Reply to Why do people still think that these ferocious dog breeds are safe and should be tolerated?

Forum Index » Pets

Reply to "Why do people still think that these ferocious dog breeds are safe and should be tolerated?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][b]lol, the CDC is not reputable???[/b]
Data for human dog bite-related fatalities (DBRF) identified previously for the period of 1979 through 1996 were combined with human DBRF newly identified for 1997 and 1998. Human DBRF were identified by searching news accounts and by use of The Humane Society of the United States' registry databank.
During 1997 and 1998, at least 27 people died of dog bite attacks (18 in 1997 and 9 in 1998). At least 25 breeds of dogs were involved in 238 human dog bite related fatalities during the past 20 years. Pit bulls and rottweilers were involved in over half of these fatalities and from 1997 to 1998 were involved in 67%.
During 1997 to 1998, fatal attacks were reported from 17 states; California 4; Georgia and North Carolina 3 each; Kansas, Texas, and Wisconsin 2 each; and Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, New York, South Dakota, and Tennessee 1 each.
Of 227 reports with relevant data, 55 (24%) human deaths involved unrestrained dogs off their owners' property, 133 (58%) involved unrestrained dogs on their owners' property, 38 (17%) involved restrained dogs on their owners' property, and 1 (&lt; 1%) involved a restrained dog off its owner's property.
Four hundred and three dogs contributed to these attacks. In 160 deaths, only 1 dog was involved; in 49 deaths, 2 dogs were involved; and in 15 deaths, 3 dogs. Four and 7 dogs were involved in 3 deaths each; 5, 6, and 10 dogs were involved in 2 deaths each; and 11 and 14 dogs were responsible for 1 death each
[/quote]Pp, you really need to read the entire study if you are going to quote it on DCUM.  I was interested in this point (and the fact that it came from the CDC) so I followed up and read the study which the CDC website linked to.  It was published in the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association.  It can be found here:
http://www.cdc.gov/HomeandRecreationalSafety/images/dogbreeds-a.pdf
The study notes the difficulty in determining clearly exactly what kind of breeds were responsible for Dog Bite Related Fatalities.  It also noted that the breeds with the most bites varied over time and cited studies showing other breeds having been responsible for more DBRFs than pitbulls in different periods.  The study also came out against outlawing specific breeds and recommended focusing on specific owner and dog behavior.

Additionally, the place on the CDC where this link is located also states the following:[quote][i]A CDC study on fatal dog bites lists the breeds involved in fatal attacks over 20 years (Breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998 Adobe PDF file). It does not identify specific breeds that are most likely to bite or kill, and thus is not appropriate for policy-making decisions related to the topic. Each year, 4.7 million Americans are bitten by dogs. These bites result in approximately 16 fatalities; about 0.0002 percent of the total number of people bitten. These relatively few fatalities offer the only available information about breeds involved in dog bites. There is currently no accurate way to identify the number of dogs of a particular breed, and consequently no measure to determine which breeds are more likely to bite or kill.[/i][/quote]
As well, the CDC supports community efforts to prevent dogbites and links to a taskforce report from the American Veterinary Medical Association which also recommends against breed specific legislation in addition to suggesting a comprehensive community approach to reducing dog bites.  That report is here: http://www.avma.org/public_health/dogbite/dogbite.pdf -- and notes in particular:[quote][i]Dog bite statistics are not really statistics, and they do not give an accurate picture of dogs that bite.7 Invariably the numbers will show that dogs from popular large breeds are a problem. This should be expected, because big dogs can physically do more damage if they do bite, and any popular breed has more individuals that could bite. Dogs from small breeds also bite and are capable of causing severe injury. There are several reasons why it is not possible to calculate a bite rate for a breed or to compare rates between breeds. First, the breed of the biting dog may not be accurately recorded, and mixed-breed dogs are commonly described as if they were purebreds. Second, the actual number of bites that occur in a community is not known, especially if they did not result in serious injury. Third, the number of dogs of a particular breed or combination of breeds in a community is not known, because it is rare for all dogs in a community to be licensed, and existing licensing data is then incomplete.7 Breed data likely vary between communities, states, or regions, and can even vary between neighborhoods within a community. [/i][/quote]

It's quite clear the CDC opposes Breed Specific Legislation so please do not use the research they cite to suggest otherwise.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics