Can You Help A Ph.d Student?

[alpha bet]

Actually the study I referred to was DEFINATELY for e-collar..... some 6-7 years ago from memory.

[WoofnHoof]

The reality is that there is bugger all money available for companion animal research, PhD students are living on a shoestring usually on a scholarship and are early career researchers, you can't break new ground without laying a solid foundation first. You can't build a sound research project that is founded on assumptions, it has to have a strong foundation of solid data before you get towards the ultimate goal. It goes at a snails pace because of the aforementioned lack of funding resulting in an incomplete foundation. Established researchers can't get scholarships and so their research must be well funded either by government or industry, neither of which are interested in funding companion animal research so the established researchers must do other projects which are funded and usually in the production animal industries that's of they can get into animal research at all.

The best plan for breeders and all of those in the companion animal industry who are interested in having their questions answered would be to form a research cooperative, allocate funding and call for projects within a defined parameter as other industry bodies do. Look at the CRCs for an example of this.

In addition supporting researchers such as the OP goes a long way towards showing strong industry interest in companion animal research, which in turn may make it more attractive to funding bodies with an interest in this area.

[Simply Grand]

The reality is that there is bugger all money available for companion animal research, PhD students are living on a shoestring usually on a scholarship and are early career researchers, you can't break new ground without laying a solid foundation first. You can't build a sound research project that is founded on assumptions, it has to have a strong foundation of solid data before you get towards the ultimate goal. It goes at a snails pace because of the aforementioned lack of funding resulting in an incomplete foundation. Established researchers can't get scholarships and so their research must be well funded either by government or industry, neither of which are interested in funding companion animal research so the established researchers must do other projects which are funded and usually in the production animal industries that's of they can get into animal research at all.

The best plan for breeders and all of those in the companion animal industry who are interested in having their questions answered would be to form a research cooperative, allocate funding and call for projects within a defined parameter as other industry bodies do. Look at the CRCs for an example of this.

In addition supporting researchers such as the OP goes a long way towards showing strong industry interest in companion animal research, which in turn may make it more attractive to funding bodies with an interest in this area.

[Aleksandr]

The reality is that there is bugger all money available for companion animal research, PhD students are living on a shoestring usually on a scholarship and are early career researchers, you can't break new ground without laying a solid foundation first. You can't build a sound research project that is founded on assumptions, it has to have a strong foundation of solid data before you get towards the ultimate goal. It goes at a snails pace because of the aforementioned lack of funding resulting in an incomplete foundation. Established researchers can't get scholarships and so their research must be well funded either by government or industry, neither of which are interested in funding companion animal research so the established researchers must do other projects which are funded and usually in the production animal industries that's of they can get into animal research at all.

The best plan for breeders and all of those in the companion animal industry who are interested in having their questions answered would be to form a research cooperative, allocate funding and call for projects within a defined parameter as other industry bodies do. Look at the CRCs for an example of this.

In addition supporting researchers such as the OP goes a long way towards showing strong industry interest in companion animal research, which in turn may make it more attractive to funding bodies with an interest in this area.

CRC fees are from 5K to 20000$ for membership. Doubt any individual dog breeder can afford that. Kennels more concentrating on their financial sustainability. and so on may be universities themselves can establish a fund where individual breeders can chip in for common research by order. Such us hip dysplasia in some breeds of dog. ?

[WoofnHoof]

The reality is that there is bugger all money available for companion animal research, PhD students are living on a shoestring usually on a scholarship and are early career researchers, you can't break new ground without laying a solid foundation first. You can't build a sound research project that is founded on assumptions, it has to have a strong foundation of solid data before you get towards the ultimate goal. It goes at a snails pace because of the aforementioned lack of funding resulting in an incomplete foundation. Established researchers can't get scholarships and so their research must be well funded either by government or industry, neither of which are interested in funding companion animal research so the established researchers must do other projects which are funded and usually in the production animal industries that's of they can get into animal research at all.

The best plan for breeders and all of those in the companion animal industry who are interested in having their questions answered would be to form a research cooperative, allocate funding and call for projects within a defined parameter as other industry bodies do. Look at the CRCs for an example of this.

In addition supporting researchers such as the OP goes a long way towards showing strong industry interest in companion animal research, which in turn may make it more attractive to funding bodies with an interest in this area.

CRC fees are from 5K to 20000$ for membership. Doubt any individual dog breeder can afford that. Kennels more concentrating on their financial sustainability. and so on may be universities themselves can establish a fund where individual breeders can chip in for common research by order. Such us hip dysplasia in some breeds of dog. ?

When I said breeders I didn't mean individuals, I meant organisations, breed clubs, national registering bodies etc. And I didn't say "join a CRC" I said look at the CRCs as an example of industry funded and directed research.

