There is vigorous ongoing debate about whether fish feel pain and have the capacity to suffer. The body of literature dedicated to the topic is increasing but what is particularly problematic is that the majority of the contributions represent opinion pieces and thus fall within the realm of advocacy. Many of the empirical research papers purporting that fish do or do not feel pain have problems with cavalier use of definitions, poor experimental design, or statistical/technical issues and tend to include advocacy statements in their interpretations. Rather than continuing to spin our wheels and deepen the divide, I would advocate our community undertake a balanced, transparent and rigorous appraisal of all available evidence to help guide us and provide more clarity on pain and suffering in fish. This could be done through the use of evidence synthesis techniques such as systematic review and should be done by a reputable independent body such as a learned society or scholarly organization. Our continued emphasis on littering the peer-reviewed literature with opinion and advocacy is only confusing the matter for the public, media, policy makers and the rest of the scientific community
