Sachs Et Al 2000

[sandgrubber]

This is the 'CDC' study often quoted in the BSL debate. Executive summary below

Breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998

Jeffrey J. Sacks, MD, MPH; Leslie Sinclair, DVM; Julie Gilchrist, MD; Gail C. Golab, PhD, DVM; Randall Lockwood, PhD (J Am Vet Med Assoc 2000;217:836–840) .

Objective—To summarize breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks during a 20-year period and to

assess policy implications.

Animals—Dogs for which breed was reported involved in attacks on humans between 1979 and 1998 that

resulted in human dog bite-related fatalities (DBRF).

Procedure—Data for human DBRF identified previously for the period of 1979 through 1996 were combined

with human DBRF newly identified for 1997 and 1998. Human DBRF were identified by searching news accounts and by use of The Humane Society of the United States’ registry databank.

Results—During 1997 and 1998, at least 27 people died of dog bite attacks (18 in 1997 and 9 in 1998). At

least 25 breeds of dogs have been involved in 238 human DBRF during the past 20 years. Pit bull-type

dogs and Rottweilers were involved in more than half of these deaths. Of 227 reports with relevant data, 55(24%) human deaths involved unrestrained dogs off their owners’ property, 133 (58%) involved unrestrained

dogs on their owners’ property, 38 (17%) involved restrained dogs on their owners’ property, and 1 (< 1%)

involved a restrained dog off its owner’s property.

Conclusions—Although fatal attacks on humans appear to be a breed-specific problem (pit bull-type

dogs and Rottweilers), other breeds may bite and cause fatalities at higher rates. Because of difficulties

inherent in determining a dog’s breed with certainty, enforcement of breed-specific ordinances raises constitutional and practical issues. Fatal attacks represent a small proportion of dog bite injuries to humans and, therefore, should not be the primary factor driving public policy concerning dangerous dogs. Many practical

alternatives to breed-specific ordinances exist and hold promise for prevention of dog bites.

Full article can be found here

Oops. I thought I was posting this under 'studies about dogs'. I'm tired of hearing people argue about dog bite/dog attack statistics on these forums without giving references.

Oops

Edited March 25, 2010 by sandgrubber

[Paptacular!]

This study is now 10 years old.... is it still valid?

[~*Shell*~]

I would love to know what they consider to be a "husky type"

An "alaskan husky" is a very definite cross breed where as the siberian husky is an ancient pure breed.

[Sticky]

Excellent info with links to articles from CDC here:

http://www.cdc.gov/HomeandRecreationalSafe...-factsheet.html

They say this about the Sachs article:

A CDC study on fatal dog bites lists the breeds involved in fatal attacks over 20 years (Breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998). 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.

Many practical alternatives to breed-specific policies exist and hold promise for preventing dog bites. For prevention ideas and model policies for control of dangerous dogs, please see the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) Task Force on Canine Aggression and Human-Canine Interactions: A community approach to dog bite prevention. *

S

[Sticky]

There is also this recent paper:

"Dog bites: still a problem?"

http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/14/5/296.abstract

S

[sandgrubber]

Confusing! They say Sachs et al do not identify specific breeds. Sachs et al carefully avoid recommending BSL, but they unquestionably use breed . . . or breed-type identifiers and the data presented show extremely strong trends. They also include lots of well-justified caveats about the difficulties of correct breed identification. It's a hard area to get good data for, but I don't think that justifies ignoring the data that are available and calling people biased, ignorant, etc. when they express the opinion that certain breeds may be a problem.

Yes . .. husky-type group includes different breeds with some differences in tendencies; kelpie-type (which Sachs et al don't consider cause they're rare in the USA) will group pedigree kelpies and working dogs of various breeding; and separating the 'pit' from other bull breeds is something that only a few people in a hundred (if that) people can do reliably. The data are imperfect, but not bad enough to be dismissed as 'crap'. When I bring a new dog into boarding kennels, on first cut, my expectations fall along breed lines. Some breeds have a lot of yappers. Labbies are gutsers. Bull breeds and X-breeds require careful handling and it's often better not to mix them with other dogs. All the dog fights I've had in kennels have involved bull breeds, mostly barneys involving two dogs from the same household who are being boarded together.

I don't advocate BSL, but I tend to get verbally aggressive when I see people hiding their heads in the sand.

Excellent info with links to articles from CDC here:

http://www.cdc.gov/HomeandRecreationalSafe...-factsheet.html

They say this about the Sachs article:

A CDC study on fatal dog bites lists the breeds involved in fatal attacks over 20 years (Breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998). 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.

Many practical alternatives to breed-specific policies exist and hold promise for preventing dog bites. For prevention ideas and model policies for control of dangerous dogs, please see the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) Task Force on Canine Aggression and Human-Canine Interactions: A community approach to dog bite prevention. *

S

Edited March 25, 2010 by sandgrubber