Fish are Friends, But are Also Food

From the "Hooked On a Myth" article by Victoria Braithwaite, I found myself in a dillema between my support for animal rights, opposing my undying love for seafood.  When we think of a fish, we usually imagine a senile aquatic creature flowing in whatever direction the water takes it, but because of this article, I now understand that they aren't as undeveloped as I thought.  With all the facts given by Victoria in "Hooked On a Myth", I now understand that fish also can feel pain like we humans do.  This article made me think of all the fish that I've eaten, what atrocious pain was caused to them in order for me to enjoy the spoils of genetic superiority?  There was even one dish I ate where the fish was gutted, descaled, and cleaned while it was still alive and put into boiling noodle soup.  I didn't think of anything while I ate it as it still twitched in the bowl, because all I thought was that "It's just a dumb fish, it can't feel anything.". Knowing that the fish could feel every nerve in its body squirm in pain as I deliberately tortured it for my appetite sends shivers doen my spine, that due to my hunger, a living being went through what I can dscribe as "hell on Earth", truly it makes me lose my appetite. I'm not saying that we should stop eating fish altogether, they're a crucial part of many Americans' diets, what I'm trying to suggest however, is to show the beings a little mercy.  End their pain swiftly, don't prolong their suffering for efficiency or taste, use painless methods in order to prepare their bodies as food, and show them at least some kindness as their executors.

We do share this world with them after all

In A Change of Heart about Animals, Jeremy Rifkin explains that animals aren't that different at all from humans emotionally. Study shows that they feel pain suffering, stress, affection, excitement and even love. Rifkin tells us about a study at Purdue University that shows pigs craving for affection and easily getting depressed if isolated or denied playtime. This proves to show their side of showing stress and boredom.  Rifkin then turns our heads to another study at Oxford University about two birds named Betty and Abel. In this experiment the two birds are given two wires, one straight and one bent. The goal was to use the bent wire to obtain food inside a tube.  Abel being the dominant male took the bent wire and obtained the food while Betty was stuck with the straight wire. Nine out of the ten times she bent the wire to obtain the food. This study shows to be personally very valuable and interesting since it proves that animals can use logic skills to survive.  Similar to logic, a gorilla in northern California named Koko shows high intelligence by mastering 1000 sign language symbols and understanding several thousand English words. Not only that but she reached the human IQ of 70-95. This is technically a below average score for us but then again we’re humans and she’s a gorilla. For an animal to be able to understand so much as that is very impressive, as well as showing that we can engage in some communication. Rifkin introduces us to the subject of whether animals feel self-awareness or not.  Some philosophers and animal behaviorists argue that animals aren't capable of such things because they lack individualism. However, at the Washington zoo orangutans are given mirrors and they explore the parts of their bodies they can’t see themselves. One orangutan named Chantek from Atlanta Zoo uses his mirror to groom his teeth and adjust his sunglasses. If you ask me this is perfect proof of self-awareness and individualism. Only those who are would bother to explore the parts of ourselves we cannot see and customize our appearance with accessories. Rifkin then turns the tables to the subject of grief. Some people believe that animals don’t know the concept of death. However, Elephants would stand next to their dead kin for days showing signs of grief. He may not show actual scientific proof that they do show grief but the sighs don’t lie. Lastly, he gets into the recent study of learning that not everything animals do is instinct like we so believed, but some things must be taught to them. One example would be geese showing their goslings their migration routes.  Lessons such as these are passed on from parent to offspring.  As I finish up the article I can come up with the personal conclusion that we should add more animal rights. It’s proven scientifically that animals feel the same emotions as we do so why must they suffer for our curiosity and cruelty? I know that this world would never be perfect and there will always be pray and predator but it won’t kill us to show our fellow creatures respect. We do share this world with them after all. 

The World Without Us

I came across this across this article from Discover Magazine, dated 2005 called, "Earth Without People" by Alan Weisman, that questioned how the planet we would live in would thrive without us. At one point, he mentions the events of mass extinction, polluted oceans, and global warming, and wonders what the planet would be like without humans.

Our world is populated by a whopping 7 billion and is growing as the years go by. It's a fact; the society and environment we live in now is nowhere near similar to how it was a hundred years ago. We've evolved into an age of technology; our gadgets and gizmos are unlike any other. The advances we've made it the medical field and in the lives of consumers is something to be proud of. But along the way, we've forgotten to cherish the ground we live on.

An article in the National Geographic entitled, "Farming the Amazon" states that during the past 40 years, about 20 percent of the Amazon rain forest has been cut down; 20 percent of homes to the wildlife there have been cut down. We're a society that takes advantage of the water we have at use--taking showers that could last up to an hour and participating in water schemes such as the ice bucket challenge. It's not news that the polar ice caps are melting either; there are images from NASA satellites that the area of permanent ice over is contracting at a rate of 9 percent each decade. Would all of this happen if humans weren't around anymore?

This isn't to put down the entire human race. I believe that we're an impressive species; we truly are the most complex. But think about it. We thrive off of bettering ourselves by bettering the world by bettering the technology that we are accustomed to. The behaviors that animals exhibit are innate; they are born, they reproduce, they die, and so on. The idea of survival of the fittest is so that the most adaptable traits that can survive the worst are passed down generations to keep them from being extinct.

Think about it. We also use animals in experimentation in order to better our products such as medicine or makeup. Animals are our main source of energy. Without plants, the whole process of carbon dioxide and oxygen exchange would not be successful. We need wildlife to exist, but as our age goes on, we're only tearing them down. We need plants and animals to thrive as a species, but do they need us?

