain? Why?
Do we spend enough on Aids research? OR cancer? or Diabetes? Heart disease? If we are going to spend milions, whether it be gov't or school or private funds and or charities, we really should put our priorities places like this, but PETA(makes me cringe too) would prefer to push this and later use it to harm humans in prevention of a good sport and good food. When millions of people evey year get cance,r, aids, diabetes and have abortions. I have to admit my feelings on the latter are different then some others, but hey wew all have varying opinions on controversial issues. I can't see how fishes feelings can or should be controversial or even an issue to spend so much money on, NOT when we do have so much more to worry about.

 

[lillylegs]

hi everyone, FYI here is the actual title and abstract published (Brain Res. 2003 May 16;972(1-2):44-52).
I would like to draw attention to the last sentence "The fish nociceptors had similar physiological properties to nociceptors found in higher vertebrates." NatureLover, that is what it had to w/ humans.
Trigeminal somatosensory innervation of the head of a teleost fish with particular reference to nociception.
Sneddon LU.
Roslin Institute, Welfare Biology, Midlothian EH25 9PS, Roslin, UK
Trigeminal somatosensory receptors have not been characterised in teleost fish and studies in elasmobranchs have failed to identify nociceptors. The present study examined the trigeminal nerve of a teleost fish, the rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) to determine what types of somatosensory receptors were present on the head of the trout specifically searching for nociceptors. Single unit recordings were made from receptive fields on the head of the fish innervated by the trigeminal nerve. Each receptive field was tested for sensitivity to mechanical, thermal and chemical stimulation. Five different receptor types were found: fast adapting receptors responding to mechanical stimulation; slowly adapting receptors responding to mechanical stimuli; polymodal nociceptors responding to mechanical, noxious thermal and chemical stimulation; mechanothermal nociceptors responding to mechanical stimulation and noxious heat; and mechanochemical receptors responsive to mechanical and chemical stimulation. Mechanical thresholds, receptive field diameter, conduction velocities and thermal thresholds of the receptors were determined and there was no significant difference between the receptor types in terms of these properties. Three shapes of action potential (AP) were recorded from these receptors: type 1 with no inflexion; type 2 with an inflexion on depolarisation; and type 3 with an inflexion on repolarisation. Conduction velocity, amplitude and duration of the APs, afterhypolarisation amplitude and duration, as well as the maximum rate of depolarisation were measured for each action potential type. No major differences were found when making comparisons within receptor type and between receptor types. The fish nociceptors had similar physiological properties to nociceptors found in higher vertebrates.

 

[elan]

wow.. i need an asprin after that one....lol

 

[chef jaysen]

I would like to end this debate by testing All PETA members to see if they feel pain. Let the tests begin.........NO MERCY.......hahaha.........cheers

 

[elan]

haha.. funny..
a few things... about shark fishing... if we decide to fish the waters, we really have to fish it to the point of keeping balance.... just like in our tanks... if we kill a bunch of fish, but no sharks, then the top predetors may eventually eat the remaining population.. therefore, we have to catch sharks to keep a balance.....plus, they are tasty too...
from my diving experience off the south florida coast and the bahamas, i noticed a direct relationship between sharks and fish and (specifically) lobsters on the reef...... lobsters are pretty much plentiful in south florida where sharkfishing is done and not many sharks seen during diving... In the bahamas...many sharks.. and not enough lobsters.. but plentiful fish....
here is a pic in the bahamas.

 

[fshhub]

Originally posted by lillylegs
hi everyone, FYI here is the actual title and abstract published (Brain Res. 2003 May 16;972(1-2):44-52).
I would like to draw attention to the last sentence "The fish nociceptors had similar physiological properties to nociceptors found in higher vertebrates." NatureLover, that is what it had to w/ humans.
Trigeminal somatosensory innervation of the head of a teleost fish with particular reference to nociception.
Sneddon LU.
Roslin Institute, Welfare Biology, Midlothian EH25 9PS, Roslin, UK
Trigeminal somatosensory receptors have not been characterised in teleost fish and studies in elasmobranchs have failed to identify nociceptors. The present study examined the trigeminal nerve of a teleost fish, the rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) to determine what types of somatosensory receptors were present on the head of the trout specifically searching for nociceptors. Single unit recordings were made from receptive fields on the head of the fish innervated by the trigeminal nerve. Each receptive field was tested for sensitivity to mechanical, thermal and chemical stimulation. Five different receptor types were found: fast adapting receptors responding to mechanical stimulation; slowly adapting receptors responding to mechanical stimuli; polymodal nociceptors responding to mechanical, noxious thermal and chemical stimulation; mechanothermal nociceptors responding to mechanical stimulation and noxious heat; and mechanochemical receptors responsive to mechanical and chemical stimulation. Mechanical thresholds, receptive field diameter, conduction velocities and thermal thresholds of the receptors were determined and there was no significant difference between the receptor types in terms of these properties. Three shapes of action potential (AP) were recorded from these receptors: type 1 with no inflexion; type 2 with an inflexion on depolarisation; and type 3 with an inflexion on repolarisation. Conduction velocity, amplitude and duration of the APs, afterhypolarisation amplitude and duration, as well as the maximum rate of depolarisation were measured for each action potential type. No major differences were found when making comparisons within receptor type and between receptor types. The fish nociceptors had similar physiological properties to nociceptors found in higher vertebrates.
ummmmmmmmmm yeah, whatever you say

 

[stacyt]

Redcorsair,
That last statement is pretty racist, and I do not appreciate it one bit. Most Japanese are not that way. Can't speak for the Norwegian's. I do agree about PETA, and the donkey. That was pretty stupid.
elan
Well said, and very nice catch. Feel free to send some my way if you have any left.

