Do fish feel pain?

 Do fish feel pain? Rethinking the ethics of fishing 🎣🐟

If someone punches your face, you scream. A monkey would screech, a dog would yelp, even a lion would roar in pain. And when we hear that sound raw and undeniable it triggers something in us, empathy, guilt, and a reason to stop. But fish don’t scream. They thrash, they gasp, but they suffer in silence. That silence has cost them their place in our moral spotlight. We’ve raised campaigns, held protests, and reformed industries to protect cows and pigs animals whose pain we can clearly see and hear. But fish? They still slip beneath the radar of compassion, pulled from water by the billions, as if their pain doesn’t count. This isn’t because their suffering is less it’s just quieter. And that quiet shouldn’t be a license for cruelty. This gap in moral concern raises the need to re-evaluate the ethics of killing fish for food, not only through emotional reasoning but also through scientific understanding. 

There’s a bunch of scientific evidence out there showing that fish are capable of feeling pain. In 2002, researchers discovered nociceptors which are pain receptors occur in fish. As a result of experiments which are conducted to Rainbow Trout, these receptors responded to things like mechanical pressure, heat and noxious chemicals, which puts them on par with what we see in mammals. In one experiment, trout injected with acetic acid showed some pretty telling behaviors such as, Rocking side to side, rubbing their lips against the tank walls, losing appetite and less movement. Meanwhile in the 

control group where fish were injected with saline didn’t show any of that. The most fascinating part? When the acid injected fish were given morphine, a painkiller, those abnormal behaviors dropped significantly. That tells us their reactions weren’t just automatic or reflexive and they were feeling something. This complicates the whole predator-prey, “ just nature” argument. We’re not just eating them, we’re probably causing suffering. And if there’s even a chance we can reduce that suffering, The moral high ground would be to try. 

“If a being can suffer, there is no moral justification for refusing to take that suffering into account. Fish may not look like us, and they may not scream like mammals do, but that doesn’t mean their pain is any less real. The evidence shows they can feel discomfort, fear, and distress. To ignore that just because they’re fish is a form of speciesism a bias as arbitrary as racism or sexism. Ethics isn’t about who looks like us. It’s about recognizing suffering where it exists, and choosing not to be the cause of it when we can help it.” Inspired by Peter Singer, a moral philosopher in Australia. This quote dives deep into the complication of pain in fish and it echoes parallel with the spiritual point of views of certain religions. In Buddhism, causing suffering even to an animal is a karmatic weight. In Hinduism, fish are a part of sacred lore, even appearing as an avatar of Vishnu. Christianity and Islam, though allows meat eating, emphasize mercy, moderation, and gratitude for creation. We can certainly make sure to give a listen to the underlying voice which surely occurs on every human being which says, “Take only what you need, and never forget the soul of what you take”. 

As humans fall into the omnivores predatory category, It’s a must for us to fulfill our protein intake. It’s what the body needs. Protein is an essential nutrient for human health, and it is commonly obtained from two major sources, meat and fish. While meat production has long been a primary means of meeting dietary protein needs, it requires the maintenance of large livestock populations, extensive land use, significant water consumption, and considerable environmental resources. Moreover, the increasing global demand for meat has raised concerns about sustainability, greenhouse gas emissions, and food security. In contrast, fish has emerged as a more reliable and sustainable source of protein for the growing human population. Fish farming and wild capture fisheries can provide high quality protein with a relatively lower environmental footprint compared to terrestrial livestock. Additionally, fish offer essential fatty acids like omega 3, which are crucial for brain function and cardiovascular health. As the world continues to seek efficient and sustainable food sources, fish are becoming an increasingly important part of the global diet, offering a practical solution to the challenges faced by traditional meat production. Considering that fact, it can be thought that fishing is really a sin?, Afterall it’s just not a sin because the fish dies. It’s a sin when we kill thoughtlessly, when we harvest without limits, when we forget that this is a being that lived, felt, and tried to survive just like us. 

That’s why saying stop to fishing is not practical or fair. But fish with intention. Understand that pain exists underwater too. Measure what nature can handle the maximum sustainable yield and don’t take more than that. If you’re going to eat a fish, give it a death that doesn’t include prolonged agony!. 

Written by - Yasandu Seneviratne

2nd year (22/23)

#AQUATICS

#ASA

#USJ