DOCSLIB.ORG

Incorporating Ethics and Science Into the 3Rs

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Incorporating Ethics and Science Into the 3Rs Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science Vol 54, No 2 Copyright 2015 March 2015 by the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science Pages 224–230 Consideration and Checkboxes: Incorporating Ethics and Science into the 3Rs Margaret S Landi, 1,* Adam J Shriver, 2 and Anne Mueller 3 Members of the research community aim to both produce high-quality research and ensure that harm is minimized in animals. The primary means of ensuring these goals are both met is the 3Rs framework of replacement, reduction, and refine- ment. However, some approaches to the 3Rs may result in a ‘check box mentality’ in which IACUC members, researchers, administrators, and caretakers check off a list of tasks to evaluate a protocol. We provide reasons for thinking that the 3Rs approach could be enhanced with more explicit discussion of the ethical assumptions used to arrive at an approved research protocol during IACUC review. Here we suggest that the notion of moral considerability, and all of the related issues it gives rise to, should be incorporated into IACUC discussions of 3Rs deliberations during protocol review to ensure that animal wellbeing is enhanced within the constraints of scientific investigation. Conflicting feelings about conducting experiments in animals lead to suboptimal reviews and missed opportunities for im- have existed for more than 4 centuries.28 The ‘father of physiol- proving welfare. Why do we think that standard practices for ogy,’ Claude Bernard (1813–1878) recognized this polarization in IACUC could be enhanced? his statement that “the science of life is a superb and dazzlingly First, the checkbox approach can limit critical thinking about lighted hall which may be reached only by passing through a long reviews by making the process more about following a set of and ghastly kitchen.”18 In fact, Dr. Bernard’s wife, Marie Francoise instructions than about holistically considering how the pro- Martin, established the first antivivisection society in France.18 cedures might affect the welfare of animals. New procedures The conflict, concern, and debate continue into the present time. and technologies are developed continuously, and different One major step forward was taken with Russell and Burch’s experimental designs might introduce novel considerations seminal book on animal research. Russell and Burch developed that were not present when the checklist was developed. A rote what is known as the 3Rs approach more than 50 years ago with following of instructions could lead IACUC members to miss the intention of balancing the advancement of knowledge in sci- potential changes that would enhance the welfare of the animals. ence with respect for the lives and experiences of animals.38 The Second, the checkbox approach can lead to a bias in favor of three principles arose from recognition that harm to animals in the status quo. If older approaches or technologies have been ap- studies could be prevented or minimized without compromis- proved in the past, an approach with an emphasis of checking off ing the quality of the scientific investigation. This prevention of requirements that meet a minimal threshold likely would lead to harm could be achieved by replacing potentially harmful research bias of past approaches and technologies, even if new (and poten- on sentient organisms with nonsentient material (replacement), tially better) approaches and technologies have been developed. planning carefully to establish smaller group sizes or fewer study Thus, the checkbox approach might act as a barrier to progress. groups (reduction), and fine-tuning animal care and experimen- Third, the checkbox approach may make it possible for mem- tal designs to reduce unnecessary pain or distress (refinement). bers to conduct reviews without seriously considering all ethical Although the 3Rs approach has led to valuable progress, the and scientific assumptions underlying different approaches. If 3Rs are sometimes treated as a bureaucratic hurdle. Assessment a reviewer knows that a certain approach has been approved of the 3Rs frequently is accomplished by review of a set of before, the reviewer may simply move forward to approval, prompts or boxes to check off by using standardized procedures in light of past practices. However, ultimately many of the that can bypass in-depth discussions and full consideration of challenges of IACUC reviews require careful and thoughtful enhancement guided by knowledge