Hooked on a Myth

Hooked on a Myth by author Victoria Braithwaite argues that we shouldn't be so quick to believe fish do not feel any pain or emotion. Many believe its okay to treat them unfairly then other animals because of their appearance you may say and view them as "dumb, unfeeling non-human animals." Before reading Victoria's article, my view on fish would  be similar to what society believes because its not common for someone to say "Save the fish" but its common to hear "save the animals in shelters" or "Save the whales" etc. Honestly, nobody really has any sympathy towards fish. Fisherman are able to swoop up as many fish as they can from the ocean or lakes and cook them for dinner or sell them without any hesitation or sympathy for the fish.  Most people fish out on lakes for fun or as a hobby. Not that there is anything wrong with it, but it just shows the true affect fishes have on society. Victoria Braithwaites purpose is to not have people change the way they treat fish of course because that would be nearly impossible, but to have a different perspective amongst them. She experiments on fish to prove that they do feel the same pain as we do by discovering that they have similar nociceptors as humans. Nociceptors are nerves that alerts us to detect pain and they have the two types of nociceptors which are A-Delta and C-Fibers. Her experiment was well proven and supports her argument well, from this response I can say myself that fish are treated a bit unfairly and not many care to acknowledge it. The next question Victoria has is because they feel pain, do they feel emotion or the same consciousness as humans? She is unsure about this also, but does find that they are quite clever for the capability to learn geometrical relationships and landmarks. They are able to use these and generate a mental map to plan their escape routes if a predator arrives. This was interesting to me because you would never think fish may have the same characteristics and capabilities as humans do. I'm sure they don't have exactly all emotion we have but to know that they do feel pain and are actually clever minded makes me change their perspective towards them and i feel bad that they might know what situation they are about to be put in when they are taken especially because so many of them are easily killed, but also i have another side of myself that doesn't feel all that bad because of how many we have in the oceans, seas, lakes, etc. that its almost impossible for them to go extinct anyway.

Testing on animals vs Humans? SHOULDN'T EVEN BE A QUESTION!

About a month ago in my government class we had discussion over if its ethical to test on animals. Basically my teacher, the lovely Ms. Pinkwasser, separated the class into two sections. Test on Humans or test on Animals. I believe that it shouldn't even be a discussion. With all due respect to animals and people who believe that we should do tests and experiments on humans over animals, you really do need to reevaluate yourself. Now some people may get on my case and bad side over this but please have hardcore evidence as to why we shouldn't test on animals over humans. Some people might say "oh wow Luis you're an animal hater" but no, you just have to think more logically. If the tests are safe then sure why not, but if there are chances of bodily harm, there shouldn't be a debate about it.  Ask yourself, what do lab rats provide for us besides testing.... Ill wait. Like my great friend Jeremy said, "Even if scientists were to test on prisoners, it would more than likely be considered a direct violation from the Eighth Amendment". So even if people try to get a movement going to push out animal testing, goodluck. I know I sound harsh and i apologize but come on people, lets be smart here. (apologies for the late blog post)

Juggling

The first semester is coming to an end and my grades are not the best. Personally I've had trouble this year trying to juggle everything. Between work, school, and maintaing a social life keeping my grades up has been difficult. I know a lot of seniors have jobs so I doubt I'm the only one facing this problem. I come home from work and the last thing I want to do is write an essay or do any kind of homework. I of course do it but sometimes I decide not to. I know it's gonna hurt me in the future but at that moment I'm unable to. I knew I had to change things and make school my number one priority. So I lowered my availability and began to make time for school work no matter what. I became more organized and realized what my priorities needed to be. It's still hard sometimes and even though I don't regret beginning to work I do wish that maybe I would have waited until senior year was over so I could focus on my school work more. Because once you start working you don't stop. 

Animals

  A Change of Heart about Animals seemed pretty self explanatory to me because of the fact that I have a pet and I know for a fact that my dog has emotions.  In the article, it says that scientists are finding that animals are more like us than we imagined, but even without a dog, I still knew that.  The article also explains how they can feel pain, suffer, and experience stress, affection, excitement, and also love.  I don't know if it's just me, but I think that it was pretty much common sense that they have emotions and can feel.  If a dog were to get their foot ran over, they will cry really hard because of the pain.  Dogs also will always love their main owner if that person has taken care of them since close to birth.  I know that this is supposed to be about every animal, but I feel like if a dog is capable of these feelings, then any other animal should be as well.  Excluding all of the very little animals, of course.  I heard this one story about a gorilla that learned sign language that was obviously very intelligent and she would watch a movie over and over again and after a while, the gorilla would know all of the sad parts and say in sign language "I don't like this part." and then would cry after.  Also, this gorilla had a pet cat and when they told the gorilla that his pet cat died, she was very upset and became depressed for a few weeks and just didn't want to talk to anymore because of how sad she was.  And even house pets can be an example on how they can feel sadness because when they don't get attention, they usually cry a lot.  I just feel like since most animals are capable of feeling the same kinds of emotions as humans, why shouldn't they have rights?

I often wonder do animals think like humans. Do the have the capacity to understand humor or to sense if another is in pain. Do they have stages if mourning or do they even acknowledge death. If the answers to these is no i want to know why? Why are we the only creatures with these traits? Why must we be in a real of emotions snd complex thought processes alone wjen there are so many species that scientists deem "advanced". I just wonder...

I thought we were all equal ...

Now I know this Blog post has absolutely nothing to do with anything we've been discussing in class but I'm tired of reading the same posts about fish and their feelings. Meanwhile there is so much going on around the world. I'm sure if most of you don't watch the news, your parents do or you seen something about it on social media. But if you haven't then this past week another Caucasian police officer was indicted not guilty for killing another African American male named Michael brown. I felt that I should blog about this because everyone deserves to know and feel free to share your opinion below in the comments (unless ignorant) about this subject. Now I'm not taking sides because the male that was murdered was black, but because police officers are supposed to be protecting us, not killing us over misdemeanor crimes. The Officer that shot Brown was Darren Wilson and he has been a police officer for several years, which should mean that he is highly trained and knows what to do in certain situations. So why would your first instinct be to put 2 bullets into someone. And then once that victim is walking away with his hands in the air you fire 4 more bullets into him. Now to my understanding police aren't supposed to fire their gun unless completely necessary. They have multiple items that can be used to detain the suspect if the matter were to get out of hand, such as mace or a club, so why would your first thought be to shoot a person with a gun? Now I understand if it was completely necessary as if you panicked or felt as if you didn't have time to reach and grab your equipment, but in that case it should only be 1 shot  and then you make the arrest. But in Wilson's case he apparently was trigger happy because it wouldn't make sense to fire so many shots when the victim was clearly walking away.

In my opinion Officers should not let there emotions get the best of them. And that's what Wilson did he responded in ways that were not in any type of way necessary.

