Scientists prove that fish suffer "intense pain" for at least 10 minutes after catch, calls made for reforms
-
Just like it's amoral to kill ethically a dog and a cat.
in most circumstances, probably.
-
Come on, you can do better.
On the wikipedia page you linked, there is exactly zero occurrence of the word "pain".
The only part that could remotely be linked to your previous argument does not indicate pain at all.The GLVs responsible for the smell of freshly cut grass play a role in plant communication and plant defence against herbivory, functioning as a distress signal warning other plants of imminent danger and, in some instances, as a way to attract predators of grass-eating insects.
This paragraph is a less sensational and more serious reformulation of the source material, an opinion piece stating the following without a single scientific reference
Trauma, that’s what. It’s the smell of chemical defenses and first aid. The fresh, “green” scent of a just-mowed lawn is the lawn trying to save itself from the injury you just inflicted.
This piece was posted in May 2012 on mentalfloss.com, so not really a scientific study.
Also, nothing in there speaks of the brocoli, which you first referred to.
Edit: spelling, formatting
Nothing in either comment speaks about pain either, just screams. I only posted the wikipedia link because it referenced the numerous articles about this well established phenomenon. I didn't realize I was defending a doctoral thesis here. Y'all are fucking toxic.
-
I think the most universal thing is to minimise suffering.
that's just not true. the only ethical system i know of that holds this axiom is utilitarianism, and that is fraught with issues from epistemics to the fact it can be summarized "the ends justify the means"
Stop abusing animals and do better. Eating animals is wrong, unhealthy and horrible for the environment. Stop making excuses for your nonsense.
-
Stop abusing animals and do better. Eating animals is wrong, unhealthy and horrible for the environment. Stop making excuses for your nonsense.
Stop abusing animals
i don't, and your accusation is not appropriate.
-
being farmed isn't torture.
I beg to differ.
https://awionline.org/content/inhumane-practices-factory-farms
-
torture means that pain/distressed are caused intentionally. like beating someone so they give up information. that's not the case in farming. sometimes, animals are caused pain or distress, but the point of the activity is not to cause it. if a farmer could raise their livestock and never cause them any pain or distress for the same cost, i'm sure they would. the pain is incidental, not intentional. it's not torture. qed.
-
Stop abusing animals
i don't, and your accusation is not appropriate.
I think it's appropriate given your blase attitude towards the suffering non-human animals.
-
Stop abusing animals
i don't, and your accusation is not appropriate.
Yet you belittle the animals at every chance you get, someone wouldn't go through all the trouble of doing that if they didn't care about their image reflecting poorly to their peers. You do everything you can to hold yourself and humanity back rather than admit you're wrong and owe up to your mistakes. Such a poor character without substance. Drop the gaslighting and animal products now!
-
Maypull is not worth talking to. They're defending the cruel multi-billion dollar animal agriculture system no matter the cost to the animals, the environment and the workers.
-
Can we solve human suffering first? Not saying this isn't important... just that it's kind of hypocritical to shift the focus away from the "hard" stuff, to something "easier".
Any critique of capitalism that ignores this aspect of exploitation is bullshit.
-
torture means that pain/distressed are caused intentionally. like beating someone so they give up information. that's not the case in farming. sometimes, animals are caused pain or distress, but the point of the activity is not to cause it. if a farmer could raise their livestock and never cause them any pain or distress for the same cost, i'm sure they would. the pain is incidental, not intentional. it's not torture. qed.
trolling or just willfully ignorant?
-
torture means that pain/distressed are caused intentionally. like beating someone so they give up information. that's not the case in farming. sometimes, animals are caused pain or distress, but the point of the activity is not to cause it. if a farmer could raise their livestock and never cause them any pain or distress for the same cost, i'm sure they would. the pain is incidental, not intentional. it's not torture. qed.
yeah, killing the animals so you can consume their flesh, after all their lives being in a enclosed space designed to maximise the profits, isn't bad or torture for the animals.
the bad things happening to them from that life is just a byproduct of wanting to use their corpses for other things, so it can be considered torture, right?it doesn't matter what is the explicit or direct intent, they are being abused, mistreated and tortured, just for personal and human gain.
you can torture other people physically, emotionally or psychologicaly without it being the direct intent for your actions, but the torture will still be there.