of various ethical views consideration of protocols and an understanding of the specific on animals. A checklist way of working, when not bolstered by animals being studied, so a system structured in a manner where additional discussion, might minimize the true nature and value such critical thinking is not rewarded or valued could lead to of the 3Rs and can work to circumvent in-depth discussions. important improvements being missed. Our view is that many IACUC do an excellent job of carefully As a supplement to the checklist approach, we argue that the considering all of the relevant information and synthesizing rich body of thought on animal ethics can and should inform this information into an optimal set of recommendations. Some IACUC discussions and continuously move the 3Rs framework IACUCs may use checkboxes extremely effectively. However, forward. We center our discussion of animal ethics on the we suggest a few reasons by which a checkbox approach could notion of moral considerability and argue that including discus- sions of moral considerability in IACUC assessments will help ensure that assessment of the 3Rs for a protocol or study are an Received: 28 Sep 2014. Accepted: 8 Jan 2015. intellectually engaging process that continuously evolves and 1 GlaxoSmithKline Office of Animal Welfare, Ethics and Strategy, King of Prussia, Pa and responds to new research. Although we do not offer a formal 2University of Pennsylvania Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy 3Applied Bioethics, Philadelphia, PA proposal here for IACUC evaluation, we outline how we believe *Corresponding author. Email: [email protected] a discussion of moral considerability can be valuable and sug- 224 Ethics and science in the 3Rs gest why we think such discussions could be important in the of moral considerability: 1) What features contribute to moral IACUC protocol review process. considerability? 2) Which animals have those features? and 3) As we soon describe, there are a variety of perspectives on What do those features entail in terms of treatment? We do not which animals have moral considerability, on how to best as- expect that readers will find all approaches equally useful for sess moral significance in animals, and on the implications of IACUC review, but we aim to provide a range of options to help possessing these capacities. Although US Government Principles,4 enhance IACUC discussions. The Guide for the Care and Use of Animals (the Guide),23 and other What features contribute to moral considerability? The most policy documents and publications provide guidance, we en- common basis for granting moral considerability to nonhuman courage each IACUC to come to their own conclusions about animals is the view that animals are sentient: that is, capable of how they can best enhance the 3Rs perspective with discussion experiencing pleasure, pain, and other feelings. Because there of moral considerability. Not all IACUC will reach the same are many definitions of sentience, we want to be clear about the conclusions about which ethical theories are relevant; however, definition we are using. We will use sentience interchangeably what is important is that careful consideration is given to both with consciousness and conscious awareness. To say that an animal the ethical assumptions and scientific knowledge that underlie is sentient, in our use of the term, means that the animal has the ultimate decision. conscious experiences of pleasures, pains, and other emotions Finally, some may ask why we should think about ethics at all and that the animal can be directly aware of such feelings. To during IACUC evaluations. Good research should be objective say that an animal is consciously aware of pain is different from and unbiased; why would particular ethical theories play a role? claiming the animal is self-aware. Being self-aware implies the This stance, we believe, relies on a mistaken understanding of animal has a conception of itself as a being having a type of the application of ethics in science. Science, of course, needs to be experience, but the awareness of sentience just refers to being as objective as possible, and steps should be taken to ensure that capable of having the experience. Likewise, sentience is often results are evaluated without prejudice. Nevertheless, the choice contrasted with the notion of cognition, which refers to certain of any particular research design will, by necessity, depend in part complicated forms of information processing. For our purposes, on the ethical assumptions of the researchers. Avoiding discussion cognition can be thought of as