Another example would be the Trayvon martin case where a man who wasn't even a police officer killed a young boy because he was walking around with his hood on and some snacks in a bag. According to him Trayvon looked dangerous and he then proceeded to call the police who told him to leave the situation alone and he took matters into his own hands and killed the boy. It just goes to show that African Americans aren't as valued in America as other ethnicities. It also crazy to me how a jury was set in front of both of these men, both murderers, and they were convicted not guilty. The fact that 2 murderers are out there living there life is honestly chilling.

not happy

At the moment, i am not too thrilled with the blog and blogging in general. I tried to post two comments already and after i tried submitting the first comment, the page reloaded with my long and genuine paragraph no longer there. I thought it was computer acting up, so i moved to the next blog post to try to comment. I diligently worked on a response to my fellow classmate, and after i completed the post, i went to submit it and it shot me to another page making me put in my email and password to submit the post, even though my name already appears in the top right corner. When i clicked enter, it sent me back to the blog page, with my comment NOWHERE TO BE FOUND. So, at the moment i am not too thrilled with this, just crossing my fingers hoping this post doesn't get mystically vanished. Before today, i enjoyed the blogging process, being able to express my feelings to everybody and being able to express my opinions on other people's thoughts. I am eager to hear feedback on what my fellow classmates think about the blogging process. Are you accurately expressing your feelings and responses in your posts? Do you feel like it could be useful to require more blogs and posts?

What does it mean to feel pain?

What does it mean to feel pain exactly? Do humans and animals feel pain in the same way? Pain to me is an unpleasant feeling that is uncomfortable. In the article Hooked On a Myth by Braithwaite she acknowledges that maybe fish do feel pain. When humans feel pain specialized nerve endings called nociceptors alert us to the damage. Fish have the same two types of nociceptors that we do. Animals are more like us than we think. From the article studies show that scientist stimulated the nociceptors by injecting bee venom or vinegar under the skin of the trout. This makes the fish go wild and its gills beat faster. Although they feel some type of pain they heal better than we do. Pain can be emotional or physical.

I just think we should respect animals more because whether we acknowledge it or not animals are more like us than we think. How do we not want scientist to test on humans but volunteer poor animals to be tested on. They have feelings. They cry, suffer, experience stress, affection, excitement, and even love. Just like  our parents can teach us what they know, animals can teach us too. In Rifkins article, "A Change of Heart about Animals" a gorilla named Koko was taught sign language. How amazing is that? Scientist and researchers should really think twice before they do these things especially on stupid things. Unless it's finding a cure for cancer or diseases then animals should not be tested on. Certain animals are more like us, so this will help in finding cures. Even then who am I to say that's the right thing to do?

Still split down the middle.

I am now realizing why I feel conflicted on this subject and why I cannot give one straight answer, which is kind of frustrating me. The articles that I have been reading are very persuasive and use pathos to try to convince me why I should stop the consumption of meat. I just finished reading and writing my rhetorical précis on an op-ed article titled Animal, Vegetable, Miserable by Gary Steiner. The author, who is a vegan, did work his magic and made me feel bad for the poor animals and the way they are being treated. He doesn't understand why people buy items from the "free range" section of the supermarket because they still were killed in order to get to the market. I do feel bad that animals who feel pain still have to go through the horrible suffering in order to become a meal. But at the same time he points out how everything and I mean everything has animal product in it. For example, he notifies us that there is animal fat in razors and the adhesive on Band-Aids is also animal product. Gary Steiner tries to take out all of this stuff in his life, or do the best possible. Which I find kind of ridiculous. But he is right, people are starting to have an interest in the way that animals that they eat are treated, yet still eat the meat anyway. I am frustrated because I am split in half on this subject. I do believe animals should still be consumed because of all of its nutrients and well because of its pure goodness. But I don’t believe animals should be used for cosmetic purposes and things of that sort, I as well don’t think animals should be locked in a cage for our enjoyment. I still don’t have a straight answer on if I think we should change the way we treat animals. I have two totally different perspectives, it all just depends on what the animal is being used for; our wants or our needs.

Fish? Pain?

Upon reading Braithwaite's article about fish I became puzzled toward the fact that people genuinely did not know that fish do not feel pain. I honestly became quite confused at the fact that some people do not consider fish to be emotion-filled animals. When fishes are stressed, they begin to develop white spots or a bacterial infection on their body. Even simpler, at a young age you are told not to tap on a fish tank simply because fish become disoriented and confused as to why there is this loud thumping noise on their home. How can we distinguish the feelings and emotions of another creature if we, as humans, cannot come up with a just explanation for actions of other creatures?

The Bridge Between the Two

The topic of animal testing and pain has always been an intriguing topic for me. It's always been a heated subject to talk about because I believe that animals have rights and deserve to be treated with the upmost respect. Now, I'm not saying that they should be put on a pedestal and given crowns. I'm referring to puppy mills or dog fighting.  In Rifkin's editorial, he argues that, "Animals have the ability to feel pain, suffer, and experience stress, affection, excitement, and even love." much like human capabilities. Dogs used in dog fighting are used for human's own selfish tendencies and the result of fighting often leaves a negative reaction on the dog in action or the dog being used as a pin, or practice dog. These dogs tend to become aggressive and depressed as they age into adulthood because they've been bred to become aggressive creatures. He then beings to appeal to our emotions by using pathos to make readers feel empathetic for the animals he writes about. He writes about pigs and how they need affection or they become depressed. Overall, Rikin focuses on appealing to readers who believe in animal rights and animal activists who only wish to see the best for the mental, emotional, and behavioral state of these animals.

I'm Not a Vegetarian

According to dictionary.com, a vegetarian is a person who does not eat or does not believe in eating meat, fish, or fowl; a vegan is a vegetarian who omits all animal products from the diet.

Found in Jeremy Rifkin's editorial, "A Change of Heart about Animals," his belief is that there are few differences between animals and humans. He appeals to our emotions with the use of pathos by letting our empathy get the best of us. We feel sorry for the pigs that become easily depressed. We are excited over the fact that animals--Koko the gorilla--have the ability to communicate through sign language, something that the humans have mastered long before. What grabbed my attention from these articles were not the articles themselves, but the letters to the editor in response. Lois Frazier took a bombastic approach by stating that we should do more than ban animal experimentation; we should ban fur and leather clothing and commit to a vegan or vegetarian lifestyle.

