General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: The most incredible animal photo I've ever seen [View all]baldguy
(36,649 posts)That has been debunked, refuted & withdrawn, because the methodology used was... well, to say it was flawed would be generous. Full of shit is more accurate.
"Human (Dog Bite-Related Fatalities) were identified by searching news accounts and by use of The Humane Society of the United States registry databank."
Except that news accounts have been proven to be massively & wildly inaccurate when it comes to breed identification (any animal with four legs & a tail which injures a person is described as a "Pit Bull"
, and The Humane Society doesn't maintain such records as described.
And the linking page to this study debunks it too: "A CDC study on fatal dog bites lists the breeds involved in fatal attacks over 20 years. It does not identify specific breeds that are most likely to bite or kill, and thus is not appropriate for policy-making decisions related to the topic. Each year, 4.7 million Americans are bitten by dogs. These bites result in approximately 16 fatalities; about 0.0002 percent of the total number of people bitten. These relatively few fatalities offer the only available information about breeds involved in dog bites. There is currently no accurate way to identify the number of dogs of a particular breed, and consequently no measure to determine which breeds are more likely to bite or kill."
http://www.cdc.gov/HomeandRecreationalSafety/Dog-Bites/dogbite-factsheet.html