thinking and sentience as feeling. of the ethical principles at work in research design is not truly We see an early example of recognition of the importance avoiding subjective value judgments; rather it is relying on hid- of sentience for moral standing in Jeremy Bentham’s famous den and unexamined value judgments to do the work. Although quote, “a full-grown horse or dog is beyond comparison a more we recognize that IACUC are not tasked by law to conduct harm/ rational, as well as a more conversable animal, than an infant 4,31 benefit analyses, we nevertheless believe that understanding of a day or a week or even a month old. But suppose the case the notion of moral considerability can be useful in determining were otherwise, what would it avail? The question is not, Can the best way to apply the 3Rs to a particular research design. That they reason? Nor, Can they talk? But, Can they suffer?”6 In this is, deliberation about moral considerability may expand or offer quote, Bentham is emphasizing the importance of animals’ new opportunities for the application of the 3Rs.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cephalopods and the Evolution of the Mind
    Cephalopods and the Evolution of the Mind Peter Godfrey-Smith The Graduate Center City University of New York Pacific Conservation Biology 19 (2013): 4-9. In thinking about the nature of the mind and its evolutionary history, cephalopods – especially octopuses, cuttlefish, and squid – have a special importance. These animals are an independent experiment in the evolution of large and complex nervous systems – in the biological machinery of the mind. They evolved this machinery on a historical lineage distant from our own. Where their minds differ from ours, they show us another way of being a sentient organism. Where we are similar, this is due to the convergence of distinct evolutionary paths. I introduced the topic just now as 'the mind.' This is a contentious term to use. What is it to have a mind? One option is that we are looking for something close to what humans have –– something like reflective and conscious thought. This sets a high bar for having a mind. Another possible view is that whenever organisms adapt to their circumstances in real time by adjusting their behavior, taking in information and acting in response to it, there is some degree of mentality or intelligence there. To say this sets a low bar. It is best not to set bars in either place. Roughly speaking, we are dealing with a matter of degree, though 'degree' is not quite the right term either. The evolution of a mind is the acquisition of a tool-kit for the control of behavior. The tool-kit includes some kind of perception, though different animals have very different ways of taking in information from the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Lay Persons and Community Values in Reviewing Animal Experimentation Jeff Leslie [email protected]
    University of Chicago Legal Forum Volume 2006 | Issue 1 Article 5 Lay Persons and Community Values in Reviewing Animal Experimentation Jeff Leslie [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclf Recommended Citation Leslie, Jeff () "Lay Persons and Community Values in Reviewing Animal Experimentation," University of Chicago Legal Forum: Vol. 2006: Iss. 1, Article 5. Available at: http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclf/vol2006/iss1/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Chicago Unbound. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Chicago Legal Forum by an authorized administrator of Chicago Unbound. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Lay Persons and Community Values in Reviewing Animal Experimentation Jeff Lesliet Is it morally acceptable to use animals in scientific experi- ments that will not benefit those animals, but instead solely benefit people? Most people would say yes; but at the same time most would view the use of animals as a regrettable necessity, to be pursued only when the benefits to people outweigh the harm to the animals, and only after everything possible is done to minimize that harm. Identifying benefits and harms may require specialized scientific and technological understanding, to be sure, but evaluating the tradeoff between them requires not technical expertise, but rather the capacity to make difficult moral judg- ments. We do not usually think of moral judgments as the unique terrain of any particular set of professionals or experts. Anyone capable of ethical reasoning has an equal claim to exper- tise, and a pluralistic society can be expected to exhibit a wide range of moral beliefs.
