You fuckers are really upvoting someone who spelled bred as “Bread”?

Haaaaahahahah

Y’all suck on this topic as much as Redditors do and that’s saying something.

I upvoted what they’re saying regardless of their spelling because I’m not a fuckhead who thinks an obvious spelling mistake obviates overwhelming statistical evidence that they’re correct.

Unrelated, but I saw an anti-Iran-war protest sign the other day that used the wrong form of “its”; suppose I’m pro-war now.

A look at dog bite statistics over only 5 years in 1 city

Oh yeah, only 51% of all dog bite injuries for which a breed could be identified presenting to a large pediatric hospital over five years in the sixth-most populous city in the US is basically nothing. I’m sure pit bulls are just 51% or thereabouts of all dog ownership in Philadelphia anyway.

Meanwhile, I find it interesting you said: “they don’t even specify how those dog breeds are identified does not prove what you think it does.” (Cool blatant grammar mistake, by the way; enjoying your glass house?) Because all I gave you was the condensed version on PubMed. Crazy how you totally read the full methodology you didn’t have in like 30 seconds before dismissing it. The obvious and only answer, of course, was “the patients told the doctors”, you stupid fuck.

More than 30 different offending breeds were documented in the medical records. Unfortunately, these data were missing or not known in over half of the medical records (51.2 percent). Of the 269 cases for which a breed was indicated in the medical record, the majority of injuries were caused by pit bull terriers (50.9 percent), Rottweilers (8.9 percent), and mixed breeds involving at least one of the two aforementioned breeds (6.0 percent) (Table 1). Most patients were familiar with the dog involved in the attack (68.8 percent).

I can only imagine the 282 unidentified dogs were those vicious golden retrievers. They come out of nowhere, and they’re gone before you know what bit you. They’re fucking bloodthirsty, man.

You’d need to compare it to the number of each type of dog in those statistics. Even then, it wouldn’t tell the whole story because people who buy dogs with bad reputations often buy them for roles where they are more likely to bite like guard dogs. And EVEN then, you also need to consider that dogs who cause worse injuries are more likely to show up in the data because when they do bite it gets reported. I know I didn’t go to the hospital when a Chihuahua didn’t even break skin.

Pit bulls undeniably are dangerous by virtue of their size and strength, but so are other dogs. How inherently dangerous they are based on temperament is harder to determine. I’m always skeptical of breed essentialism because it’s so close to human eugenics and scientific racism. We do not have as much control or understanding over nature as we think we do, and our misplaced confidence in our abilities causes harm and keeps us from actual solutions.

And EVEN then, you also need to consider that dogs who cause worse injuries are more likely to show up in the data because when they do bite it gets reported. I know I didn’t go to the hospital when a Chihuahua didn’t even break skin.

That’s literally the point. Every time someone supporting pit bulls brings up “but chihuahuas are aggressive!!”: yeah, no shit, probably even moreso than aggressive pit bull breeds like the American Bully. They’re little monsters. I used to have a hamster who would make me wear a gardening glove because he would bite my finger every time I tried to hold him. I’d rather have my finger nipped 500 times by a tiny little hamster than have my child mauled to death one time – something the hamster could obviously never do.

You are describing the point. The fact that these bites are severe enough to show up so frequently at the hospital is the problem.