Fish Suffer Up to 22 Minutes of Intense Pain When Taken Out of Water
Each year, a trillion or so fish are pulled from the water, typically destined for our plates. While it's hardly a pleasurable outcome for the animal, a new study has just put a sobering number on their suffering.
Rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) hail originally from the Pacific Ocean's cold water tributaries, but are now a popular food fish worldwide, farmed in every continent except Antarctica.
Most of the time they are killed by asphyxiation, either in open air or ice water. While this is a cost-effective way to kill fish en-mass, an international team of biologists, led by Cynthia Schuck-Paim from the Welfare Footprint Institute, has found that each fish can experience up to 22 minutes of intense pain with this method.
Animal suffering is a difficult thing to quantify, but scientists have recently developed a standardized framework that factors in the intensity of negative states like stress or pain and the length of time they're experienced.
It's called the Welfare Footprint Framework, or WFF. The hope is that it will allow people who work with animals – biologists, veterinarians, zookeepers, farmers, etc – to compare and improve animal welfare standards.
"Societal concern about the impacts of production practices on animal welfare is rising, as evidenced by consumer-driven movements, labelling efforts, accreditation schemes, policies and legislation that prioritize animal welfare," the study's authors write.
"Our findings provide the first quantitative estimates of pain during fish slaughter, demonstrating the potential scale of welfare improvements achievable through effective stunning methods."
Sifting through stacks of published scientific papers, the team created a detailed picture of the experience of a fish out of water.
Just five seconds of air exposure triggers a neurochemical response we might associate with negative emotions in ourselves. Behaviors such as vigorous twisting and turning further demonstrate an intense aversion reaction.
Without water, the delicate gill structures that exchange oxygen for carbon dioxide stick together, causing CO2 from respiration to accumulate. These rising levels trigger nociception – the body's alarm system – which causes the fish to gasp. Eventually the elevated CO2 levels acidify the animal's blood and cerebrospinal fluid, ultimately resulting in unconsciousness.
Depending on the size of the fish, and the conditions in which it is slaughtered, these distressing experiences can last anywhere between 2 and 25 minutes.
"When standardized by production output, this corresponds to an average of 24 minutes per kilogram, with over one hour of moderate to extreme pain per kilogram in some cases," the authors note.
They estimate that electrical stunning, which has been proposed as a humane alternative for killing fish, could save up to 20 hours of moderate to extreme pain per US dollar of capital expenditure.
But brain scans have found the effectiveness of electrical stunning can vary widely: ideally, the animal should be rendered immediately and wholly unconscious until death. With current stunning methods, this isn't always the case.
"The welfare impact and effectiveness of any stunning method also depends critically on the entire harvest process, being affected by cumulative pre-slaughter stressors," Schuck-Paim and colleagues write.
"The WFF can also be used for assessing the welfare impacts of these processes and identifying priority areas for effective intervention."
While it's difficult for many of us to confront the cost of our human activities from an animal's perspective, this comparable measure of animal experience offers a clear picture of where improvements can be made for the welfare of our food stocks.
By quantifying the pain associated with this most common fish slaughter method, we may find better ways to care for the billions of animals that feed us each year.
The research is published in Scientific Reports.