    [Show full text]
  • Animal Welfare and the Paradox of Animal Consciousness
    ARTICLE IN PRESS Animal Welfare and the Paradox of Animal Consciousness Marian Dawkins1 Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK 1Corresponding author: e-mail address: [email protected] Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. Animal Consciousness: The Heart of the Paradox 2 2.1 Behaviorism Applies to Other People Too 5 3. Human Emotions and Animals Emotions 7 3.1 Physiological Indicators of Emotion 7 3.2 Behavioral Components of Emotion 8 3.2.1 Vacuum Behavior 10 3.2.2 Rebound 10 3.2.3 “Abnormal” Behavior 10 3.2.4 The Animal’s Point of View 11 3.2.5 Cognitive Bias 15 3.2.6 Expressions of the Emotions 15 3.3 The Third Component of Emotion: Consciousness 16 4. Definitions of Animal Welfare 24 5. Conclusions 26 References 27 1. INTRODUCTION Consciousness has always been both central to and a stumbling block for animal welfare. On the one hand, the belief that nonhuman animals suffer and feel pain is what draws many people to want to study animal welfare in the first place. Animal welfare is seen as fundamentally different from plant “welfare” or the welfare of works of art precisely because of the widely held belief that animals have feelings and experience emotions in ways that plants or inanimate objectsdhowever valuableddo not (Midgley, 1983; Regan, 1984; Rollin, 1989; Singer, 1975). On the other hand, consciousness is also the most elusive and difficult to study of any biological phenomenon (Blackmore, 2012; Koch, 2004). Even with our own human consciousness, we are still baffled as to how Advances in the Study of Behavior, Volume 47 ISSN 0065-3454 © 2014 Elsevier Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Wild Animal Suffering and Vegan Outreach
    Paez, Eze (2016) Wild animal suffering and vegan outreach. Animal Sentience 7(11) DOI: 10.51291/2377-7478.1101 This article has appeared in the journal Animal Sentience, a peer-reviewed journal on animal cognition and feeling. It has been made open access, free for all, by WellBeing International and deposited in the WBI Studies Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Animal Sentience 2016.087: Paez Commentary on Ng on Animal Suffering Wild animal suffering and vegan outreach Commentary on Ng on Animal Suffering Eze Paez Department of Legal, Moral and Political Philosophy Pompeu Fabra University, Barcelona Abstract: Ng’s strategic proposal seems to downplay the potential benefits of advocacy for wild animals and omit what may be the most effective strategy to reduce the harms farmed animals suffer: vegan outreach. Eze Paez, lecturer in moral and political philosophy at Pompeu Fabra University, Barcelona, studies normative and applied ethics, especially ontological and normative aspects of abortion and the moral consideration of nonhuman animals. He is a member of Animal Ethics. upf.academia.edu/ezepaez Underestimating the importance of wild animal suffering. Ng’s (2016) view is not that animal advocates should focus only on farmed animals, to the exclusion of those that live in the wild. He concedes that our efforts must also be directed toward raising awareness of the harms suffered by animals in nature. Nonetheless, he seems to suggest that these efforts should be minimal relative to those devoted to reducing the harms farmed animals suffer. Ng underestimates the potential benefits of advocacy for wild animals in terms of net reduction in suffering perhaps because he is overestimating people’s resistance to caring about wild animals and to intervening in nature on their behalf.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparative Evolutionary Approach to Pain Perception in Fishes
    Brown, Culum (2016) Comparative evolutionary approach to pain perception in fishes. Animal Sentience 3(5) DOI: 10.51291/2377-7478.1029 This article has appeared in the journal Animal Sentience, a peer-reviewed journal on animal cognition and feeling. It has been made open access, free for all, by WellBeing International and deposited in the WBI Studies Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Animal Sentience 2016.011: Brown Commentary on Key on Fish Pain Comparative evolutionary approach to pain perception in fishes Commentary on Key on Fish Pain Culum Brown Biological Sciences Macquarie University Abstract: Arguments against the fact that fish feel pain repeatedly appear even in the face of growing evidence that they do. The standards used to judge pain perception keep moving as the hurdles are repeatedly cleared by novel research findings. There is undoubtedly a vested commercial interest in proving that fish do not feel pain, so the topic has a half-life well past its due date. Key (2016) reiterates previous perspectives on this topic characterised by a black-or-white view that is based on the proposed role of the human cortex in pain perception. I argue that this is incongruent with our understanding of evolutionary processes. Keywords: pain, fishes, behaviour, physiology, nociception Culum Brown [email protected] studies the behavioural ecology of fishes with a special interest in learning and memory. He is Associate Professor of vertebrate evolution at Macquarie University, Co-Editor of the volume Fish Cognition and Behavior, and Editor for Animal Behaviour of the Journal of Fish Biology.
