Dog On Trazadone, Valium And Prozac

[Aidan3]

This information is freely available to anyone who wants to do some research without going to the expense of engaging a behaviourist.

I still think it's worth engaging a professional even if you know enough to understand the protocols. It can be a terrible lost opportunity to try something and not quite get it right due to lack of experience, in some cases you burn the chance to use the least invasive method by 'sensitising' the dog to it.

Despite it's simplicity, I rarely see anyone using classical conditioning in it's most effective form (as an example). One of the worst outcomes is to associate the toy or food with bad things happening, but more often conditioning just doesn't result.

[Guest lavendergirl]

This information is freely available to anyone who wants to do some research without going to the expense of engaging a behaviourist.

I still think it's worth engaging a professional even if you know enough to understand the protocols. It can be a terrible lost opportunity to try something and not quite get it right due to lack of experience, in some cases you burn the chance to use the least invasive method by 'sensitising' the dog to it.

Despite it's simplicity, I rarely see anyone using classical conditioning in it's most effective form (as an example). One of the worst outcomes is to associate the toy or food with bad things happening, but more often conditioning just doesn't result.

Thank you - I take your point. I can only comment on my own experiences - I guess I was looking for something a bit more innovative.

[Aidan3]

This information is freely available to anyone who wants to do some research without going to the expense of engaging a behaviourist.

I still think it's worth engaging a professional even if you know enough to understand the protocols. It can be a terrible lost opportunity to try something and not quite get it right due to lack of experience, in some cases you burn the chance to use the least invasive method by 'sensitising' the dog to it.

Despite it's simplicity, I rarely see anyone using classical conditioning in it's most effective form (as an example). One of the worst outcomes is to associate the toy or food with bad things happening, but more often conditioning just doesn't result.

Thank you - I take your point. I can only comment on my own experiences - I guess I was looking for something a bit more innovative.

We all are :laugh: For most things, the basics done well are best though.

[itsadogslife]

Posted by Aidan2 Do you have any evidence that veterinary behaviourists are inappropriately medicating dogs,

I have a tenfold increase in the prescribing of drugs.

are inexperienced in working with dogs,

What kind of hands on working experience with dogs is required before someone with a degree in behavioral science opens up a practice treating dog problems? Is any kind of hands on experience required at all?

You seem to think that reading a manual on how to ride a bike is the same thing as being able to ride a bike.

or that the ten fold increase in medication is indicative of an actual problem?

The fact that these problems have been treated successfully by experience trainers for years without the use of drugs. Or are you suggesting that the ten-fold increase in drug use is the consequence of a ten-fold increase in biological, neurological problems in dogs? Or are suggesting to me that experienced dog trainers were unable to diagnose anxiety until behaviorists enter the picture?

The irony here is that you dismissed Dr Seksels academic experience as not being 'hands on' experience in working with dogs.

Yes, that is correct. Although I will concede that her qualifications are far more meaningful than the requirements expected from certain dog training franchises. I would probably run even faster in the opposite direction from certain dog trainers. Nonetheless, if I should ever need to seek help with a dog problem it is the CV of someone like Mark Singer that impresses me far more than Dr Seksel’s as impressive as her achievements are. It’s just not the kind of experience I am looking for when I have a dog problem.

The truth is that science is the most honest firm of actual hands on experience we have.

Who says? Scientists? Now of course scientists could never be self-decieved as to nature of what they are doing could they? They could never be biased in the way in which they conduct their research could they? One only has to pursue the research done on ecollars to see how much bias is inherent in the majority of these studies to realise that the science of behaviorism is as much captive to the normal human biases as the rest of us.

Self deception is rife out in the "real world".

Science is a human practice conducted by real people in the real world. The idea that scientists are less subject to the kind self-deceptions as the rest of us, is I find, rather naïve.

[Aidan3]

You seem to think that reading a manual on how to ride a bike is the same thing as being able to ride a bike.

Straw-man argument.

or that the ten fold increase in medication is indicative of an actual problem?

The fact that these problems have been treated successfully by experience trainers for years without the use of drugs.

False premise. No, we have never treated separation anxiety, noise phobias, or stereotypies with much success without the use of drugs. The fact that we can today is a triumph of the science I so naively put my faith in.

Or are suggesting to me that experienced dog trainers were unable to diagnose anxiety until behaviorists enter the picture?