This isn't to say that I am making a mockery out of Frazier and praising the way we treat animals. It is a fact: meat has been a part of our diet for generations, and we shouldn't have to change this type of lifestyle in order to meet the needs of animal-lovers everywhere. I've had my fair share of exposure to documentaries that show how animals are treated at the slaughterhouse, and let me tell you, it's not that pretty. It's a dirty thing to know that chemicals are injected into these animals in order to keep up the consumption rate. Pens filled with chickens could overflow to the point that they'll be walking around in their own waste, but this isn't to say that I will change my lifestyle because I don't like what happens behind the scenes. Meat tastes good; meat provides you with proteins; meat is good for you. But I remain empathetic and believe that certain guidelines and regulations should be kept to a safer and cleaner way to go about mass production.

Not Much of a Change in my Heart about Animals ...

In "a Change of Heart about Animals," Jeremy Rifkin discusses the scientific evidence for animals being equivalent to us and that we should treaty them as equals but I totally disagree. Animals have been treated as they are for a long period of time and they continue to be perfectly fine. Why should I have to restrict myself from eating meats and wearing the expensive fur or leather coat I want to wear? Before, animal hide was peoples only way people were able to acquire clothing. Besides like Bob Stevens said, "In nature animals naturally kill and eat each other" so why should we be the exception ? Although, I do still want to eat my meats and wear my coats and other such things, I still agree that animals should be respected but as they have been. Going as far as to give them rights and let them reign free is completely ridiculous but keeping them well treated as they have been is perfectly fine in my perspective.

Do fish feel pain?

In Hooked on a Myth, Victoria Braithwaite claims that fish do feel pain or at least have a conscious to notice they are in pain. She talks about whether we should treat fish as conscious animals that feel pain and suffering.  She says if we should change our views on fish whether we see them as simple animals that don’t feel pain or show thought ,or we should see them as more than a simple fish and treat them better. She claims that fish have pain receptors located in their lips in order to show that fish have the capability to feel pain. Fish do react to pain, but I believe that they don’t feel that pain because their brains aren’t developed enough for them actually feel or suffer from it. Fish do feel pain; however, unlike other animals like cats, dogs, birds, etc., they don’t have that sense of consciousness or self-awareness to suffer and think to themselves that they are indeed in pain. Also I believe that the benefits that come from fishing like fishing for sport or to sell on the market to make profit outweigh the cost of whether the fish is likely to suffer or not.

If it has a purpose

I find this to be a very controversial topic. The idea of finding a cure for cancer and other diseases is great. And obviously most people wouldn't want to be tested on, whether it's for medical purposes or something else, unless of course they volunteer (which some do). Animals do not have that luxury because they are animals. You need the human's consent in order to test on them, except for third world countries where the most human testing takes place. But you do not need an animal's consent, and researchers take advantage of that. The recent articles we read in class argue that there are few animal groups that have cognitive abilities, and some (like Koko) can be taught sign language. Another article claims that fish have the same sensory wiring to detect pain. What they don't know is if the animals themselves can understand what they are doing. They would need to do a more deeper analysis, and run more extensive tests. When it comes to finding cures for people, the obvious choice is to test on animals. If it means that this specific medication might be able to significantly help with Parkinson's disease or any other, then go for it and test away. Where I cross the line is the point when pharmaceutical companies test meaningless drugs, or want to produce another type of painkiller only too make more money. That is a waste of time.

Should animals be cared for more?

There are many different opinions on the topic of should animals be treated more carefully and if testing on animals is right. My opinion is that animals are animals and they still can feel pain and have feelings. There's a certain extent to treat animals and they should be treated careful but also should not be treated as a regular human being. When it comes to testing on animals some people should be consciously aware that most animals still feel pain and have feelings and should not test products that can be really harmful to an animal. But I also understand that some things are necessary and have to be tested on animals first. Animals are very important some of us eat them and some of us have them as pets however there are some humans that are homeless and don't have nothing to eat so would you rather help one of us humans or help an animal. In Jeremy Rifkin's article he states that "they feel pain, suffer and experience stress, affection, excitement and even love - and these findings are changing how we view animals." These findings are changing how we view animals and many of us should be aware to treat animals fairly and have them a home in their nature. Destroying our nature is destroying homes for animals and would lead them to be depressed and suffer. Animals are part of this world and should be cared for more. There are many people that care for these animals and help them when they're hurt but there are also people that don't really care and have no motivation to help them. I'm not saying everyone should just care for these animals and be vegetarians and things like that but they should just be cared for more and people should be more considerate with them because most of them have the same brain anatomy like us and chemistry. In conclusion, animals are part of this world and treating them with more care and sympathy will lead to a better future in our world.

Fish Have Feelings Too?

Why do humans assume that fish are incapable of feelings and emotions because they do not look like them or communicate the way that they do? This question is approached by Victoria Braithewaite in "Hooked On A Myth". Braithewaite feels as though fish being able to actually "feel" pain determines whether or not they have the the capacity to feel emotion and suffering. This would make it much easier on activists who are fighting for fish rights. Because Braithewaite is a biologist, she was able to conduct a few experiments to test out her hypothesis of fish being able to feel. During the first experiment, Braithewaite and her colleague took vinegar and a little bit of bee venom and put it under the skin of a trout. Soon after, the trout began to act differently by beating their gills faster and rubbing the affected area on the walls of the tank. This little bit of information proved that fishes are indeed affected by pain. Now all Braithewaite had to do was show that they are emotionally affected by it as well. Honestly, I do not really agree with this article because I feel as though it does not make any sense, and it is almost a contradictory situation. Braithewaite believes that fishing by using hooks is a cruel and unusual punishment because it may hurt the fish, yet she is willing to conduct experiments that causes pain to other fish for her own benefits? Doesn't this sound a little bit hypocritical? At least the reason that fish are hurt because of humans is for food. She chose to cause pain to fish in order to prove a point. My point for stating this is to say that we all have our reasons of causing pain to fish, and the majority of the time it's only to survive. No I don't believe in hurting animals just because, but sometimes you have no choice, and Braithewaite has no right to judge fishermen for their doings because even she was willing to cause pain to fish for her benefit.

