From: Zphobic (zphobic@softhome.net)
Date: Tue Feb 26 2002 - 04:37:48 MST
[Hermit] The above explains how an animal can remain functional - and
indeed
happy - with a disease or injury where a human would be experiencing severe
shock. Unless a trigger is actively present, the animal is not perceiving
"pain", and while it will react at a brain stem level to minimize the pain
triggers experienced this does not imply significant discomfort. So a cat,
with half its face eaten away by a cancer will still purr and behave
perfectly normally, and it is often the owners sympathetic reaction which
leads to the euthanasia of otherwise functional animals.
[Z] What do we see in other primates? Presumably some mixture of the two...
- Z "learnin' stuff" phobic
----- Original Message -----
From: "L' Ermit" <lhermit@hotmail.com>
To: <virus@lucifer.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 1:13 PM
Subject: Re: virus: Rich's Vegan Ethics? McAmerika Rex or You can have my
steak when y...
> Jake] Hmmmm... This is a first for me. I have discussed this before many
> times in different crowds with lots of people foaming at the mouth on both
> sides and no one has brought this up to me before. And now you AND
Hermit.
> Well, much as I respect you both, my default on this has to stay at
roughly
> ---> other mammals have essentially the same nervous system as humans do
> except for humans having greater cerebral capacity, and even that still
> analogs the rest of mammalian brains except for relative size, therefore I
> would tend to believe that they experience basic physiological things like
> physical pain in similar ways to us<--- So, yes, I DO want to see
something
> on this "numbness" that you claim blesses our bovine cousins. And somehow
I
> think that if it is out there, you guys will find it for me. It's not
> really a "like it or not" thing for me either. I am genuinely curious.
Is
> it just bovines, or do all other mammals! save humans share in this
> blessing?? Hmmmmmm, if so, this human thing sucks worse than I thought.
>
> [Hermit] It has been discussed here before. Perhaps in 1998 or 99.
>
> [Hermit] As you observe, the human chordate central nervous system has a
> large cerebral hemisphere and a brain stem connected to a spinal cord.
> Nociceptive (detection of injury) stimuli causes an immediate protective
> reaction called a reflex mediated by the spine and brain stem, but at that
> stage, pain has not been felt by the person. The nociceptive activity is
> transmitted to the brain stem where additional protective reactions take
> place (avoidance responses, verbalizations). The nociceptive activity is
> transmitted from the brain stem to various parts of the cerebral
hemispheres
> where it activates conscious awareness of the pain stimulus and generates
> the emotional unpleasantness of pain. All mammals have enlarged cerebral
> hemispheres that are mainly an outer layer of neocortex. In humans, this
> neocortex is massively developed and this is the key to our ability to
> experience pain.
>
> [Hermit] If we beat up an animal without a recognizable brain, e.g. a
> starfish, it will recognize injury through nociception, and will attempt
to
> move away from it (nocivoidance). Does that mean it is feeling pain? Most
> researchers would argue that the lack of a brain precludes any sensation
of
> pain. It is simply a nervous reaction. Moving up the phylae, fish, have a
> spinal column (chordata) and a functional brain stem, and, as the
referenced
> study shows [infra], shares a great deal of neural functionality and
> response with humans. Yet trauma that would incapacitate a human has less
> effect on a fish than simple fear, caused by applied restraints. If the
> cerebral hemispheres of a human are destroyed, a comatose vegetative state
> results. If the cerebral hemispheres of a fish are destroyed, the fish's
> behavior is normal in most ways. I would argue, that a fish, lacking the
> cerebral regions necessary for conscious awareness also lacks the ability
to
> and for generation of pain experience.
>
> [Hermit] Looking more closely as humans as a model for animal reaction to
> pain, when a person's thumb is hit with a hammer, the initial reaction
> trigger is the local nervous tissue detecting the trauma (nociception).
The
> hand is jerked back due to activity in the spinal column (nocivoidance)
long
> before the signal reaches the brain. Next the signal reaches the brain
stem
> which triggers a boost in adrenaline, respiratory and cardiac activity.
Only
> after this do you have the opportunity to perceive that you are
experiencing
> pain. What follows involves suffering, but not necessarily "pain" unless
> there is ongoing triggering due to an increase in internal local tissue
> pressure (due to reduced drainage, infection or tissue damage) causing
> ongoing nerve stimulation and brain stem reaction. The suffering we
perceive
> is not connected to the physiological perception of pain but is mediated
by
> the brain stem. We can see this more clearly when suffering occurs not as
a
> result of physical neurostimulation, but because of perceiving the death
or
> suffering of someone you love. Clearly in this case, there is no
perceptual
> effect involved, but that does not prevent it from resulting in suffering
> and pain. Various in vivo tests (fMRI) have proved that the pain
experienced
> due to nociception is mediated by the brain stem, that the initial
reaction
> is driven by the spinal column, and that secondary responses are dependent
> on cortic function. An even more convincing example occurs in stroke
victims
> who suffer from central pain, where pain is experienced (and is very
> difficult to alleviate except through the use of luminal hypnotics which
> allows it to be ignored), in the absence of injury due to damage to the
> brain stem triggering cortical emotional responses, and where this can be
> clearly seen using fMRI.
