Mike Connor wrote:

No, she apparently disagrees with current scientific opinion.

Since your premises are based on what you believe, and not on proven fact,
or on logic in view of the known facts, it is quite impossible for anybody
else to either prove or refute them.

She does use logic in view of the known facts. I quoted her in the top
post of this thread. Maybe you should read it again. Evidence can be
scientific and trustworthy and something that's worthy of putting to
use even when it's not 100% proven. I can think of no better example
than the subject if this thread. Playing it safe is easy and might
prevent the suffering of suffocation thousands or millions of times per
day.

You make it sound like there's scientific evidence that refutes her,
like evidence that fish can't suffer. If so, I'd like to hear it. But I
guess you're just saying that her evidence that fish feel pain and how
to relieve it is lacking. I suggest you rethink the purpose for those
clubs (justices?). If you want to do a little research, you can look at
some of the studies on fish anesthesia, particularly cold anesthesia. I
referenced one earlier today. I'll be looking it up myself eventually.