Tiny Moth Seen Navigating by The Stars in Scientific First
First Signs of a 'Ghost' Plume Reshaping Earth Detected Beneath Oman
Great White Sharks Were Scared From Their Habitat by Just 2 Predators
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Rise in VC activity tees up ‘strong year' for medtech funding: PitchBook
This story was originally published on MedTech Dive. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily MedTech Dive newsletter. Increases in venture capital investments have positioned 2025 to be a 'strong year for global medtech funding,' according to a report from market data research firm PitchBook. First quarter VC funding totaled $4.1 billion, the highest it has been since 2022. The number of confirmed transactions hit 216, reversing a four-quarter decline. However, the uptick in medtech mergers and acquisitions that PitchBook predicted under the second Trump administration has yet to emerge, and antitrust regulators are still challenging deals. Medtech VC activity fell in both 2022 and 2023, according to PitchBook. Last year brought signs that the market might be bottoming. The number of VC investments fell for the third year in a row, but the amount of funding was higher than in 2023. Signs of a VC recovery continued into the first quarter of 2025, when the $260 million investment in whole-body-imaging startup Neko Health was the largest of 11 rounds worth $100 million or more. With Elon Musk's brain implant startup Neuralink raising $650 million this month, PitchBook said preliminary data for the second quarter shows more than $3 billion of medtech VC funding so far. VC exits are rare, though. PitchBook said there were no significant medtech VC exits in the first quarter, and the total exit value remained roughly in line with the previous two quarters. Total exit value in recent years has been driven by rare big deals, such as Tempus AI's initial public offering in 2024 and the $6 billion acquisition of Athelas in 2023. PitchBook highlighted three notable exits that closed in the first quarter: Beta Bionics' IPO, Hologics' $350 million takeover of Gynesonics and Boston Scientific's $540 million acquisition of SoniVie. The level of activity has fallen short of PitchBook's expectations. 'Our earlier thesis that the new U.S. presidential administration's more lenient regulatory stance would catalyze M&A activity has yet to play out, as broader market turbulence in early 2025 has complicated dealmaking conditions across sectors,' PitchBook said. 'Additionally, regulatory resistance remains a headwind.' PitchBook cited the Federal Trade Commission's legal challenge to the $627 million private equity buyout of Surmodics as evidence of ongoing regulatory resistance. The FTC challenged the deal on the grounds it 'would lead to a highly concentrated market for outsourced hydrophilic coatings and eliminate significant head-to-head competition.' Recommended Reading Medtech venture investment recovery continues, but startup M&A remains limited: Pitchbook Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Wall Street Journal
3 hours ago
- Wall Street Journal
When AI Creatures Ask ‘Why Me?'
In my algorithm, as readers will have noticed, exaggerated fear of artificial intelligence is a mask for what really distresses us, the thought that we are algorithms too. We think we're so smart and free, but we are apes who wear clothes. Our thoughts and actions have their origins in the animal mess. They aren't our own creations.
Forbes
10 hours ago
- Forbes
Dyeing for change: Why microbes could clean up fashion's toxic mess
Three different microbial pigments Colorifix What comes to mind first when you think about the environmental cost of what we wear every day? Fossil-fuel fabrics, overflowing landfills and underpaid labour are often front and centre of the conversation, and rightly so. But what rarely makes it into the headlines - is dye - the stuff that makes our clothes colourful. Textile dyeing is actually one of the most chemically intensive and polluting elements of garment production, accounting for roughly 20% of global industrial water pollution. The vast majority of dyes in use today are made from petrochemicals, derived from crude oil. And the amount of water required in the process is staggering. A single pair of blue denim jeans can take up to 7,000 litres of water to produce. Plus, the indigo hue is synthetic and involves toxic chemicals and heavy metals in its manufacturing. In factories all over the world, from China to Bangladesh, these pollutants are dumped untreated into rivers, poisoning ecosystems and endangering communities. It's a problem that sits in plain sight, literally on our backs, yet remains largely missing from the sustainable fashion discourse. Synthetic dyes are cheap, efficient and industrially embedded. They provide a wide colour spectrum, which brands like, and deliver predictable results - perhaps why no viable solution has been able to compete. Natural dyes made out of plants have been used for centuries, but their problem? The colours tend to be earthy and dull and, crucially, don't stick to the fabric and eventually fade. One British breakthrough may have solved the problem, by inventing a 'green' dye (not literally) that meets the industry's rigorous expectations. It's scaleable - and that means there is potential to disrupt the status quo. Instead of mining oil or boiling vats of chemicals, Colorifix uses engineered microorganisms, (essentially programmable microbes) to grow colours in the lab. Fed with sugar and salt to create