In the 2010s, an astonishing practice of aesthetic care appeared in France: the fish pedicure.
Clients of various salons, spas and wellness centers are invited to dip their feet in a pool occupied by a hundred small freshwater fish of the Garra rufa species.
These are supposed to provide a form of exfoliation of the submerged limbs, by nibbling away dead skin.
The practice, which came from Turkey, is however controversial.
First of all, from a health point of view, unlike swimming pool water, the basins used for fish pedicures cannot be completely disinfected – this would kill the fish.
A constraint which "greatly complicates the control of microbial risks", estimates the National Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health Safety (Anses), in a report published in 2013. Several cases of infections linked to the fish pedicure have thus been reported throughout the world, although these remain rare.
High population densities
But the conditions of detention of the fish used are also a concern.
As sentient beings, the Garra rufa are in principle protected under article L214-3 of the rural code, which prohibits “abusing” animals.
This implies that they are placed by their owner in living conditions that meet their physiological needs.
For these small fish, it starts with good quality water: sufficiently oxygenated, maintained at the right temperature and at the right pH, continuously filtered.
Their environment should not cause them chronic stress, injury or disease.
Minimal requirements, yet hardly compatible with the very principle of fish pedicure.
"The nature of the fish spa business requires high stocking density to maximize customer satisfaction," said British fish veterinarian William H Wildgoose in a 2012 article in the Fish Veterinary Journal. .
Moreover, if in their native environment, in the Near and Middle East, the Garra rufa appreciate being able to evolve near the bottom of rivers and lakes, where they can hide in rocks and vegetation, "the The bare glass aquariums of most fish spas offer little opportunity for environmental enrichment, as their primary purpose is to provide a hygienic environment for customers”.
"We allow ourselves a lot of things about fish"
To encourage the kept fish to come and nibble the dead skins, it is common for them to be voluntarily starved.
A practice that "may be considered animal cruelty", according to the US public health organization Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
ANSES also considers that "skin scales of human origin are far from satisfying their nutritional needs", and that when they are "well nourished, fish lose their propensity to approach bathers to graze on their skins dead”.
For all these reasons, the fish pedicure makes Amandine Sanvisens, co-founder of the antispecies association Paris Animals Zoopolis (PAZ), react.
“This practice reflects the lack of consideration that our society has for fish.
It's animal abuse.
We allow ourselves a lot about fish and we treat them with even less consideration than other animals.
However, fish are gifted with sensitivity.
PAZ fights for them to stop being considered as toys, for their basic needs to be taken seriously.
»
An attack on animal dignity
The Garra Rufa "have a low financial value but require a high level of maintenance", summarizes William H Wildgoose.
Ordered on the internet for a few dollars each, delivered by post from farms in Southeast Asia and Central Europe, the animals are easily replaceable.
This fact, combined with the absence of specific health regulations (the establishments are in particular not obliged to keep a register for monitoring the number of animals), suggests that many fish kept in fish pedicure establishments in France suffer from bad treatment and die prematurely.
The fish pedicure is prohibited in ten states in the United States and four Canadian provinces, strictly regulated in Germany.
In Switzerland, the Federal Office for Food Safety and Veterinary Affairs recommends that the authorities refuse authorization requests to open fish pedicure establishments, considering that the practice is "an attack on the dignity of the animal and that we must "give less weight to the benefit generated for humans than to the constraint that this represents for fish".