 

[j21kickster]

Seems to be a lot of thes threads lately- i dont mind though-
i have some simple proof that fish feel pain- last week i was looking at my tank when the lights were off- i noticed that my clown was sleeping on the heater just barely touching it and gently rocking back and forth- a as you can expect- it turned on- about 15 seconds later he swam off a went ape sh$% for a minute and then calmed down- a couple of nigts later the same thing occured- now my clown does not sleep there-
i would find it extremely coincidental that he swam spaztically twice after being at rest, right after the heater came on
Know what i mean?

 

[fshhub]

gotta agree
that is racist and not to mention, it is not the race, but the buyers who are responsible, who for the most part are not the ones mentioned.
shark fishing and whaling has nothing to do with sushi, does it?

 

[j21kickster]

lillylegs - i understand about 1/2 of that and that is after reading it a few times- just some lab results- do you know what it means

 

[lillylegs]

why yes i do. i am a phD student in molecular biology and i spend at least half my day reading papers such as the above. specifically though, if you want to know, i am not in neuroscience. i study the molecular mechanisms of

[hr]
cancer and why drugs such as tamoxifen have an antagonistic effect on cell growth in some tissues but proliferative in others. for example, scientists study yeast division to better understand cancer's un-restrained ability to divide. research is done for a reason, the money its funded for is for a reason, and i'm just simply pointing out these fish weren't harmed for the sake of being harmed.
i find it much more worthy of my time when i'm not just studying biochemistry for the sake of studying, but can apply it to the molecular basis of disease. i just had to stick up for my fellow phD's .
people cannot understand that which they do not know, and i thought i would post the facts. IMO, the public needs to understand what this paper was actually published for, not what the media has made of it. this entire thread was essentially started as a discussion of what's been published above. in summary this paper is a report on the discovery of nociceptors that have particular homology between fish and higher vertebrates. that's all folks. do you believe eveything the media tells you?

 

[stacyt]

fshhub ,
thanks
lillylegs ,
All of that, and the only part that made sense is the last 2 sentences.

 

[fulcrum]

Thank you LillyLegs for bringing a factually supported, cogent arugment to this forum.
The rest of you, who either make fun of the science behind this research, or who dont take the time to understand what it means are sadly typical of our undereducated, big mac culture. Its easier to joke about the things you dont understand than it is to get off your ass and try to understand it.
I'm not saying you have to understand what every word in that Abstract meant, but you should be able to peice together from context clues what the general meaning is.
Lilly's post (which admittedly had a couple of sentence structure issues) was very much on topic. Let me explain. She was saying that she studies yeast, because of its uncontrained ability to reproduce, just like cancer cells. If you saw nothing but a study on yeast, you might think it was kind of stupid, until you realized that it might help cure cancer.
Studying the neurorecptors in animals helps us understand how our own nervous system works. The implications are limitless in the treatment of chronic pain, alzheimer's, paralysis, epilepsy, ALS, and the list goes on and on.
Rather than send back some stupid quip about 'crackheads' and pain experiments on human beings, why dont you do a little research yourself. The perception that millions of dollars were spent on this study drives me up a wall. It is quite likely that it didn't cost anywhere near a million dollars, and it liekly didn't come from a government funding source. If research were that lucrative I would have stayed in academia after my doctorate.
Rest assured, your tax dollars are not being wasted on research. You could tripple the amount of government funding for research in this country and still wouldn't equal the gross income from NASCAR every year. Thats sad. How many times must cars go in a circle before we realize that the fastest one wins? (and before anyone gets upset...I know its not a circular track, and I know its not government funded....I'm just making a point about allocation of resources)
Math and science skills in this country are deploreable, People would rather make fun of science than understand it. If only those were the only people that got diseases we hadn't researched a cure for.
By the way, LillyLegs...please tell me your name is a "Blazing Saddles" reference, you Teutonic Titwillow.

