My Photo


follow us in feedly

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Best Of KC Dog Blog

Become a Fan

« Reforming Animal Control | Main | Not an overnight success (but improvement in eliminating killing nonetheless) »

May 10, 2011



Oh dear, I read the study and came to the same conclusion as another famous Missouri native - "Lies, damned lies, and statistics". there is so much wrong with the study I don't even know where to begin and I'm NOT going to try and compete with Jim Crosby. and how in the name of Sam Hill do seemingly respectable publications get sucked into studies that don't even belong in the National Enquirer????????

This comment is interesting - "These breeds (pit bulls) should be regulated in the same way in which other dangerous species, such as leopards, are regulated."

back in the 80s it was common to compare pit bulls and pit bull bites to big cats and big cat attacks, but those comparisons have been fairly rare more recently. I remember asking someone (Mike Santos, Randall Lockwood, someone else that's equally stupid - can't remember), "So, you'd rather be in the cage with the Bengal Tigers at the Kansas City Zoo than in my livingroom with my pit bulls?"

Good analyis, Brent!


The reason that comparison is similar to what was said in the 80s is because at least 10 of their resources were dated 1999 or before -- with several of them being very early 90s and at least one going all the way back to 1982. Thankfully most of us have learned a few things over the past 30 years...


Oh, good point Brent. I hadn't quite connected those dots re: the dates of the resources. that comparison came up in the "Hearne" case in Overland Park, KS. Someone testified a "pit bull bite" was as dangerous as a leopard or some other big cat. For crying out loud, never mind the difference in size, the infection rates can't even be compared on cat vs. dog bites.

And that was one of the more sensible things that came out in testimony at that trial! Honestly, civil cases are not like criminal cases. If I ever get picked for a civil trial jury I am going to pay my doctor whatever it takes to write a note stating I can't be there due to potential emotional distress. And that's the truth!

I believe the journal that published this "study" should be renamed "The ANALS of Surgery" because someone clearly pulled this information out of their ***.


I actually seriously mis-typed that the first time through. Must have been Freudian. I don't do much for spell checking (as editing your own work is impossible and editors don't work cheaply and I do this for free) --but I did catch that when skimming through and admit that I chuckled a bit.


Oh well, so much for the peer-review process...


American Stafford Terrier I have. I live with him now 12 years old and my children too. And now I found out that this is a leopard, and I'm stupid, I thought my dog.


I didn't even have to read it to know the research was flawed. If they wanted actual scientific data, they should have researched the circumstances surrounding the dog bites--and they probably would have found out that the dog was provoked or the person was unsupervised (ie, a child). I'm sorry, but that's not the dog's fault. Their conclusion is that more damage is done from pit bull bites--well duh, look at the power in their jaws!!! This is such bad science I can't believe someone funded it, much less published it. If they wanted actual data they could use, they probably should have had veterinarians do the study. At least most of us aren't biased towards breeds. Frankly, the doctor heading the paper should be ashamed of himself.


I'm from San Antonio, so I"ll definitely tell my friends and family to stay away from university hospital. If they can't do science, they probably can't do medicine either.



The funny thing is, in the "study" they acknowledge that pit bull bites weren't more powerful than other large breed dogs and STILL came to the conclusions they came to. And sure, the bite would be stronger than your average Spaniel, but less so than many other larger breed dogs. That only makes sense.

Meanwhile, as you note, it's amazing the number of people who choose to do studies without any effort to look at circumstances behind bites - -and in this case, specifically left out information on significant causal factors.

Sarah @ Dog Separation Anxiety Cure

It is very difficult to find a neutral point of view taking in all of the evidence..

Thanks for debunking this study and drawing attention to the fact that media is mediated and you can find research to support ANY argument! In order to be valid science there should be two teams per study trying to find the opposite of what the other team is looking for. Then we could see which viewpoint had more supporting evidence.

Spaccio Moncler

Nice, and thanks for sharing this info with us.Good Luck!

The comments to this entry are closed.