Why we need animal testing

Animal testing is needed in my opinion. There are a ton of beneficial commodities that we test on animals that society would simply refuse to let us test on humans for a variety of reasons. Medicines, for example, that treat separate illnesses are tested on animals first because its much easier for humans to morally accept that a lab rat died from unexpected side affects of a new drug rather than a human dying from the same reason. Even if scientists were to test on prisoners, it would more than likely be considered a direct violation from the Eighth Amendment, which protects against cruel and unusual punishment. Also, humans are able to interpret isolation, pain, and "what's happening to them" far better than animals are, meaning that humans are capable of thinking much more in depth about their situation than an animal would, and have much more of a torturous experience than an animal would. Lastly, modern society is much more capable of accepting that a lab rat died of an unexpected side effect of a drug they were testing on it rather than a human death for the same reason. This wouldn't even be an option even if we only tested on those put on death row due to the fact that the number of prisoners being sentenced to death is much smaller than the millions of different drugs out there that need to be tested out; moreover, it may even be considered by some (or most) as torturous. All in all, I ask  you to  ask yourself this: Would you rather have a drug be tested out on yourself or on a lab rat?

(Ethos, pathos, logos)

Animals.

In a recent article that I've read by Victoria Braithwaite she discusses that fish feel pain. Fish have pain receptors all along their mouth so we know for a fact that they experience pain, but the real question is do they consciously suffer? As a biologist, Braithwaite uses much of her scientific knowledge to explain her beliefs. She says that fish have very similar brains to humans, specifically the function of two of their forebrain area. She claims that they have the mammalian amygdala and hippocampus which are areas that associate with emotion,learning, and memory. She then suggests that if fish have these brain parts then what's to stop them from suffering when they are caught? If fish have pain receptors, I feel that they do suffer from the scientific evidence provided within the article. Another argument shown is that if fish do suffer, then should we continue fishing them for sport or strictly for food? There are laws on bird hunting within the United States so what is it that makes them different from fish having laws protecting their lives? This also leads back to the article by Jeremy Rifkin where he discusses that pigs are proven to be depressed animals when they are separated from each other. He says that if pigs were played with for just a minute a day then they would be at ease. Although millions eat pork on a daily basis, if these creatures experience a strong human emotion such as depression should we continue isolating them in pens or continue to harvest them on a daily basis? This argument also interferes with Ed Yong when he states that chimpanzees are practically human beings since both species have intriguing amount of similarities when it comes to brain activity. In other countries such as United Kingdom and New Zealand, they are taking steps and have even made a few laws on protecting the primates from experimentation. Does that mean that the United States should follow in their footsteps and halt research and experimentation on primates as well? Even if we did, I think we would still be at a dilemma because we use chimpanzees to help test our medication on and even do research as to curing human diseases such as AIDS or cancer on them. Although we are at the top of the food chain, I believe that we should stop being so cruel to our animals because they have rights just as we do.

Fish

Do fish, like humans, experience pain and suffering? People hold very differing beliefs about this question. Some would believe that if fish react to stimuli that would cause a person to feel pain that the fish must also be feeling pain. Others assume that fish are too different from humans for the matter to be of concern. Many people don’t know what to think about the issue. In Hooked on a Myth  Do Fish Feel Pain? biologist Victoria Braithwaite says that “there is as much evidence that fish feel pain and suffer as there is for birds and mammals.” Fish don’t necessarily scream when they’re hooked or when the hooks are ripped from their mouths, but their behavior shows evidence of their suffering, if we are willing to look and pay attention to their actions. They might even give us clues in how they suffer.  Neurobiologists have long recognized that fish have nervous systems that comprehend and respond to pain. Braithwaite's main argument  is why fish are treated differently than other animals because they may feel pain like any other animal. just because fish can't react to pain it does not mean it can't fee it. There's a possibility that fish go through much pain when it is hurt. When a fish is caught and released , it suffers, fish suffer for pleasure of fishers. If I were to fish, I think I would much rather eat the fish than throwing it back because the pain and suffering is already caused the second it is hooked and if you throw it back, the poor fish is traumatized.  Although fish don't react when they suffer like other animals do it doesn't necessarily mean they don't  feel pain or in other words suffer. They may not clinch or make noise the way dogs do when they are accidently stepped on or cry and respond in  a particular way, so we sometimes feel free to treat them in a way that we wouldn't treat any other animal. I believe fish are conscious and should be treated equally to any other animal and I agree with Braithwaite, we should have fish in consideration because after all they are smart and their brain functions very similar to ours.  

Vegan

To be honest, I agree with the recent articles that we have been reading in class, especially because I'm a vegan. I think that animals have the right to not have to be tested on and get to live their lives. For example, animals shouldn't have to be tested on just to make sure that makeup isn't harmful. There's so many makeup brands that don't test on animals that you can get your makeup from, so what's the point of testing on animals? People have asked me if it's hard to be a vegan, but it's really not! You have to make sure you're still getting enough protein and vitamins which you can easily achieve by eating nuts, tofu, "chicken", hummus, beans, soy, etc. and taking vitamins daily. Being vegan has actually given me a large amount of energy. I've also gotten rid of my "addiction" to coffee. I used to drink coffee daily, but now I only have it when I didn't get much sleep the night before and when I really need it, not to just have it for fun. I used to get headaches if I didn't have coffee and now that's gone away (thankfully). Now this post isn't to convince you to become vegan, it's just my thoughts and what's going on in my brain.  

Animals

 In America meat is the definition of overweight, unhealthy, disease inflected citizens we are known today. That being said because of our supply and demand for a large amount of food we treat our animals with neglect. Not only with food but with animal testing for products. I have put some thought into the way we treat our animals, Jeremy Rifkin's article, A Change of Heart about Animals, let's people know what true capacity animals can prove. Koko, a female Gorilla that showed love, compassion, knowledge, and most importantly relationships that made her feel happiness and sadness made me act upon really giving the time to write this post. I dug deeper into Rifkin's stand in this motion of taking action to be more aware and protective with the animals we have now on this earth. Some of the studies show that elephants, gorillas, monkeys, even dogs can feel emotions. In more depth they understand their role and individuality from the time they are born. they grow up similar to the same way humans do. gorillas are now known to identify themselves, speak sign language and communicate to humans, learn basic math and create bonds. Bonds that are very alike in our human world with families.  Rifkin demonstrated and explained the positivity to have animal rights in America. Speaking from the heart animals mean much more to me than any human. I have loved animals all my life. I couldn't agree more to have animal rights not only here in America ,but other countries. One important reason I had the need to help animals is because, once in Mexico , a boy younger than me ( maybe 7) had the nerve to fling a baby piglet by its back hind leg into the wall. I stood up for the pig , I picked it up into my arms and had it calm down. Remembering the squeal was painful to hear. I told that boy if he ever did that again I would sock him. Since I was little I knew animals had feelings that we humans have. when I was their holding that piglets its mother was pounding against rails she was in, basically going nuts only to see what happened to her little one. The same story Jeremy Rifkin experienced with Koko, Koko had a cute, small, grey kitty. The bond she made with that kitten was as if Koko was kitty's adaptive mother. when kitty died Koko's brain activity showed great relativity as one humans would when a loved one dies. This gives enough prof of having animal rights a responsibility  us humans need to enforce. Animals have been here long before we arrived , they know about life and it's battles with nature. Another good recent fact about Koko is the sadness she felt when she found out Robin William's had passed. she signed her emotions about Mr.Williams. Saying he was funny among other things like his movies. My feelings about Jeremy Rifkin's article truly high lights the point people really need to see to fully understand what animals are feeling.