 

[jim672]

fulcrum,
Although I am a college graduate, I suppose you'd include me in the "undereducated big mac culture". At first I made fun of this study; primarily because the immediate adoption of PETA to some of the facts and their ridiculous demands that all fishing cease immediately.
Rather than undereducated, I'd prefer to think of myself as "underinformed".
Could I have done some research and learned more about this? Sure.
Did I chose to spend my time that way? No.
I read an article on-line and decided that was all I needed to know about that particular topic.
You make some good points and have provided some good, thought-provoking backround about research and how its results do go alot further than what the topic might imply.
Too bad you had to use insults to get your point across.
One of my favorite sayings is "People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones"
Quote: " Lilly's post (which admittedly had a couple of sentence structure issues) "
Quote:"Thank you LillyLegs for bringing a factually supported, cogent arugment to this forum."
You misspelled "argument".
Jim

 

[elan]

well said broomer5

 

[broomer5]

thanks elan
I deleted my reply though

 

[broncofish]

Originally posted by jboothiv
personally cannot think of a single food substance that is composed of 100% artificial, man-made ingredients. Everything has some plant or animal component and it is ridiculous to think that we can thrive as an organism without injuring another one.

Take it from a person who has been a vegan at several different points in my life, it is very very very possible. It's actually easy if you do the same thing you do for this hobby....research. http://www.vrg.org/ can tell you how to get started, a nutrionist can tell you the rest.

 

[fulcrum]

Well Melody,
By studying the physiological responses to various painful stimuli, we gain understanding of how nerves function. We also gain understanding of how the brain processes these neural signals and converts them into perception of pain, cognition, and memory. Understanding these processes helps us develp new treatments and surgical procedures, robotic limbs for amputees...OMG...I could go on and on.
How many of you are aware that an american physician/research scientist has created a device which uses cameras that send signals to the human brain? This device has been shown in clinical trials to provide a crude form of sight to blind people. A blind man actually drove a car through an obstacle course! This would not be possible without animal research in neurophysiology. Sadly the research is being performed in Europe, because the United States will not permit the testing required to finish this amazing invention.
I am not specifically familiar with the study you mentioned with the acid in the dog's eyes. Off hand I dont know what they were researching. It could be chemical exposure effects on vision. It could be a study on treating eye injuries in the event of accidental exposure to humans (like our troops that might be attacked by chemical weapons). I don't know. I do know that research funding is tough to come by. And I seriously doubt a scientist is wasting time and money just getting his kicks of pouring acid in a dog's eyes.
I don't disagree that there are some animal tests that just seem unnecessary. I know that some animals suffer greatly for what appears to be very little scientific payoff. In some cases it may not even be warranted and I dont like it when that happens, but I feel that there is so much good that comes from most research that it outweighs these cases. Putting an end to animal testing would do much more harm than good. You should also know that live animal testing is regulated pretty heavily in this country.
If you go back and reread my last posting, you will find that I was not advocating animal research. I was knocking people for not valuing research. I do support animal testing (and I suppose that was implied) but that was not the intended message of my post. The message is that people should have a better understanding of how science impacts their lives. People are too quick to make stupid jokes about research being too expensive without having a clue of how much money is actually being spent. People will not bother to try and comprehend a scientific article because they might have to concentrate on what they are doing for a few minutes.
You refered to yourself as poor and uneducated. I made no such personal accusation. My statements about our culture being undereducated can hardly be refuted. I dont appreciate you turning my social commentary into a personal attack (a technique used by people who lack foundation in their arguments).
Broomer makes a great point. Unless you are a total vegan that doesn't wear leather, wool, makeup or perfume, you dont have a leg to stand on. You benefit from the death of animals. Do you think the fish in your aquarium are truly better off then they would be int wild? If you are a vegan that has eliminated every animal based or tested product from your life I truly admire the hell out of your conviction. If you fall somewhere in between, you need to embrace your hypocrisy and better defend your arguments.
And don't let it get personal. That's when you lose objectivity, and it just turns into a shouting match.

 

[fulcrum]

Hey Jim672,
I saw that typo right after I posted. I HATE it when that happens. D'oh!
I appreciate the mild endorsement of some of my points. I dont think I said anything individually insulting, though. I made sure my comments were about society in general, and tried not to single out any specific people. It certainly wasn't my intent. I taught college courses, and have seen first hand the general dumbing down of our culture. Its a frightening trend. My comments are directed to everyone, not any 'one person.'
On the "undereducated" vs. "underinformed" topic I have to say there is little difference. My point is that if schools were better at teaching science and math, then people wouldn't be so underinformed. If people had a better general grasp of science, that article might not recieved with such skeptism and mocking. I dont think everyone should be able to write and article like that, but I would love to see a world where most people could read an article like that.
I wish you the best in college. I hope you appreciate the opportunities that exsit for you. There is likely never going to be a time in your life where you have as much instant access to knowledge as you do right now. Enjoy.

 

[jim672]

fulcrum,
I appreciate your response. Where "SpellCheck" is not available, typo's should all be forgiven. I just couldn't resist.....
I'm sure you didn't intend to single anyone out or insult anyone. Unfortunately, people tend to read something, interpret it and infer what they want. For example, I mentioned I was a college graduate. You inferred from that that I was still in college and were nice enough to wish me well.
I only wish that I was still in college. I graduated in 1970, have been married for 31 years, have raised three children, etc, etc, etc.
Perhaps you can understand how Melody may have inferred that you very being personal with some of your other comments?
That aside, I have enjoyed the information you have provided.....and I've learned a few things, too!
Jim