    [Show full text]
  • JAGE-691 Fish Cognition and Consciousness Colin Allen [email protected] Phone
    JAGE-691 Fish Cognition and Consciousness Colin Allen [email protected] phone: +1-812-606-0881 fax: +1-812-855-3631 Program in Cognitive Science and Department of History and Philosophy of Science Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405 USA ABSTRACT. Questions about fish consciousness and cognition are receiving increasing attention. In this paper, I explain why one must be careful to avoid drawing conclusions too hastily about this hugely di- verse set of species. Keywords. Fish, learning, cognition, consciousness 1. Introduction to the controversy The cognitive and mental capacities of fish are a current topic of scientific controversy, and consciousness is the most contentious of topics. In a recent review article, Michel Cabanac and coauthors (Cabanac et al. 2009) argue that consciousness did not emerge until the early Amniota, the group of species that includes mammals, birds, and "reptiles.” The latter term is in scare quotes because biologists consider it a paraphy- letic group (i.e., a group that contains just a subset of the descendants of its common ancestor) that is im- proper for classification purposes due to its exclusion of the birds, which descended from the saurians. Amniotes are characterized by an embryonic membrane that makes terrestrial reproduction feasible. The amphibians, lacking this adaptation, are constrained to place their eggs in an aqueous environment for proper development. These biological details are important because of the nature of some of the evidence that Cabanac et al. bring to bear on the question of consciousness in fish – evidence that I shall maintain seems skewed towards other adaptations that have to do with terrestrial life.
    [Show full text]
  • Jm Coetzee and Animal Rights
    J.M. COETZEE AND ANIMAL RIGHTS: ELIZABETH COSTELLO’S CHALLENGE TO PHILOSOPHY Richard Alan Northover SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF ENGLISH LITERATURE IN THE FACULTY OF HUMANITIES UNIVERSITY OF PRETORIA PRETORIA, 0002, SOUTH AFRICA Supervisor: Professor David Medalie OCTOBER 2009 © University of Pretoria Abstract The thesis relates Coetzee’s focus on animals to his more familiar themes of the possibility of fiction as a vehicle for serious ethical issues, the interrogation of power and authority, a concern for the voiceless and the marginalised, a keen sense of justice and the question of secular salvation. The concepts developed in substantial analyses of The Lives of Animals and Disgrace are thereafter applied to several other works of Coetzee. The thesis attempts to position J.M. Coetzee within the animal rights debate and to assess his use of his problematic persona, Elizabeth Costello, who controversially uses reason to attack the rationalism of the Western philosophical tradition and who espouses the sympathetic imagination as a means of developing respect for animals. Costello’s challenge to the philosophers is problematised by being traced back to Plato’s original formulation of the opposition between philosophers and poets. It is argued that Costello represents a fallible Socratic figure who critiques not reason per se but an unqualified rationalism. This characterisation of Costello explains her preoccupation with raising the ethical awareness of her audience, as midwife to the birth of ideas, and perceptions of her as a wise fool, a characterisation that is confirmed by the use of Bakhtin’s notion of the Socratic dialogue as one of the precursors of the modern novel.
