You could have bothered to do a simple google scholar search like I did and you would have found that there are no published studies by author: Oleson containing the words dog and bite.

Instead you offer a post hoc rationalization of why the information could be wrong. Since we don’t have the methods section of said (possibly non-existent) article, we don’t know if the author took the obvious step of producing a risk ratio based on breed population.

I just wanted to see if you had any reason behind your claim before I bothered looking into it. You didn’t, and whats worse, I had to do your homework for you. You just wanted to argue about something based on gut feeling not brain thinking. You _may_ be right, but not for the reasons that you claim.

Pit bulls are not a breed, but a loose group including 20-30 different breeds that make up between 5-10 percent of the US dog population (so your ad hoc German Shepherds being far more common falls apart). This makes it a useless group for comparing one breed agaisnt another.

There is no database of dog bites, so your claim that Rotties are the most likely to bite is of little value. Pits as a group do tend to bite and shake, which does cause more damage than dogs that bite and let go, but they aren’t alone in this strategy. Rotties and German Shepherds do this as well.

Most studies on dog bites are based on media reports, and are not useful since breed identification is limited and attack reported to be from pit bulls are more newsworthy. Any mutt with a flat broad muzzle is a pit bull to the average observer.

So you don’t offer any proof. Just more hot air. Offer some evidence. Show me the links to dog bite statistics. Show that you can do your own homework.

The pit bull is a type of dog including several breeds. The pit bull type includes the breeds you mentioned.

I didn’t say that German Sheppards [sic] were more widely adopted. Only that your 100 fold difference in number _guess_ was wrong. If Pits make up 5-10 percent of US dogs, German Sheppards [sic] cannot be 500-1000% of US dogs. Read for comprehension, Maggie and do try to keep up.

Do you have any evidence that pits have a higher psi in their bites than say, German Sheppards [sic]? Because they don’t. The only live animal bite test that I have seen puts American Pit Bull Terrier almost tied with the German Sheppard [sic]. But since you obviously know better, you must have some evidence. Why don’t you offer it up?

Whatever, Maggie. Pit bull is a type of dog. This is an accepted term and grouping for several breeds including the APBT. The authors of the CDC report on dog bites notes this as a problem. In their summary table, pits are listed as “pit bulls”, quotation marks and all, not by any specific breed name, but by the accepted type name. In this analysis (based on media reports, a source of error), pits were the most common cause of fatal bites. For specific named breeds, Rotties and German Sheppards [sic] were the most common lethal biters.

A report in Pediatrics www.festifall.com/agendas/2009/03/23/6a/6a-4-which_dogs_bite.pdf showed that the breeds that bite most often, based on a case control study, were German Sheppards [sic] and Chow Chows. APBTs as a breed and pits as a group didn’t even make the list.

You looked up bite strength some time ago, but won’t provide a link and won’t offer a range? What do you think it is? Go ahead and ballpark it. 200-300 psi? 300-400? 4000-5000?

Admit it Maggie, you don’t have any evidence beyond a gut feeling. You are just afraid of admitting that you are wrong. Just like with humans not being apes.

Thanks, nyokki.

I enjoy reasonable, spirited debate. Maggie fails at it, though. Its fun for a bit, but it gets boring fast when he just keeps repeating the same things over and over and won’t back up his loony beliefs.

Wow. Thats damn near ancient!