The Empathic Civilization

"Hooked on a myth"

In Hooked on a myth, Victoria Braithwaite introduce the problem which is based on how we treat fish. She tries to identify whether there is really any biological justification for exempting fish from the standards as those of bigger animals such as cats and dogs etc. She includes if fish actually feel pain, whether they suffer or not but also if we are accurate when we say that fish are unfeeling animals that are just dumb. It has been found that fish have nociceptors around their mouth which alert them of pain so they question of whether they feel pain might be yes. When the nociceptors were stimulated with chemicals researchers found that they did react to the pain by beating their gills faster, they were rubbing the areas affected with the chemical on the walls of the tank, they lost appetite, and had problems making decisions. After the fish were injected with a substance for pain and their behavior was induced by the experience of pain. Braithwaite's main argument here is why fish are treated differently than other animals because there are clues that they do feel pain. Many people think of fish as being dumb but many don't know that they are actually clever because of their ability to be able to learn geometrical relationships and landmarks as escape routes. Not to mention that surprisingly fish's brains are similar to those of a mammalian amygdala and hippocampus and their forebrains associate with emotion, learning, and memory. She is strong about changing the ways that we treat fish but that we don't necessarily have to change our behavior towards them. She say's that it also shouldn't interfere with sports fishing because that outweighs this and the suffering of fish. Braithwaite is bothered by the fact that it has taken this long to be able to determine whether fish feel pain or not.

Know the differnece between animal wants and animal needs.

In Jeremy Rifkin's article titled A Change of Heart about Animals, he argues that animals are more similar to us than we have ever imagined. Scientists have discovered that animals do feel love, excitement, and pain just as we do. With examples presented such as pigs crave affection and crows and gorillas are very smart. Yet some philosophers believe that animals do not have any self-awareness because they lack individualism, they come to find out that that statement is false. When a mirror was put in front of an animal they searched themselves for the parts that they could not see, showing individualism. The one point that supposedly divides us is morning. Animals do not seem to have a sense or knowledge of death, including their own. But studies show that that is not true because elephants stand next to their dead offspring and touch them with their trunks. It is also shown that animals, when happy or pleased, release dopamine. Scientists also believed that some traits animals have were genetically wired and that they were sheer instinct, when in reality they are learned behaviors that are passed down from parent to offspring. All of these examples show how animals are more similar to us than I thought. Proposing the questions of whether we should add animal rights into the constitution and should we change the way we treat animals. In my opinion animals should not be treated in a harmful manner if it is not necessary. I do believe that animals should still be used as a food source because that is where we get our protein and other nutrients, just as they do when they eat other animals. So no we don’t have to become vegans, but we should still be considerate because they having feelings as well. So go ahead and eat that burger and chicken strips because you need the protein, but don’t buy that fur coat because that isn’t a necessity in your life. And there shouldn’t be a law in the constitution because people eat animals for survival. But that doesn’t mean you have to harm a live animal just for your personal pleasure. Be smart, be kind, and be considerate when it comes to animal rights. Know the difference between harming for materialistic wants, and  harming for food needs.

What "A Change of Heart about Animals" is about

In the article A change of Heart about Animals by Rifkin he claims that our fellow creatures are more like us than we might ever have imagined but also that you do not have to be human to feel emotions. The fact that they feel emotions has changed many people's views on animals. It is then said that companies such as Burger King and KFC have started researching into emotional, mental, and behavioral states of the creatures that they use. From the studies that have been done on pigs it has been found that they crave for affection and are easily depressed when they are isolated or kept from playing with one another. There have been big step made by countries to outlaw and ban pig stalls but also requiring people with pigs to provide them with a certain amount of human contact daily. Also to support the claim that creatures are more like us studies have been done on other types of animals also like on New Caledonian crowns and on a gorilla named Koko. In the findings with the crows researchers were able to find out that they re smart because Betty which was one of the crow's when left with only a straight wire at an instance bent it just like the hooked wire and then snagged the food and out of ten trials she did this nine times. Koko the gorilla is just as impressive as these crows because she was taught sign language and has managed to master more than 1,000 signs and understands several thousand's English words. Just to prove of her intelligence on human IQ tests she scores between 75 and 90 which is really impressive for an animal. Rifkin thinks that animal rights should be included in the constitution but also that some should be changed in a way that they will protect animals more than they already do. In order to protect animals more, Germany has guaranteed animal rights into its constitution. Rifkin denies that statement that says that animals behave by sheer instinct and claims that they in fact don't but are rather taught by parents just like geese teach their goslings their migration routes. Rifkin agrees with the teachings of law courses on animal rights but also with the animal rights lawsuits that are being filed due to painful laboratory experiments, and the raising of animals in inhumane conditions.

Fish Feel. Fish are Smart.

Hooked on a Myth, by Victoria Braithwaite argues about how fish feel pain and have emotions as well. She presents a variety of arguments and experiments on fishes feeling pain. But, on the emotional side I didn't really feel convinced. She really didn't have much information to bring that topic up. I don’t believe she should have stated that fishes had emotions if she wasn't quite sure and didn't have as much information to back it up. Rather, she should have just stuck with fishes feeling pain. That is just my own opinion.  When I first read this article I was actually surprised on the experimentation of, vinegar on an open cut.  It was weird how the fish reacted and when it started to experiencing a lot of agitations, but when it was given medication it started to calm the fish agitations, I didn't expect the fish to react the way it did. I thought it would have gotten weak and eventually die.  I don’t really know much nor absolutely anything about fish or about their anatomy. So, it’s kind of hard for me to actually feel bad for the fish. But I know we should take into consideration of the fishes pains, if there have been experiments presented that showing that they do feel pain.