It was frequently diagnosed as "submission", or paradoxically, "dominance". In the latter, the symptoms (but not the cause) were suppressed. The dogs were still anxious, sometimes more so, but punished into shutting down the overt behaviours associated with it. Learned helplessness was not an uncommon side-effect, which is an utter tragedy.

If the dog was lucky, a bullet ended the problem. If the dog was really lucky, the greedy drug companies would profit from a pentobarbital sale.

The truth is that science is the most honest firm of actual hands on experience we have.

Who says? Scientists? Now of course scientists could never be self-decieved as to nature of what they are doing could they? They could never be biased in the way in which they conduct their research could they?

Of course they can, and are. Science is a process, not an isolated event. The fact that published data is available for scrutiny should speak volumes as to it's honesty. I am as free to criticise as I am to collect data, as are you for that matter.

What is better, Dr Seksel meticulously taking data on 200 dogs randomly allocated to groups; or the dog trainer who only has his own opinions and observations to go by and only shares that which they would want you to know?

Self deception is rife out in the "real world".

Science is a human practice conducted by real people in the real world. The idea that scientists are less subject to the kind self-deceptions as the rest of us, is I find, rather naïve.

Perhaps it is naive of me to go to a doctor when I need my appendix removed, rather than a faith healer? If that is naive, then I'm OK with that.

[itsadogslife]

Posted by Aidan2 False premise. No, we have never treated separation anxiety, noise phobias, or stereotypies with much success without the use of drugs.

Okay, for the sake of argument I will accept this for now.

It was frequently diagnosed as "submission", or paradoxically, "dominance". In the latter, the symptoms (but not the cause) were suppressed. The dogs were still anxious, sometimes more so, but punished into shutting down the overt behaviours associated with it. Learned helplessness was not an uncommon side-effect, which is an utter tragedy.

Can you please direct me to research which shows widespread misdiagnoses amongst dog trainers. Can you also show me the research that shows learned helplessness to be a widespread outcome of dog trainers interventions.

[huck house]

This information is freely available to anyone who wants to do some research without going to the expense of engaging a behaviourist.

I still think it's worth engaging a professional even if you know enough to understand the protocols. It can be a terrible lost opportunity to try something and not quite get it right due to lack of experience, in some cases you burn the

chance to use the least invasive method by 'sensitising' the

dog to it.

Sorry to go off topic , but can you please expand on this Aidan2? Thanks

Despite it's simplicity, I rarely see anyone using classical conditioning in it's most effective form (as an example). One of the worst outcomes is to associate the toy or food with bad things happening, but more often conditioning just doesn't result.

[huck house]

Apologies, I don't know how to quote ..

[Aidan3]

It was frequently diagnosed as "submission", or paradoxically, "dominance". In the latter, the symptoms (but not the cause) were suppressed. The dogs were still anxious, sometimes more so, but punished into shutting down the overt behaviours associated with it. Learned helplessness was not an uncommon side-effect, which is an utter tragedy.

Can you please direct me to research which shows widespread misdiagnoses amongst dog trainers. Can you also show me the research that shows learned helplessness to be a widespread outcome of dog trainers interventions.

Koehler's suggested treatment for dogs with separation anxiety was to leave, returning unexpectedly when they whine to beat them with a leather strap or belt "until he thinks it's the bitter end". If you google "learned helplessness" I don't think you'll have too much trouble piecing it together.

Or you could look at the relationship between punitive training techniques and separation related behaviours reported in this article: http://www.azs.no/artikler/art_training_methods.pdf

Unfortunately we can't always find a study that answers specific questions. Sometimes we have to piece together information from different sources (and our own experiences). Whilst this study doesn't answer your questions directly, it does fill in some of the gaps: http://www.friendsofthedog.co.za/uploads/6/0/9/1/6091047/trainingarticle.pdf

[Aidan3]

This information is freely available to anyone who wants to do some research without going to the expense of engaging a behaviourist.

I still think it's worth engaging a professional even if you know enough to understand the protocols. It can be a terrible lost opportunity to try something and not quite get it right due to lack of experience, in some cases you burn the

chance to use the least invasive method by 'sensitising' the

Sorry to go off topic , but can you please expand on this Aidan2? Thanks

Sure, imagine your dog is afraid of men with hats. You decide to use a desensitisation protocol utilising classical conditioning. Whenever you see a man in a hat you act all jolly and play with your dog, the idea being that he will associate men in hats with you being playful and happy.

The only problem is that the jolly routine, or the way you do it, might not be all that wonderful to your dog. So now every time you do it, your dog is starting to tense up, expecting a man in a hat to appear. Before you realise, all of a sudden every time you get a bit excited about something, he tenses up and waits for the man in the hat to appear.