-
trolling or just willfully ignorant?
why not both?
-
Haha I love this response. Force this person to grow their own food because the farmers have more important people to feed.
You "love" the idea to "force" people to suffer, because they aren't your chosen ones?
Are you sure?
-
This isn’t a zero-sum game you can help people and the animals at the same time. You wouldn’t be trying to divert attention from dog abuse so don’t do it with the fish.
Please leave this thread and post articles about human suffering rather than attacking articles that advocate for the better treatment of the animals.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]This isn’t a zero-sum game you can help people and the animals at the same time.
Prove it.
Show me how you get the resources to do both. Animalists are high on saving whales, kitties, puppies, etc. while letting their neighbors die home alone, or worse... when not directly saying "I love animals, I hate people".
Please leave this thread and post articles about human suffering
No, I think I'm right where I should be. I don't doompost either.
-
Was that ever up for debate? I mean, what do people believe happens when one takes a creature adapted to breathing through water out of said water?
Apparently it's a common myth that fish don't feel pain. I think it's because they show pain differently than mammals (for example, if a salmon let down an ear-shattering shierk when caught, I think we'd think differently) and people don't want to think about it.
-
This is a false dichotomy. There is absolutely no reason to do both.
And honestly, people who advocate for animal welfare tend to also be more outspoken against human suffering.people who advocate for animal welfare tend to also be more outspoken against human suffering
If I got a cent for every time I've heard an animal advocate say "I love animals, I hate people"... I'd have a couple bucks already. This thread seems to count towards that.
-
This isn’t a zero-sum game you can help people and the animals at the same time.
Prove it.
Show me how you get the resources to do both. Animalists are high on saving whales, kitties, puppies, etc. while letting their neighbors die home alone, or worse... when not directly saying "I love animals, I hate people".
Please leave this thread and post articles about human suffering
No, I think I'm right where I should be. I don't doompost either.
Let's address the issue of fishing, by having everyone go plant based. Give some transitionary period so that the infrastructure keeps up. Suddenly, we are putting out far less greenhouse emissions and have loads more land and resources available to tackle other issues, because plant based diets use a fraction of the land and resources to support, and generate far lower emissions.
The climate situation stops enshittening at the rate it is, and we can allocate the freed up resources and land to "more important" issues, like (directly back into) climate change, homelessness, and world hunger.
We save fish and cows and chickens and pigs and etc from living tortured lives (yes, there will be a massive drop in livestock population as we stop breeding them to live in factories).
I love animals. I love people. This is a false dichotomy.
-
Broccoli screams, you just can’t hear it.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Plants have feelings too
No, they do not. There is no serious study to suggest that they do. Plants do not have a brain or central nervous system. At most, they respond to stimuli.
If you really care that much about the welfare of plants, you should go vegan, since many more plants "die" for animal feeding.
Do you feel bad while mowing your lawn? And would you rather rescue a potted plant than a dog from a burning house? Is docking pig tails the same as branch trimming to you? Question upon question... -
Broccoli screams, you just can’t hear it.
I don't love the disregard for plant life just because they lack the central nervous system of animals, but this isn't an argument in favor of eating animals. If you want to argue it's better for us to die than to live via harm, that's one thing, but if you accept we have the right to live at the expense of other life forms then the goal of many becomes to minimize suffering.
While plants do have sensory experiences which elicit behaviors, they don't experience the world in a personal way; they're like a robot or generative AI. When a dog suffers, it has a concept of self and an understanding of what is happening to it, and it will carry memories of the experience which negatively influence its quality of life.
