I never denied that. I only said "It's really idiotic to posit that only things that eat and drink can suffer.". Don't just pattern-match everything to some vaguely related black/white issues.
In the entire span of human history, the concept of suffering required sentience and the only things with sentience eat and drink.
Do you really think that proves anything? It strikes me as a disingenuous argument.
It doesn't prove anything. It provides context for why someone would make that statement. Can you prove that things that do not need to eat and drink to survive can suffer?