>
> [Hermit] Modern analysis, particularly of quantifiable issues such as
> measurements of such parameters as cardiac and respiratory responses, pain
> scores, computer simulation and particularly the concentration of a stress
> hormone in feces and urates shows that most animals, like humans, do
> experience "pain" in the sense of detecting injury to themselves (this is
> generally evaluated using a rough "discomfort scale" viz
> [url=http://www.ahsc.arizona.edu/uac/iacuc/pain.shtml]The University of
> Arizona Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee Handbook[/url]). But
are
> the physiological reactions "pain reactions" or something else? I would
> strongly suggest that it is "something else".
>
> [Hermit] fMRI studies show that the unpleasant part of pain in humans is
> generated by specific regions of the frontal lobes of the cerebral
> hemispheres. So we see that in humans, pain involves perception
> (neurological nociception) and a consequent physiological (stress)
response
> as well as an emotional response and that it is the emotional response
which
> causes the perception of pain. Other mammals have radically different
sized
> frontal lobes and none have the specific cortical complexities where the
> pain response is concentrated in humans. Cows and pigs' perception of pain
> cannot possibly be anything like ours, due to their not possessing these
> receptor sites and thus the psychological pain reaction component is
absent
> from their response even though the brain stem reactions to pain stimuli
are
> similar. In other words, the pain that humans experience is a
psychological
> experience and should be separated from the behavioral and physiological
> reactions to injurious stimuli which we share with our less cortically
> endowed fellow animals.
>
> [Hermit] The above explains how an animal can remain functional - and
indeed
> happy - with a disease or injury where a human would be experiencing
severe
> shock. Unless a trigger is actively present, the animal is not perceiving
> "pain", and while it will react at a brain stem level to minimize the pain
> triggers experienced this does not imply significant discomfort. So a cat,
> with half its face eaten away by a cancer will still purr and behave
> perfectly normally, and it is often the owners sympathetic reaction which
> leads to the euthanasia of otherwise functional animals.
>
> [Hermit] It is perhaps appropriate to note that behavioral and
physiological
> reactions cannot be separated from fear - and indeed, most supposed
complex
> animal pain reactions have been shown to be fear reactions. As an example,
> it has been shown that fish can experience both pain and fear (and it is
> fear which appears to cause more serious distress in angling situations).
> viz [url=http://pisces.enviroweb.org/carpfear.html]DO PAIN AND FEAR MAKE A
> HOOKED CARP IN PLAY SUFFER?, Prof.dr.F.J. Verheijen & Dr.R.J.A.
> Buwalda.Published April 1988.[/url]. Although it is possibly relevant that
> for various reasons, Dutch and English researchers are recognized to have
a
> greater empathy for animals than US researchers (For more on this refer
the
> references below).
>
> [Hermit] Having said that, animals do experience fear, and I would argue
> that this is the aspect of abattoir practice which most deserves
attention.
> Visiting a high density abattoir shows animals in extreme states of terror
> caused by the necessary restrictions on movement, and the experience of
> frightening unfamiliar and unexpected sounds (and possibly smells) which I
> have never had to deal with in animals being slaughtered in farm
butcheries.
> I would argue that we simply do not do sufficient to suppress the fear
> reaction in mass slaughter animals and would personally suggest the use of
a
> rapid breakdown hypnotic drug delivered by injection, somewhere in the
> process of moving them to the slaughter point, to prevent fear reactions
> while not contaminating the meat. We do this for criminals before
executing
> them, we should do it for animals if we can avoid contaminating the meat
> products.
>
> Kind Regards
>
> Hermit
>
> Refer interesting discussion at
> [url=http://www.spiked-online.com/Articles/00000000550C.htm]"Animal
> research: a scientist's defense",Stuart Derbyshire[/url]
> [quote]
> It is a necessary fact that animals will die and suffer in the pursuit of
> human betterment. By all estimates, at least one million monkeys died in
the
> race to halt polio. By the early 1960s, when vaccine production was
running
> smoothly, a previously dreaded disease that crippled or killed 20,000
people
> a year in the USA alone was afflicting a few people per year.
>
> Cases of polio became so unusual that an occurrence anywhere was
startling.
> It is a sobering thought that such an effort would, in all likelihood, be
> impossible today.
> ...
> It makes no sense for animal researchers to engage in a discussion of
animal
> welfare beyond ensuring that the animals will be properly housed, fed and
> exercised, and that they will be generally physically and behaviorally
> nourished as much as possible to benefit their performance as an
> experimental subject. The idea that we should - or even can - be any more
> concerned about their welfare stretches credibility.
>
> Giving animals AIDS and other diseases, carrying out experimental
surgeries
> and infusing untested drugs hardly sound like procedures aimed at
protecting
> the animals' welfare. Mistreating animals is unacceptable because it ruins
> experiments - but any further concern for the animals' wellbeing is beside
> the point.
> [/quote]
>
> I would argue that the same goes for food.
>
> Another is [url=http://www.spiked-online.com/Printable/0000000054FF.htm]"A
> timeline of reaction",Stuart Derbyshire[/url]
>
> Counterpoint is the question of whether animals feel empathy. The answer
> seems to be yes.
> Refer, e.g. [url=http://chronicle.com/free/v48/i09/09b00701.htm]Do Humans
> Alone 'Feel Your Pain'?, FRANS B.M. de WAAL[/url]
> and [url=http://www.sciam.com/1998/1198intelligence/1198gallup.html]Can
> Animals Empathize? Yes[/url]
>
> And I argue that this is another answer why suppression of the fear
reaction
> should be considered as a humane issue in slaughter animals.
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:44 MDT