Another great reason to carry

[izoid]

Or how about this:

The Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association conducted a twenty year study on the most dangerous dog breeds, and here are the top 10 most dangerous dog breeds based on the amount of fatalities they have caused:

Pit Bull is #1 on the list.

 

[izoid]

I find it troubling that Pit Bulls make up a very small portion of the domestic dog market but account for the most fatalities from dog bites and the most dog bites in general.

 

[Bear44]

Here is just one study that was conducted. Over a 5 year period in Philadelphia over 50% of dog bites to children at one hospital were Pit Bulls. Read the article and you will the overwhelming incidence of Pit Bull bites when compared to there population.


Doctors Alison Kaye, Jessica Belz and Richard Kirschner studied 551 dog bite injury cases that were brought to the Division of Plastic Surgery at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia over a five-year period. The victims ranged in age from newborn to 18 years. As is the usual procedure in trauma cases, as much data as possible was gathered about the event that caused the injury at the time that the patient was admitted. One important bit of data that was collected in these cases was the breed of the dog that bit the child. What is striking in this report is the fact that of all of those injuries where the dog's breed was identifiable, 50.9% were due to pitbulls (55.7% if we include crosses). The next closest breeds were Rottweilers accounting for 8.9% of the bites (10.3% with crosses), German Shepherds with 3.7% (7.0% with crosses), and Akitas and Cocker Spaniels each account for 3% of traumatic dog bites. According to the available statistics the most popular breeds of dogs in the city of Philadelphia are, Labrador Retrievers, German Shepherds, Yorkshire Terriers, Bulldogs and Rottweilers. As in most large cities in America, pitbulls (defined as American Pit Bull Terriers, Staffordshire Terriers, and American Staffordshire Terriers) account for less than 1% of the canine population. On the basis of these statistics alone one would expect that Labrador Retrievers would have the highest bite rate yet they are virtually invisible in this data set. Instead we find that pitbulls are responsible for more than 50 times the rate of bite injuries than what we would expect given their population numbers. This is from information taken as part of medical intake of dog bite victims who are being treated for trauma. It is not based on press reports, nor does it represent some kind of inherent bias against square-headed dogs. No matter how much one may love the bully breeds, these are facts that, like a surveillance video of a robbery which identifies a perpetrator, cannot simply be explained away under the cloak of bias or misrepresentation.

Really? They have videos of all these bites happening? No, they don't. Probably about 99% of the breed identifications were done by the victim or other unqualified witnesses. I have seen so many different breeds of dog identified as a pit bull it's hilarious.

Though I have never owned a pit, I have worked with hundreds over the years. They are no more likely to be aggressive than any other breed and that is based on over 25 years of experience of a person that has absolutely no problem with breed identification. I am not bias in favor of pits and am willing to tell an owner that their dog is dangerous regardless of breed. If you want a long term study done by an expert in dog behavior that has worked with over 10,000 dogs, well.....that's me. Take it or leave it, but it's the best source of unbiased data on the frequency of pit bull aggression I'm aware of. It certainly blows away the study you quote.

 

[Bear44]

Or how about this:

The Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association conducted a twenty year study on the most dangerous dog breeds, and here are the top 10 most dangerous dog breeds based on the amount of fatalities they have caused:

Pit Bull is #1 on the list.

I would like to see that study.

 

[Bear44]

I find it troubling that Pit Bulls make up a very small portion of the domestic dog market but account for the most fatalities from dog bites and the most dog bites in general.

The percentage of dogs that are claimed to be pits or pit mixes is WAY low.

 

[rugerceltics13]

I find it troubling that Pit Bulls make up a very small portion of the domestic dog market but account for the most fatalities from dog bites and the most dog bites in general.

i find it troubling that u believe everything u hear or see on the news

 

[FbodTrek]

Where are the statistics? i've never seen em, all i've ever heard is hearsay.

 

[rugerceltics13]

Where are the statistics? i've never seen em, all i've ever heard is hearsay.

i consider it heresy

 

[Dr Larry]

The percentage of dogs that are claimed to be pits or pit mixes is WAY low.

I understand you are a "trainer", but I have not seen you citing any studies to back up your claims. Anecdotal experience is only mildly useful, on either side. You have also mentioned wanting to see data for some of the other claims proposed here. It's not that hard to find supporting data for a lot of different sides, but I decided to look up what the CDC has to say, since they really should not have any inherent bias.
I found an older study that covered 20 years (1979-1998) that concluded more than half of fatalities related to dog bites were cauesd by "pit-bull types" and rottweilers. Obviously it's not limited to those two breeds - in fact 25 breeds were identified as causing fatalities. This study seems to be the basis for many other articles, etc., in this arena.
I am well aware how the media may slant any issue, either by ignorance or intent, but there is a reason beyond that as to why we hear stories of the (up to the final moment) perfect, docile, family dog (insert breed) savagely attacking a family member, particularly a child. Much of the reason for some breeds being more "dangerous" than others is their physical characteristics. Big, strong dogs with massive jaws will inflict a lot more damage than a nasty smaller dog.
I am not "afraid" of dogs - in fact, my family calls me a dog whisperer. I get along with a lot of dogs that even their owners won't get near! I do respect what they can do, however, and take reasonable precautions. I have had dogs in my family for about 55 years and would not harm one unless absolutely necessary.
As to the OP, don't assume every pitbull or rottie, etc., is going to bite you, but don't take leave of common sense, either. You know, my 3 grandsons can hit and even bite me, but I don't worry about them as much as a big guy in a dark alley. Or certain breeds of dogs.

 

[rugerceltics13]

I found an older study that covered 20 years (1979-1998) that concluded more than half of fatalities related to dog bites were cauesd by "pit-bull types"

pitbull types? do tell