You didn't do anything "wrong" as far as the procedure goes, you just didn't know what to look for to make it work or weren't able to reassess and pick another approach that might be favourable.

[Christina]

Here is the problem I have with dogs being prescribed these kind of medications

When a person is given an anti depressant, drug for schizophrenia or psychosis or anxiety/sedative type medication, there is no actual way of measuring serotonin levels in the brain or any other chemical.

There is no test for this that can be done on a living creature, only dead ones so

Diagnosis is made by asking questions & observing behaviour.

Verbal feedback is given on any side effects. Dogs can't talk.

So while the dog may be seen to be behaving in the appropriate/desired manner in its head it may be laughing & suicidal & it has no way of telling. Its behaviour will not reflect always this. Some people on prozac do actually suicide. It can have this weird effect & it may not be obvious. How can a dog let you know ?

Edited February 29, 2012 by Christina

[huck house]

Aidan2 , thanks for the example as well as the interesting links you posted. Cheers

[itsadogslife]

Posted by Aidan2 Koehler's suggested treatment for dogs with separation anxiety was to leave, returning unexpectedly when they whine to beat them with a leather strap or belt "until he thinks it's the bitter end".

I see you are leaving a great deal out of your description of Koehler’s method for treating seperation anxiety. Is that because you one of those dog trainer’s “who only has his own opinions and observations to go by and only shares that which they would want you to know?”

If you google "learned helplessness" I don't think you'll have too much trouble piecing it together.

I asked you a specific question. I asked whether you “can you also show me the research that shows learned helplessness to be a widespread outcome of dog trainers interventions”.

Or you could look at the relationship between punitive training techniques and separation related behaviours reported in this article: http://www.azs.no/ar...ing_methods.pdf

Again, I asked whether you could “direct me to research which shows widespread misdiagnoses amongst dog trainers.” I did not ask whether there is any research showing the typical pet owner to be less than competent. Yet the study does mention similar research which studied more formal training under the supervision of dog training professionals. This research showed in one study no relationship between obedience training and problematic behavior, whilst the other showed a decrease in problematic behavior after training. Both those studies used professional dog trainers – the subject of the question I asked – but which you instead provide a couple of studies pertaining to the average dog owner?

Whilst this study doesn't answer your questions directly, it does fill in some of the gaps: http://www.friendsof...ningarticle.pdf

I have already read and commented on that article. I find it extremely weak at best. And again, you are referring me to a study of typical pet owners.

Unfortunately we can't always find a study that answers specific questions.

Yet to my claim that dog trainers had been successfully treating these problems without the use of drugs, you gave a very specific response that it was false.

Sometimes we have to piece together information from different sources (and our own experiences).

The subject was about the expertise of experienced dog trainers. Directing me to studies done with average pet owners and then suggesting that such studies are relevent to the competence of experienced dog trainers is an extremely long bow to draw.

Edited March 1, 2012 by itsadogslife

[Aidan3]

Whilst this study doesn't answer your questions directly, it does fill in some of the gaps: http://www.friendsof...ningarticle.pdf

I have already read and commented on that article. I find it extremely weak at best. And again, you are referring me to a study of typical pet owners.

Typical dog owners who sought information from a number of sources, including dog trainers. I am not going to trawl through every journal article I have ever read (most of which neither of us can access off-campus) to prove a point to you that you are clearly not interested in taking. If you expect to find a study that will answer every question you might raise directly, you are either dreaming or deliberately trying to point-score in a pointless argument.

You introduced the claim that dog trainers have treated these problems successfully for years. You prove it. You have studied philosophy, you know that it is your responsibility to evidence claims that you introduce. You hold me to a higher standard than you are willing to take yourself.

This is the internet, it's not worth upsetting each other over things that we will probably never see eye to eye on.

[OzzieLioness]

Perhaps it is naive of me to go to a doctor when I need my appendix removed, rather than a faith healer? If that is naive, then I'm OK with that.

Hmmm - if you keep going to a doctor to have your appendix removed, may I suggest that perhaps you need a new doctor! ;)

[Aidan3]

Perhaps it is naive of me to go to a doctor when I need my appendix removed, rather than a faith healer? If that is naive, then I'm OK with that.

Hmmm - if you keep going to a doctor to have your appendix removed, may I suggest that perhaps you need a new doctor! ;)

Thankfully they got it out the first time! Whereas if I'd gone to a faith healer...