[Steve]

And in the mean time we will watch as some studies are conducted and released using up the precious resources available which could be used to actually help us do what we do because if we don't pay we don't get to have input into what studies are needed or how studies may be able to be conducted differently to really tell us something.

Breeder input prior to the set up of the methodology of the study regarding handling of the pups between 3 days and 21 days could have made a huge difference to the conclusions which were reached because of the obvious gaping holes that makes the conclusions reached and the study pointless.

[WoofnHoof]

Steve you generally don't get to pick and choose what is studied, how and why unless you are helping to pay for it or are doing it yourself, that is the reality for every single industry not just dogs so don't behave as though you are being especially hard done by.

Many industries offer top up scholarships for topics directed in their area of interest so it doesn't even need to be a huge investment and it goes towards developing a body of research. Have a look at what is being done by other industries to get the research done that they want to see and use it as a model for directing research in your area of interest.

If you would like the OP to modify her methodology and research goals perhaps you should contact her and make a case for it, if she feels it is warranted and within the scope of the parameters approved by her supervisor perhaps she will alter it. I would probably word it a little better than "I think your study is pointless" though, just saying.

[Steve]

Steve you generally don't get to pick and choose what is studied, how and why unless you are helping to pay for it or are doing it yourself, that is the reality for every single industry not just dogs so don't behave as though you are being especially hard done by.

Many industries offer top up scholarships for topics directed in their area of interest so it doesn't even need to be a huge investment and it goes towards developing a body of research. Have a look at what is being done by other industries to get the research done that they want to see and use it as a model for directing research in your area of interest.

If you would like the OP to modify her methodology and research goals perhaps you should contact her and make a case for it, if she feels it is warranted and within the scope of the parameters approved by her supervisor perhaps she will alter it. I would probably word it a little better than "I think your study is pointless" though, just saying.

I know you don't get to pick and choose unless you pay for it and I know its not just the dog industry and its every industry and Im not behaving as if I am being especially hard done by over and above anyone or any other group. The entire process of how scientific studies are chosen and used is flawed and needs to be reassessed because many of them use up the resources that are limited .The other side to it all is that the minute a study is paid for by a third party who has an interest in the results looking one way or another it is under suspicion anyway. You would hardly expect a poor report card on milk if the study was paid for by the dairy industry so why would one paid for by a breeder's group not come in for the same criticism?

There is not enough information here for me to determine anything about the op's study except that of all things breeders want to have studied to tell them something they dont know or are curious about this is closer to the bottom of my list than most and on my wish list is the desire for us to be able to work together at least a little more than we do now before studies and methods are decided on in order for us all including the academics to utilise and take greater benefit from limited resources available for such studies which are not funded by an industry group.

My comments specifically regarding methodology were in regard to the other study which was linked to regarding handling of young pups and the conclusions which were reached based on this which renders the study in my opinion pointless.

I get it, asking for the ability to pick and choose without paying is a different concept and not the norm and how very dare I say I would like to see the resources used a tad differently but if we always do what has been done we often get the same result. Is it such a bad thing to ask for an open mind and for the industry and those that are supposedly going to benefit from the knowledge to be consulted regarding possible studies and methodology ?

Edited April 3, 2015 by Steve

[LisaCC]

As I've said before, the ANKC actually gives grants to university students doing research on dogs. If you unhappy with what projects they are picking to fund perhaps you need to speak to them.

Perhaps the MDBA could provide a grant.

[Diva]

I get it, asking for the ability to pick and choose without paying is a different concept and not the norm and how very dare I say I would like to see the resources used a tad differently but if we always do what has been done we often get the same result. Is it such a bad thing to ask for an open mind and for the industry and those that are supposedly going to benefit from the knowledge to be consulted regarding possible studies and methodology ?

I don't know about choosing a research project to obtain a Ph.d, and I am not commenting on the research project that is the subject of this thread at all. But in the kind of govt funded research programmes I am used to, and which involve post docs and more senior researchers, ensuring that end users are involved in determining research priorities, project selection and design alongside funders and researchers is getting more common. So is expecting open access to raw data that can then be accessed and reused by others if research is publicly funded, to get the greatest value from the investment. My experience is nothing to do with animal research though.

Edited April 3, 2015 by Diva

[Steve]

As I've said before, the ANKC actually gives grants to university students doing research on dogs. If you unhappy with what projects they are picking to fund perhaps you need to speak to them.

Perhaps the MDBA could provide a grant.

