Caveat

PREVENTING DOG BITES IN CHILDREN

KC Dog Blog  interviewed Jennifer Skyrock about keeping kids safe around dogs - and vice versa.

From the introduction:

"Jennifer Shryock CDBC, the founder of Dogs & Storks™. Dogs & Storks™ is a nation-wide network of dog trainers and canine behavior consultants that work with new and expecting  families in preparing for a life where dogs and children co-exist peacefully. While the advice here is meant for educational purposes, it is not meant to be a replacement for good old common sense and the help of a trained professional in your area"

Good stuff, KC!

ABOUT THOSE FIVE MILLION REPORTED BITES

The other day, I wrote to the House Reps in Montana to explain a few problems with BSL.

In my letter, I debunked some popular myths about dogs in general and 'pit bulls' in particular.

One of the most common myths is that there are 4.7 million dog bites (or more) annually in the US.  As I explained, this is not a fact but the result of an estimate based on a random survey.

Anyway, I told them that sometimes you see this as 'reported bites' or 'bites requiring medical attention', neither of which appear in the paper by Sacks et al that journalists like to reference but have most likely not read.

So, in case the good people in Montana think I was just making stuff up, I present this from today's Google hits:

How people can avoid being bitten by a dog

Ask Dr. Watts - Dr. Michael Watts

Published: January 18, 2009

According to the Centers for Disease Control, almost 5 million dog bites are reported every year and more than 800,000 of those bites require medical attention. Estimates from insurance companies and hospitals range as high as $250 million dollars spent annually on the treatment of dog bites.

I just noticed when I posted the excerpt that the author is Dr Watts.  That makes it even more annoying.

I note a similar study was published this past October using the same methodology but this time Dr Gilchrist is the lead author.  They conclude that dog bites are decreasing, which contradicts those 'sky is falling' types who like to insist they are on the rise for fun and profit.

Here's the abstract from the new paper:

1: Inj Prev. 2008 Oct;14(5):296-301

Dog bites: still a problem?

Gilchrist J, Sacks JJ, White D, Kresnow MJ.

Division of Unintentional Injury Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention & Control, Centers for Disease Control & Prevention, Atlanta, GA 30341, USA. [email protected]

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the incidence of dog bites in the USA and compare it with similar estimates from 1994. DESIGN: Nationally representative cross-sectional, list-assisted, random-digit-dialed telephone survey conducted during 2001-2003. METHODS: Weighted estimates were generated from data collected by surveying 9684 households during 2001-2003 and compared with results from a similar survey conducted in 1994. Estimates for persons aged 15-17 years were extrapolated on the basis of rates for 10-14-year-olds. RESULTS: Whereas the incidence of dog bites among adults remained relatively unchanged, there was a significant (47%) decline in the incidence of dog bites among children compared with that observed in the 1994 survey, particularly among boys and among those aged 0-4 years. Between 2001 and 2003, an estimated 4 521 300 persons were bitten each year. Of these, 885 000 required medical attention (19%). Children were more likely than adults to receive medical attention for a dog bite. Among adults, bite rates decreased with increasing age. Among children and adults, having a dog in the household was associated with a significantly increased incidence of dog bites, with increasing incidence also related to increasing numbers of dogs. CONCLUSIONS: Dog bites continue to be a public health problem affecting 1.5% of the US population annually. Although comparison with similar data from 1994 suggests that bite rates for children are decreasing, there still appears to be a need for effective prevention programs.

I THINK I ' LL MOVE OUT TO MONTANA SOON

...and raise me up a crop of...dental floss.

That line by the late, great Frank Zappa never fails to crack me up.

I wrote to the House Reps in Montana the other day (full list of email addresses is available at No Pit Bull Bans).

It wasn't one of my better missives but I wrote it and sent it, poor phrasing and all.

I didn't cover a lot of the aspects of why BSL is a huge mistake, but I did send along at least some information which the Committee may find helpful.

I got a very speedly reply from Representative Becker, who is opposed to the concept of BSL and understands that it is owners, not dogs, that cause problems when they ignore local regulations.

What I sent in is attached, with some contact info redacted because I don't want to encourage spammers.

BREED-SPECIFIC LEGISLATION & THE APBT: ARE THE LAWS JUSTIFIED?

Well, I think most of us could answer that question quite easily with a resounding 'No'.

But why listen to us?

Here's a paper from the Journal of Veterinary Behaviour by Stephen Collier that presents data and an analysis which reaches the same conclusion.

The abstract:

After more than a century as an uncontroversial dog (Jessup, 1975), the American pit bull terrier has developed a notorious reputation as a dangerous breed since 1980, with consequent restrictions placed upon it by jurisdictions in Australia and elsewhere. Studies in the United States have indicated that the “pit bull” is responsible for a significant number of human fatalities resulting from dog attack, but the data on which such studies are based are flawed by methodological shortcomings. Using absolute numbers of dog attacks by breed in Australia, data on attacks on human beings reveal the pit bull terrier to be exceeded by several other breeds. Regardless, the primary problem is that reliable data do not exist for the number of attacks relative to breed population. Of 19 human fatalities in Australia over the past two decades, none has involved a dog verified to be an American pit bull terrier. The evidence does not sustain the view that this is a uniquely dangerous breed, and breed-specific laws aimed to control it have not been demonstrated by authorities to be justified by its attack record.

And the best part?

The entire paper is available at no cost here.

WHAT IS AN AMERICAN STAFFORDSHIRE TERRIER?

The wonderful, cantankerous Terrierman has a question which should be fairly easy for you to answer:

What the Hell is an American Staffordshire Terrier?

So, if you'd like to explain here I can collect your answers and send them along, or you can comment over there.  Keep in mind that he moderates comments.

I let all comments through and if any are libelous, threatening to an identifiable person or just plain moronic (you know who you are) I delete 'em.

My place, my rules, right?  Right?

Have fun.