Opposing viewpoints

Dr. Lynne Sneddon seems to support fish welfare without question.
(Photo taken from Twitter)

Hey all. I finished the first draft of my Literature Review Assignment. Everything seems to be running smoothly. Pain in fish is definitely my research topic now—I won't be changing it again, I promise. The only concern I have at this point is that I have no idea how I'm going to be making a final argument when 1.) I'm not a scientist, and I'm basing my argument from science and 2.) there are as many scientific articles in support of the theory as there are against it.

One weird thing about that second point, though: many different articles that I've compiled are contributed on by the same people—Drs. Lynne Sneddon and James D. Rose are two very common names in this topic that argue for and against the fish pain theory, respectively. If you search "fish pain" in Google Scholar, you'll find that it's nearly impossible to find a scholarly article that doesn't at least reference the work of one of these two researchers.

I'm beginning to wonder if I might be getting a bit of a skewed view. Probably not too skewed, since all the scholarly articles are peer-reviewed. But it's still worth considering. For example, Lynne Sneddon's work is geared less toward the simple pursuit of knowledge and more toward animal welfare. That doesn't mean her data isn't reliable or that her logic isn't sound, but it could mean she might leave out possible deductions that could oppose her theory.

I'll give examples of some of the research I've found soon—hopefully before Monday night this time.