Again you miss the point and I already know what the ANKC do and I'm not unhappy with the projects the ANKC are picking to fund. Whether or not the MDBA or anyone else is able to provide a grant is not relevant to what I'm saying. Some of the resources being used for studies which are being funded by the universities as part of scholarships for phd's could in my opinion, be better used. Chucking in and sticking your tongue out at me to tell me about how other studies maybe funded or how we might get more satisfaction by providing a scholarship or grant is not the same as discussing how current studies are chosen and how useful their finding are to the industry they are supposed to be helping by studying something.

[LisaCC]

I'm not pointing my tongue out at you Steve. My exact point is if you got some funds together the MDBA would actually have a choice then in allocating those funds and how they are used to an extent. Is that not what you want?

[Steve]

I'm not pointing my tongue out at you Steve. My exact point is if you got some funds together the MDBA would actually have a choice then in allocating those funds and how they are used to an extent. Is that not what you want?

No that is not what I want and its not something that is going to happen, what's more Its not something that should have to happen to have studies done in this country which award students their PHd which would be more likely to give greater benefit to those completing the studies, dogs and the people who are responsible for them.

The fact that we are told we can only have what we need or want and have the precious resources available used for studies which have greater credibility and use than some which are being done if we "get some funds together" speaks volumes for the current state of affairs and I again say that what I want is to have more studies done which could actually have credibility and make a real difference. Funny, I assumed those who were working toward a PHd and allocating approvals for these studies would have wanted the same thing.

[WoofnHoof]

As someone whose kids have completed PhDs I would have thought that you would be aware of the process and what criteria are needed for a PhD project to be approved. If you don't believe the current process is best for industry then as an industry representative you are welcome to approach universities and supervisors and present your point of view. Whinging on an early career researcher's thread just comes across as sulking, it's fine if you want to whinge but it doesn't do anything to address the perceived problem. Have you approached the student and her supervisor to address these concerns? Have you addressed universities and funding bodies with your point of view? Certainly there are many industries taking an active role in directing the future of research even from the level of secondary schooling. Nothing to stop any indsutry representative body doing this.

I also think it's very short sighted to work on the assumption that industry funded research is flawed simply because it is funded by industry. It comes down to whether the research is ether good science or bad science, the funding body asks the question the research attempts to answer it. The answers are not determined by who is asking the question.

[Steve]

Knowing what the criteria is and what is needed for a project to be approved doesn't mean I have to agree with it in its entirety Thank you for the advice on what I should do if I think things should be different even though Ive already told you that I've done that and more. Your assumption that nothing else is being done to try to address the problem other than me "whinging" here is also not correct.

I do agree that assuming industry funded research is flawed but in my experience that is an issue sometimes used to discredit them. Wonder why McGreevys research into use of the whip in racehorses is so much different to the industry funded research on the same topic - I also agree that this thread,this forum probably wasn't the best place to try to discuss this - so Ill shut up.

[Xyz]

As someone whose kids have completed PhDs I would have thought that you would be aware of the process and what criteria are needed for a PhD project to be approved. If you don't believe the current process is best for industry then as an industry representative you are welcome to approach universities and supervisors and present your point of view. Whinging on an early career researcher's thread just comes across as sulking, it's fine if you want to whinge but it doesn't do anything to address the perceived problem. Have you approached the student and her supervisor to address these concerns? Have you addressed universities and funding bodies with your point of view? Certainly there are many industries taking an active role in directing the future of research even from the level of secondary schooling. Nothing to stop any indsutry representative body doing this.

I also think it's very short sighted to work on the assumption that industry funded research is flawed simply because it is funded by industry. It comes down to whether the research is ether good science or bad science, the funding body asks the question the research attempts to answer it. The answers are not determined by who is asking the question.

+1! Well said.

[sandgrubber]

Old familiar problem: Money talks. The dog community is divided and not good at standing behind a common cause, so they don't sponsor many projects. On the other hand, there are always people with strong opinions willing to shoot ideas down. I have no idea who is sponsoring this particular research. If pedigree breeders want input, I'd suggest helping to organise a group of subjects, and using the subjects as leverage to improve study design. I sleep beside the whelping box and handle neonates a lot in the first few weeks, especially if there's a little one or a few little ones. If someone wanted to put a camera into my whelping setup and record interactions, I would be in a position to ask for information on study design and make suggestions. To put it crudely, better to be on the inside pissing out than on the outside pissing in.

Personally, I'd be glad to know whether or not early handling of pups had longer term effects. I have assumed handling is good, based on weak evidence. But I would prefer to see a study that followed pups to at least late adolescence . . . when behavioral problems tend begin showing up. I no longer live in Oz and was formerly in WA, so I was never in a position to influence this study. I have my PhD and spent a decade as a university lecturer who, among many other things, advised doctoral students . . . so have at least a modest claim to understanding the ropes.

Edited April 3, 2015 by sandgrubber