There are many ways for us to actually put into effect on how we treat fish. For example, barbed wire should be banned when you are trying to catch a fish. There should be other supplied wires that won’t actually hurt the fish, but still allows you to real in the fish. The second thing in protecting the fish, is the catch and release method.  When the fish is out of water it is suffer trying to grasp for air in order to survive. When it is out of the water you can see from the fish’s eye that they are suffering and hoping they will actually survive that is the worst pain you could put a fish through. It’s like taking away the oxygen of a human; we suffer as well and experience great pain. So, why should we be taking a fish's life away? It is better to just catch and then release it back.  In the article scientist determined consciousness in a human but not on a fish.  I believe a fish is conscious as well. They know their own surrounds and how they feel. They are aware when they are dying and when they are hungry. In paragraph 11 it talks about how fish are smart and clever. They are able to guide themselves in order to survive. They can detected many things that we aren’t much aware of. They are smart enough to take care of themselves and use their surroundings in order to survive.

What I think....

In Jeremy Rifkin article, A Change of Heart about Animals, he believes animals should have rights in the constitution. That they should be protected and that we should acknowledge that animals do feel pain and have emotions just like humans. He presents his argument by using a variety of experiments. I understand that we harm animals and let’s face it we don’t take their emotion and pain into consideration as much when we are eating delicious food and devouring our faces into wonderfulness.  We are humans trying to survive. But, at times we do take into consideration on animal’s pains and emotions when it’s OUR pet. We treat our pets like royalty, protect them, and talk to them like they are humans.  If it’s not a meal to eat we care more for the animal. But if it’s providing us food and allowing us to live our views are differently on the animal.  In my opinion, I believe the way the animals benefits us is the way we treat it. I think we should just be more aware on how we treat animals and not use them for foolish tests. Be more cautious and aware of what we are doing to the animal and acknowledging what we are putting the animal through. Realizing if it’s worth it or even reasonable.  In one of Rifkins experiment, it was about a pig needing 20 seconds of play time and human interaction. When I first read it I thought it was hilarious.  20 seconds. That is ridiculous an actual kid would need an hour or more of playtime to keep a kid happy. That is where an animal and human are different. A human needs much more attention and have more needs than an animal.  The second experiment that surprised me the most was the gorilla Koko. It’s crazy how smart that gorilla is. I would have never expected that from an animal. I knew animals can understand but never figured their brain development is just like ours. (Not saying we have the same brain, but rather the processes of learning). It is amazing, to see that Koko was able to learn several English words and learned how to sign more than a thousand sign. I guess they can be like us; just those animals are special and unique. Lastly, I guess we don’t really care when we kill an animal because the animal kingdom does the same. They kill their pray in order to survive I don’t think they would be aware of the difference of killing an animal and a human being. Their mind is not developed to see the difference. They just see human and animals as food (meat) and they would do anything in order to survive. So why can’t we do the same without having activist getting all crazy about us hurting an animal if the animal does the same thing.

Animal Rights

To be frank, I really don’t care much for any of the articles that we read. I like animals, but I also happen to love meat. I know that animals have certain human characteristics about them, but that does not make them human. There are certain animal right that I respect though, for example, I don’t believe that poor gorilla should have to be tested on to make sure a certain lipstick is safe. I find it quite disheartening when humans test animals for selfish reasons. If animals were only tested for serious things such as medications, then I understand, but makeup? Come on now! I agree with Bob Stevens when he responds to Rifkin’s article. He mentioned that animals naturally hunt and kill each other. With that said, why should humans be restricted in the hunting of animals for food? I believe that certain animal rights activists have taken things too far. So we should spend money making sure that animals have food and toys and in some cases, clothes, while there are little children who don’t have food to eat or clothes to wear or toys to play with? That doesn’t make the slightest bit of sense to me.

 Also take Braithwaite’s proposition for example. She believes that we should take precautionary approach to fish and their feeling. She herself pointed out that it is not proven that fish affected by pain. They might feel it, but that does not mean they react to the pain. In that case, why should I think twice before going fishing? Fish are one of the most vulnerable animals in the world. They have been hunted since the beginning of time by both humans and other animals. I don’t think I should now start worrying about their feeling.  Does it really matter if fish feel pain? No matter what happens, people around the world will still eat fish, I included.

Giving thanks

This thanksgiving, I was compelled to look back and recall things that I am thankful for. Well I don’t know about you guys, but I am thankful that I made it to senior year. If we looked back we will see that we lost so many of our class mates over the years. Our class size in seventh grade was over 600 students and now, there are only 513 seniors. What happened?!! Anyways, I am just thankful that we are able to go to school free of charge and can be guaranteed safety while in school. (for the most part.)There are so many kids our age all over the world that would give anything to be able to go to school. I sometimes feel guilty when I complain about too much homework or other petty things like that because I know that there are kids who will take Mr. Nguen’s homework six times a day if it means they get the chance to get a solid education. We should be grateful that we have teachers at Mayfair that are willing to stay after school to make sure we understand everything they taught or just to offer us help. I hope that during this thanksgiving season, we will take time to really appreciate all of the things that we have especially all of the food that we got to eat during thanksgiving. I know I was not the only one holding my belly after dinner on Thursday. I ate way too much. I know it might be a bit late but Happy Thanksgiving everyone.

AF: The Latest -- Three Things

Kids, I just have a few things to say -- first, the blog is open again and waiting for you to write 1 Post and 2 Comments about the "Rhetoric of Op-Ed" articles and ideas.  You can write about any of the articles (Rifkin, Braithwaite, Yong), or you can write about rhetorical appeals and how these appeals function in the texts, situations and conversations that we encounter.

TWO:  I want you to start writing your rhetorical precis for "Hooked by a Myth."  Have a draft on Thursday, and a final on Friday.

