In an article published in Science, they say that "the denial of animal emotion, and by extension animal feelings has been morally convenient throughout history of human exploitation" and write about Frans B.M. de Waal, a primatologist, and Kristin Andrews, a philosopher. They point out that there are increasing numbers of species, including invertebrates like lobsters, crabs, and octopuses, whose ability is to feel emotions is being demonstrated.
"Emotion is a private experience. The way that emotion manifests itself is what it is called. We are not allowed to talk with certainty about animal emotions, but only about how they manifest in the form emotion. Juan Ignacio Perez Iglesias is a professor of Animal Physiology from the University of the Basque Country. "Darwin already knew that many animals experience emotions in a similar manner to us," he says. There are now clues that feelings, which were previously limited to pets and primates, may be more widespread than we thought.
Basque biologist says that an animal's hormone levels rise when they are subject to damage. This is a "very powerful" clue. This would suggest that they might experience similar feelings to us, but with the caveat that we will never be in the head a lobster's head. Another sign is the fact that lobsters run away when they are attacked in any way. It is an evasive response, which you must believe is produced because the animal is suffering damage.
Professor at the UNED and philosopher of the animal mind
"Octopuses, cuttlefish and other fish have important cognitive abilities. Perez Iglesias says that Octopuses have many neurons and complex behavior. They have abilities that we couldn't have imagined. Monso also agrees that they have passed some extremely difficult tests. Monso recently added the octopus to the list of animals that are subject to special protection during scientific experimentation. It is an intelligent and super smart animal. It is so intelligent that if you place food in a sealed jar, it will learn to open it to get it," says Susi Marcos. She is a biologist and advisor on research ethics at the UPV/EHU.
What can we do based on this reality?
"It doesn't follow that you should stop eating or using animals. But you must treat them with the least amount of cruelty. Perez Iglesias says that if you're going to kill one animal to eat it, make sure it doesn't find out. You can achieve this by placing them in carbon monoxide environments that cause them to "die without being conscious of it, without feeling the slightest pain", then processing. The victim doesn't suffer from carbon monoxide inhalation. In the case lobster and lobster -adds director of the UPV/EHU Chair of Scientific Culture - there's no reason to put them in water to boil. It is better to freeze them earlier. They won't suffer, they won’t discover. If you believe animals shouldn't suffer unnecessarily, the possibility of organoleptic changes is less of an issue.
INIGO DE MIGUEL BERIAiN
Expert in Bioethics and research
Inigo de Miguel Birian, an Ikerbasque researcher at the UPV/EHU Chair in Law and the Human Genome and a bioethicist, believes that there is no reason to cause unintentional harm to a living creature. We must do all we can to reduce their suffering and avoid them from suffering when talking about animals. Although they are not humans, they shouldn't be treated like they were. Perez Iglesias believes that the future will see the slaughter of farm animals using methods that prevent suffering. This is in addition to improving the living conditions on livestock farms. De Miguel Beriain believes biotechnology will soon be able to help us with the production of meat from stem cells in the lab. This will eliminate the need to raise animals to slaughter.
Mega-farms are a major cause of climate change and a poor way to produce food. Monso says that animals must be fed with large amounts of vegetable protein and liters and even liters of water. This could then be used to feed people. Monso believes that everything points in the same direction. He recommends changing our diet to reduce meat consumption. This could have devastating effects on the environment as well as other animals. According to the philosopher, "what's going to get us moving isn't going to be animal suffering but climate change." Limiting livestock, along with the private vehicle, is, according to her, "one the fundamental ways that greenhouse gas emissions can be reduced."