    [Show full text]
  • Science, Sentience, and Animal Welfare
    WellBeing International WBI Studies Repository 1-2013 Science, Sentience, and Animal Welfare Robert C. Jones California State University, Chico, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://www.wellbeingintlstudiesrepository.org/ethawel Part of the Animal Studies Commons, Ethics and Political Philosophy Commons, and the Nature and Society Relations Commons Recommended Citation Jones, R. C. (2013). Science, sentience, and animal welfare. Biology and Philosophy, 1-30. This material is brought to you for free and open access by WellBeing International. It has been accepted for inclusion by an authorized administrator of the WBI Studies Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Science, Sentience, and Animal Welfare Robert C. Jones California State University, Chico KEYWORDS animal, welfare, ethics, pain, sentience, cognition, agriculture, speciesism, biomedical research ABSTRACT I sketch briefly some of the more influential theories concerned with the moral status of nonhuman animals, highlighting their biological/physiological aspects. I then survey the most prominent empirical research on the physiological and cognitive capacities of nonhuman animals, focusing primarily on sentience, but looking also at a few other morally relevant capacities such as self-awareness, memory, and mindreading. Lastly, I discuss two examples of current animal welfare policy, namely, animals used in industrialized food production and in scientific research. I argue that even the most progressive current welfare policies lag behind, are ignorant of, or arbitrarily disregard the science on sentience and cognition. Introduction The contemporary connection between research on animal1 cognition and the moral status of animals goes back almost 40 years to the publication of two influential books: Donald Griffin’s The Question of Animal Awareness: Evolutionary Continuity of Mental Experience (1976) and Peter Singer’s groundbreaking Animal Liberation (1975).
    [Show full text]
  • Shivley Colostate 0053A 13792.Pdf (3.519Mb)
    DISSERTATION EXPLORING ANIMAL WELFARE THROUGH AN INVESTIGATION OF VETERINARY EDUCATION AND ON-FARM ASSESSMENTS OF DAIRY CALF WELFARE Submitted by Chelsey B. Shivley Department of Animal Sciences In partial fulfillment of the requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado Summer 2016 Doctoral Committee: Advisor: Temple Grandin Franklyn B. Garry Terry E. Engle Bernard E. Rollin Martha L. Kesel Copyright by Chelsey B. Shivley 2016 All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT EXPLORING ANIMAL WELFARE THROUGH AN INVESTIGATION OF VETERINARY EDUCATION AND ON-FARM ASSESSMENTS OF DAIRY CALF WELFARE Animal welfare encompasses many different areas, including science, ethics, economics and law. Veterinarians have an opportunity to serve as leaders in the field of animal welfare due to their interaction with all aspects of animal use. In order to do so, they must be properly trained, and veterinary curricula were evaluated for courses related to animal welfare, ethics, and behavior. Consumers are concerned with how animals are managed, and aspects of welfare of preweaned dairy calves, including colostrum quality, passive transfer status, average daily gain, and bull calf management, were evaluated. The objective of the first study presented in Chapter III was to explore the extent to which veterinary colleges and schools accredited by the AVMA Council on Education (COE) have incorporated specific courses related to animal welfare, behavior, and ethics. The design included a survey and curriculum review. The sample included all 49 AVMA COE–accredited veterinary colleges and schools (institutions). The study consisted of 2 parts. In part 1, a survey regarding animal welfare, behavior, and ethics was e-mailed to the associate dean of academic affairs at all 49 AVMA COE–accredited institutions.
    [Show full text]
  • Science and Sense: the Case for Abolishing Sow Stalls
    January 2013 Science and Sense THE CASE FOR ABOLISHING SOW STALLS This report was written by Dr Malcolm Caulfield and PATRONS reviewed by Voiceless’s Scientific Expert Advisory Council. • Professor J.M. Coetzee It is endorsed by the World Society for the Protection Nobel Prize for Literature Winner 2003, author of of Animals, Compassion in World Farming and Animals The Lives of Animals and Elizabeth Costello Australia. • Brian Sherman AM Businessman and philanthropist Images courtesy of Animals Australia. • Dr Jane Goodall World-renowned primatologist and animal advocate © January 2013 • The Hon Michael Kirby AC CMG ISBN: 978-0-9803740-6-3 (paperback) Former Justice of the High Court of Australia ISBN: 978-0-9803740-7-0 (online) SCIENTIFIC EXPERT ADVISORY COUNCIL Voiceless • Professor Marc Bekoff 2 Paddington Street Professor Emeritus of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Paddington NSW 2021 Australia University of Colorado, Boulder. Co-founder with Jane T. +612 9357 0723 F. +612 9357 0711 Goodall of Ethologists for the Ethical Treatment of [email protected] Animals. • Dr Malcolm Caulfield Founder and Principal Lawyer of the Animal Welfare Community Legal Centre. Formerly a pharmacologist in ABOUT VOICELESS industry and academia. Voiceless is an independent and non-profit think tank • Professor Clive Phillips dedicated to alleviating the suffering of animals in Foundation Chair of Animal Welfare, Centre for Animal Australia. Established in 2004 by father and daughter team, Welfare and Ethics, University of Queensland. Brian Sherman AM and Ondine Sherman, Voiceless: • Professor Lesley J. Rogers • Creates and fosters networks of leading lawyers, Emeritus Professor of Neuroscience and Animal politicians, businesspeople and professionals to Behaviour, University of New England.
