• Mamertine@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    https://www.forbes.com/advisor/legal/dog-attack-statistics-breed/

    Dog Attack Statistics by Breed

    Many dog advocates argue that there is no such thing as a bad breed, only a bad owner. Still, it can be helpful to understand which breeds of dogs are most commonly involved in bite incidents or acts of aggression. Dog attacks by breed statistics are invaluable both for individuals looking for a dog to adopt as well as for those who interact with animals who want to minimize risk.

    The breed that commits the most attacks overall is pit bulls.

    Pit bulls are involved in more dog attacks than any other breed. In fact, the American Animal Hospital Association reports this breed was responsible for 22.5% of bites across all studies. Mixed breeds were a close second at 21.2% and German Shepherds were the third most dangerous breed, involved in 17.8% of bite incidents.⁶

    The breed that is most likely to be involved in a fatal attack is pit bulls.

    Pit bulls are both more likely to be involved in bite incidents and more likely to cause serious injury or death when a bite does occur. In fact, from 1979 to 1998, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention determined pit bulls were involved in the most fatal dog attacks, accounting for 28% deaths due to dog bites during that same time period.⁷

    I’ll add, I like pitties. I’ll also advise taking this with a grain of salt as so many mixed breed dogs fall into the pitbull umbrella.

    • Instigate@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Are those statistics weighted against breed prevalence? Because if not, those data aren’t really telling us anything significant. If pit bulls as a breed are overrepresented statistically, that would be a significant finding. Looking at the source material for the claim here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165587618305950 doesn’t clearly state if the numbers are per capita of dog breed or if they’re just sheer numbers of attacks, regardless of prevalence of breed. Do you have a source that evaluates the statistics in such a manner?

      • Lavitz@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        This should be higher. I would be interested to know more about the actual numbers. A quick search also showed shelters are not good at accurately identifying breeds.

    • restingboredface@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      Couple of issues with this data. 1- People are much more likely to report bites from larger dogs (since they cause injury that requires medical treatment and reporting is done automatically) 2- Any stats by design are going to be correlational evidence and do not guarantee causality so it’s not at all clear that rate of bites by pits are higher or just more frequently reported because they are pits or because they are so common . 3- As others have pointed out pits are more likely to be found in lower SES homes where resources for training, toys and healthy outlets for dog energy like time for long, regular walks and playtime is less readily accessible. 4-Breeds most associated with aggression are most likely to be treated by humans in ways that incite dogs’ anxiety, which is a precursor to aggressive behavior.

      I think that pitties are just the victim of really bad press. Once it became common knowledge that they were used in dog fighting, it became part of what everyone “knows” about pits. It creates a self fulfilling prophecy by seeing only results they expect rather than thinking about why they expected to see it in the first place.