a specific pigment, these microbes act like miniature factories, brewing vibrant dyes that are transferred directly onto fabric using a fraction of the water and none of the toxic additives. Fed with sugar and salt to create a specific pigment, the microbes act like miniature factories, brewing vibrant dyes. The idea first emerged from a very different kind of lab, out in nature. In 2012, two University of Cambridge researchers were studying polluted drinking water in rural Nepal. They used bacteria to detect contaminants in water, which had been engineered to change colour in the presence of specific chemicals - a simple, visual indicator for unsafe water. But as they spoke with local communities about the root causes, the answer kept circling back to the same culprit: textile dye. So instead of building tools to detect pollution, they pivoted to tackling the source of it directly, by using DNA sequencing found in our natural world. Say, the genetic code for blue in a butterfly wing, or the pink of a flower petal. By using DNA sequencing, they can copy the genetic code for a blue butterfly wing. 'Synthetic dyes are very well studied and substantiated in the textiles industry - but we're doing our own analysis from scratch,' explains co-founder Jim Ajioka. 'Growing the microorganism is a natural process, but we have modified it, to make the colours of other living organisms.' 'We get inspiration from nature - rather than extracting from nature,' says the other co-founder Orr Yarkoni. Their approach is so radical that it has been recognised royally in the UK. Colorifix became a finalist for the Earthshot Prize in 2023, a yearly contest led by Prince William to find the world's most promising environmental solutions. The Prize is often said to have been inspired by JFK's 'Moonshot' and was designed to incentivise tipping-point innovations. It has five categories, nature protection, clean air, oceans, climate and the one Colorifix competed in, waste-free solutions. Finalists receive mentorship and access to a network of global businesses, investors, and environmental organisations ready to help scale their ideas. The Prince visited the lab this week to praise founders Yarkoni and Ajioka on their science-led approach. 'It's really exciting and I know you're going to push into the industry very quickly,' he told the team. 'It's really exciting and I know you're going to push into the industry very quickly.' The microbial dye solution is already moving beyond the lab. In the last few years, it has received significant funding from highstreet brand H&M (here's a t-shirt dyed by Colorifix). H&M's innovation arm has invested in pilot dyeing projects in Portugal, where the startup's biologically grown pigments were used on items produced for both H&M and Pangaia. This marked one of the first real-world commercial applications of the technology. Today, Colorifix has just closed a $18 million Series B2 round, led by Inter IKEA Group, to fuel global commercial expansion. 'This investment marks a critical milestone as we shift from proving our technology to delivering it at industrial scale,' Yarkoni tells me. Colorifix has just closed a $18 million investment from IKEA to fuel global commercial expansion. Linn Clabburn from IKEA's innovation arm agrees. 'Colorifix is addressing one of the toughest sustainability challenges in textiles,' she says. Their progress in scaling this tech and entering new markets 'aligns well' with IKEA's ambitions to improve sustainability in the value chain, she adds. It's a vote of confidence not just in the science, but in the market's readiness for a pioneering solution. Unlike other sustainable alternatives that require entire factories to be revamped, Colorifix's process is essentially plug-and-play and compatible with existing industrial dyeing equipment. That means factories don't need to overhaul infrastructure to adopt it, which removes one of the biggest barriers to sustainable innovation: cost and complexity. The potential ripple effect is huge. If Colorifix can roll out its microbial dyeing process across fashion and homeware with some of the biggest household names, it could help detoxify one of the most water and chemical-intensive elements of garment production. Transforming a $2 trillion-dollar supply chain does not come without its challenges. Colorifix's technology may be simple to implement, but scaling it globally means convincing the big names this is the right idea for them, never mind navigating strict regulatory frameworks. Textile manufacturers, often operating on razor-thin margins, can be slow to adopt new methods - especially in regions where environmental protocols are lax and synthetic dyes remain cheap and abundant. Yet, momentum is building. Colorifix is already working with mills in Portugal, India and Brazil, with plans to expand into Southeast Asia, one of the largest dyeing hubs in the world. 'We are sure to make a difference.' And the prospects don't stop at fabric. The founders say their microbial process could one day be adapted for other industries like cosmetics and hair dye. When Prince William comes to visit a project like this, he isn't just there to tick a box. The Earthshot Prize was clearly designed to elevate this kind of bold, science-based solution with the power to transform entire systems. In fashion, that means anywhere we use colour, microbes could one day replace petrochemicals. 'Over the last few years, we have gone from grammes to tonnes of fabric per week,' says Yarkoni. 'We are sure to make a difference.'