THREE:  Also, start looking for your own Op-Ed piece.  Good places to look are the Op-Ed sections of

1. The Los Angeles Times
2. The New York Times
3. The Washington Post
4. The Wall Street Journal

AF: Scholarships! November 2014

Here is a link to available scholarships that was just forwarded from Mrs. Lane.  Check it out!

Bellflower residents:  don't forget that Bravo scholarship.  The essay is due to Mr. Vinagupta by Friday, December 5, so write it during the break and schedule time  with me for comments or help between Monday - Thursday, December 1-4.

Breathing Experience Into Words

by David, Grace, Ruby and Anna

Fletcher and Phinizy: Paperslide Précis

English teacher jokes

China and Us

Lately I’ve been hearing about how instead of English being taught around the world as the international business language it should be Mandarin, the Chinese language.  Lately it has been evident that China has been ruling the market for business, I mean, almost everything that we own is made in China.  Since many U.S. companies rely on China for its “manpower” it has been essential to eliminate the language barrier between our Eastern brethren.  Though what I really want to know is will this completely change the language taught in classes? Soon enough, if China’s power over the economy grows will learning Mandarin be required in order to land a good career?  I know it seems like a superstition but think about it, who seems to have the most power over products made?  Who does the US owe most of our national debt to?  If China were to become the primary country of where primary business is being dealt, what would that mean for us who never got the opportunity to learn Mandarin in the first place?  I know at this point I sound like one of those late-night radio channel hosts who keep spouting nonsense about the government and lizard people, but I honestly am sort of concerned about this overall.  I know that many of you definitely have plenty of counter-arguments and I’m totally open to different points of view about the matter in the comments section below.

Senior year and still not feeling it

You’d think that once senior year begins you’d feel it and think to yourself “wow this is my last and final year of high school”, however, I still feel nothing. It’s almost as if next year id be coming back to this campus, getting a new schedule, and seeing the same familiar faces I've known for the past several years of my life. It’s just too weird of a feeling that every day is sort of your last. When I think about it like that, it makes me want to make each day more special, even if it’s something small. I want to make my senior year worth remembering so when I look back on it I won’t feel any sort of regrets. This is the time to make things happen, to join that club you've had your eye on, the sport that you’d always wanted to try out. Sure there will be clubs and sports in college but why wait then when you can try it now. This is our last year to enjoy the time we have with our current friends until we all part ways. I’m surely we all know that after a certain amount of time we won’t be hearing from them again. I knew that for my senior year I wanted to make something more of myself so I set some personal goals. So far it’s not all going to plan. Just like the topic states, I’m just not feeling it. However, I’m scared that when I finally do feel it I know that I wouldn't be able to stop myself from feeling sad . I can still remember the 10 year old me thinking about how it'd be like to be a high schooler, to be going to college all grown up. I also clearly remember shaking my head and thinking that’s too weird to think about and continued doing some math problems. Now that its seven years later and that I’m finally in that moment it’s still kind of weird to think about. Also, everyone I ask seems to ask has some sort of plan of what they want to major in or hope to be. Others are just like me, clueless. I fear that I won’t find my passion in life, that I’ll end up working in a career that is a burden to me every day waking up to, but then again, who doesn't. For now I just hope that it’ll finally hit me that it’s our last year and enjoy it to the fullest. 

College Bound

What exactly are we hoping to see in college? For me, I truly believe that college is a chance to start over. It is a time for you to look back at all of your past mistakes and then try not to relive them. You are introduced to a whole new group of friends and to a whole new world of culture. We can shy away or be adventurous and experience things that we have never experienced before. It is a time to rediscover ourselves. One common mistake that most college students make is that they use their "independence" to get themselves into trouble. I am not saying that all college students are like this, but that there are a small percentage of us college-bound kids who are not used to such independence and can end up mishandling it. Here are just a few tips for us college-bounders:

• Make friends that will help you progress and not digress
• Meet people from different backgrounds
• Expand your horizons
• Get to know your professors
• be money wise

                   - You are going to be bombarded by credit card companies next year. credit cards are fun to have until you start having bad credit, then it becomes an unwanted load. if you are going to get a credit card, make sure to pay it off every month. your life literally depends on good credit

• Don't be afraid to try different things
• Join clubs that interest you
• Keep building a positive representation of yourself.
• Make sure to check with your parents regularly, they really do miss their little child

• Most of all, don’t quit when the going gets tough.

College is a lot harder than High school. We don’t have teachers or parents reminding us to do or work. It is a time to really define independence. You will be forced to make decisions that will ultimately affect your future. Those decisions can either make you or break you. Remember that there is no “grace period” in college. If you don’t do your work, you will not pass the class. There are also no tardy sweeps or Saturday school. If you miss class, you stand in risk of being dropped.

Lastly, you should have fun. Always make time to take a break from you work. You mind and soul need a break from time to time, so treat them occasionally.

 

 

Procrastination

It is something we all do regardless of what we say. Procrastination. It is the absolutely worse thing and it is something I am doing right now. I am in trouble because I feel that procrastination is also the best motivator regardless. I feel like it is something that leads me on to finish my projects rather than just wait back and relax. Once i do that I am able to focus and understand more of the topic at hand. I understand this is probably one of the worst things that a person could do because it is not something that is meant to help you. This will not help me at all in college. But i feel like it is a good things I am breaking of the habit this year. I am so stressed with school that sometimes procrastination is all you can do.

ACC College

Last weekend I was lucky enough to be able to go with my sister to ACC. My sister set up an appointment for the both of us because she is interested in going back to school and also wants me to get a feel on how colleges are and questions I should ask I had a really nice time and even found out things about careers I didn't know about. They were able to give us prices of the course and a more in depth view. In the beginning I was shy and quiet, observing the things around me and listening. The lady was more focused on my sister I don't know why but it was ok I was making sure I listened and took mental notes for next time when I go check out a college I have a list of questions to ask. She offered us to take a practice test and then an actual test to see how we would score and see any financial aid. She gave us a tour of the building and as we were talking she kept bringing up dates to when we can enroll. That's the part I didn't really like because it felt like she just wanted to make us enroll and not really care about what we needed and why my sister couldn't start school now. My sister isn't prepared financially and that's a problem and even though my sister could be eligible for aid she doesn't have money for another bill. The lady just kept insisting and starting to get aggressive and asking why she had so many bills and telling her she made mistakes and i didn't like that and neither did my sister so the experience was in a way ok but also kind of frustrating.