[rohxnsxngh]

This is a thoughtful critique and I appreciate you raising it directly. You are right that fish sentience is getting more attention in the literature and it deserves more ethical scrutiny than it currently receives. We do not take the position that scaling aquaculture is straightforwardly good without tradeoffs. There are real welfare concerns and the industry has not always handled them well.

A few thoughts on where we stand:

On welfare specifically, our technology actually reduces stress on fish compared to the current manual process. Traditional phenotyping involves netting, anesthesia, and physical handling. Our system measures fish without any of that. Less handling means lower cortisol, lower mortality, and healthier animals. We are not neutral on welfare. We think better measurement tools should lead to better treatment, not just faster growth.

On plant based protein, you are right that our framing glosses over it. Plant based is more efficient on land use and we are not arguing against it. The reality is that billions of people rely on fish as their primary protein source today and that is not going to change overnight. We are trying to make the aquaculture that already exists more sustainable and humane, not argue that it is the only path forward.

On the scale of killing, I do not have a good answer for that. It is a massive number and I understand why that gives you pause. What I can say is that if aquaculture is going to exist at scale, we would rather it be done with better data, less stress on the animals, and more intentional breeding practices than the status quo.