    [Show full text]
  • Broom Fish Brains Pain
    Pre-publication copy Broom, D.M. 2016. Fish brains and behaviour indicate capacity for feeling pain. Animal Sentience, 2016.010 (5 pages). Fish brains, as well as fish behaviour, indicate capacity for awareness and feeling pain Donald M. Broom Centre for Anthrozoology and Animal Welfare Department of Veterinary Medicine University of Cambridge Madingley Road Cambridge CB3 0ES U.K. [email protected] http://www.neuroscience.cam.ac.uk/directory/profile.php?dmb16 Keywords pain sentience welfare fish feelings emotions brain behaviour Abstract Studies of behaviour are of major importance in understanding human pain and pain in other animals such as fish. Almost all of the characteristics of the mammalian pain system are also described for fish. Emotions, feelings and learning from these are controlled in the fish brain in areas anatomically different but functionally very similar to those in mammals. The evidence of pain and fear system function in fish is so similar to that in humans and other mammals that it is logical to conclude that fish feel fear and pain. Fish are sentient beings. Key (2015) is scornful about evidence from studies of fish behaviour indicating that fish are aware and feel pain but presents a thorough explanation of the pain system in the human brain and concludes that fish could not feel pain, or have any other feelings, as they do not have the brain structures that allow pain and other feelings in humans. Section 2 of his paper emphasises “the cortical origins of human pain” and states that “structure determines function”, eXplaining the functions of the five layers of the human cortex.
    [Show full text]
  • Animal Sentience? Neuroscience Has No Answers
    Gutfreund, Yoram (2017) Animal sentience? Neuroscience has no answers. Animal Sentience 13(4) DOI: 10.51291/2377-7478.1231 This article has appeared in the journal Animal Sentience, a peer-reviewed journal on animal cognition and feeling. It has been made open access, free for all, by WellBeing International and deposited in the WBI Studies Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Animal Sentience 2017.035: Gutfreund on Woodruff on Fish Feel Animal sentience? Neuroscience has no answers Commentary on Woodruff on Fish Feel Yoram Gutfreund Department of Neurobiology Technion Abstract: Woodruff’s target article provides a detailed review of comparative studies on brain and behavior in teleosts. However, the relevance of the scientific data to the question of consciousness rests solely on the validity of a small set of so-called "requirements for consciousness." I use the target article to demonstrate that the neuroscientific study of animal consciousness in general relies on external, highly questionable and unfalsifiable criteria, and therefore fails to resolve the question of which animal species are sentient. Fish behavior can be remarkably complex, but whether fish are conscious remains a matter of belief. Yoram Gutfreund is Associate Professor of Neurobiology in the Faculty of Medicine of the Technion. His specialization is in Neuroethology, the comparative study of the neural basis of animal behavior. His current research focuses on attention behavior in birds. yoramg.technion.ac.il/ In a recent paper (Gutfreund 2017), I argued that scientific conclusions on consciousness in animals are mostly premature, and that given our current state of knowledge, neuroscientific data cannot help us resolve the question of animal consciousness, i.e., which animal species possess phenomenal consciousness or sentience.
    [Show full text]