My Photo

Categories

follow us in feedly

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Best Of KC Dog Blog

Become a Fan

« Very good sentences - -and two more BSL Repeals | Main | Lennox, the dog, is dead -- and the power of channeled passion »

July 08, 2012

Comments

Joel

Any analysis of the incremental cost to the taxpayer to get basically no change in public safety?

Brent

Joel, no word on the cost of the policies that showed no decrease in bite hospitalizations...But assuming there was one (and there always is), it was too much.

J.M.

NCRC has also taken a look at this.
http://bit.ly/PAIkr8

Brent

Thanks J.M. I've updated to include the link.

Jen Brighton

Your final bullet points, Brent, say it all. When will communities and governments get off the pit bull wagon and focus on reducing serious dog bites, period?

It's so ironic. All this focus on pit bulls infers that if you are bitten by a dog other than a pit bull, it's okay--let's just keep spending/wasting $$ on going after those dratted pit bulls and never mind other dogs that bite and/or kill.

J.M.

I`m wondering if it would be possible to find out who funded that Study?
Ontario Gov`t?

liz

Thanks KC Blog for the time and effort put in to breaking down this study. Noticeable that ALL other studies that show breed bans are NOT effective were ignored by the press, but this one flawed study received focus and attention. It appears the media hype on this issued still exists although there are many reporters out there now that have come out to the ban was just a "sound bite". http://www.torontosun.com/2012/03/12/worthington-time-to-repeal-pit-bull-ban
Further facts and information on Ontario's Breed Specific Ban can be obtained here www.supporthersheysbill.co,

Selma

@J.M.: The study was funded by CIHR, Canada's national research funding agency (formerly Medical Research Council, or MRC). It was also apparently peer-reviewed.

Thank you very much, Brent, for such a detailed report on this piece of nonsense. I don't have much of a problem with the actual research, since I think it was just trying to add something to what is basically a desert in terms of hard information. The title needs some tweaking though, even a question mark would have helped.

I DO have a problem with the twits in media who can barely interpret a press release, let alone read an actual journal article, but have no problem trumpeting their nonsense without any kind of accountability.

I wish these research types would stop sending out press releases, since the newsies aren't exactly combing PubMed looking for new information.

Thanks again this was great and extremely helpful to us here in Ontaristan.

Gaynor Henry

It's a ridiculous law and does nothing to account for the thousands of bites committed by other dogs, many of whom are far nastier than pitbulls. It also contributes to media hysteria and knee jerk reactions to any dog that even resembles a pitbull which of course could include boxer, lab, weimaraner, bulldog or just about any mix. It offensive and grossly prejudicial.

Social Mange

Thank you very much for your time in analyzing this study. As far as I'm concerned, the study has two major flaws. Its conclusions are all qualified, which makes them meaningless. Then, the researchers would have been as well off studying unicorn bite injuries, since there ain't no such thing as a "pit bull".

The comments to this entry are closed.