haven Posted September 15, 2006 Share Posted September 15, 2006 I just wanted to point something out to everyone SB writesYou state that, as a physiotherapist, after I have put this sentece I think Id personally rather have a TENS machine applied to me (the one physio use) rather than have someone spraying stinking deodorant in my face. Now how on earth would anyone straight away assume Im a physio??? It so just happends that I am qualified as a physio but I also have a feeling that this person has been having this discussion with us a while ago under a different login. A thread about NZ Police springs to my mind. Yes the personal attacks that were posted by SB last night and have since be removed definately smacked of 'prior knowledge' of a number of the posters here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve K9Pro Posted September 15, 2006 Share Posted September 15, 2006 Snobbybobby aka Henrynclo: At least in Vic. we haven't got a commercial barrow to push! K9: seems your barrow is full of attitude... SB: Which is more noxious to the dog and which is more likely to cause the dog to change tack??A Dog receiving an electric shock or a noxious smell??? The electric shock is via the neck of the animal and would be equal to the same sensation should a human apply the shock collar to his/her own neck and not a wrist as some would want. Just my humble question! K9: evidence shows the no bark collars that are electronic have a greater success, does that answer your question? Here is an article that may also help... SB: Well, you should be because citronella isn't harmful to humans or canines, K9: no this is incorrect, citronella is a poison, the MSDS on my web is put out by the people who produce citronella... It is harmful.. I have seem many dogs loose hair on their face & have extreme allergic reactions to citronella. Snobbybobby, you have changed your name from Henrynclo, under that log in your troll actions seemed to draw you attention, changing your name hasnt changed your attitude... Your were, & still are, a time waster that adds nothing to the conversation... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lab and poodle Posted September 16, 2006 Share Posted September 16, 2006 I am going to state my opinion which is founded on the little facts that I have been able to collect. I am paraphasing Dr Holmes who appeared as a witness for an E collar company in a case against Hugh wirth et al.. He said approx that the e collars were unlikely to cause damage to a dog but were far from a desirable training method. He also suggested that they acted as an unpleasnt slighly painful agent. I believe in this case that the process of discovery allowed that this was so. Erny agreed with tis finding in an earielr posting. I do not think that e collars are a worse /better adversive than many others. The question mark is a) Do we use adversives b) When do we use adversives, what situations why? I am annoyed with the unwarranted perrenial personal attacks in this columns. As far as I am concerned they say a hell of a lot about the self discipline and subject content of those that to do it than the recipient. I always wonder what is going on that it is requred that people stoop to these levels? We aren't pollies! It does not attract me and believe you me I read very widely, search widely,can easily put aside differences if neccessary and incorporate lots of different parts of methods into my work with my dogs and others. one may wonder what the hell ther is to hide when stuff like this happens. I have a further question from K9force. How is it that the level from an "e" collar is regarded as a stimulation? Is it to do with the drive model of a dog's behaviour, or is it in comparison with a TENS machine in physio? How do you compare the operation of each? I would like to see facts, figures, and references please. As you can imagine, I am an Amateur, and do not spend a lot of time musing about these devices. Such info is easier for you to find, my be your physio friend(s) can help you. I don't mind interpreting data in my role as an engineer or have another do it to once and for all get a reasonable idea of how these things work. BTW MDS sheets are a cop out crock of shite. I think with a MDS sheet was written for water, they would have to warn of its drowning and overdose effects. I am suprised about the citronella /electric collar comparison. Last I heard it was the other way around.(80/90% success rate, Dr John Fisher mentioned in his book Dogwise). He also suggested that based on reaction tests done on dogs in a controlled trial, they reacted in a completely different way to cintronella. I would like to know how to got to your number, how many dogs you tested, what variables were in the trial. etc. It is so different to these other numbers that I wondered whether you had considered publishing it along with your methodology in a peer reviewed publication so others in the dog world may share your knowledge? It is so startlingly different to these results, truely remarkable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erny Posted September 16, 2006 Share Posted September 16, 2006 Erny agreed with tis finding in an earielr posting. Ummmmm, I'm lost. Would you point me to where I agreed with the finding? Not needling, but genuinely can't remember that bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lab and poodle Posted September 16, 2006 Share Posted September 16, 2006 "[if you knew RT's or e-collars, you'd know for descriptive purposes it's less of an electric "shock" and more of a "stimulation" (albeit aversive/unpleasant)." I would disagree on the wording (stimulation instead of shock), but agree with the main thought with what I can glean. I would happily post my sources for my disagreement, but frankly it is a red herring and IMHO a distraction form the real issue.I should have isolated Dr Holmes comments "but were far from a desirable training method" about training as you might not agree with this. For this I am sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MonElite Posted September 17, 2006 Share Posted September 17, 2006 Hey L&P would it be possible for you to tell us why on earth would anyone want to do the research YOU desire and post it on here just so you can read it? Go and do your own research. and if you are not convinced about anything stay away from getting an ecollar for your dog, noone is forcing one down your throath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griffo Posted September 17, 2006 Share Posted September 17, 2006 (edited) Lab and Poodle, why on earth would he want to do free research for you? If i remember correctly, it was not very long ago that you were criticizing K9's methods and calling them: L&P: a bunch of mirrors and smokescreens Yet now you criticize other posters for making personal attacks? L&P: believe you me I read very widely, search widely,can easily put aside differences if neccessary and incorporate lots of different parts of methods into my work with my dogs and others. Yet when asked if you were interested in attending a training workshop, your response was this: L&P: No I wont. I know from these threads that I am not that interested....I am having a ball with what I am doing, and i am getting dam good results. But you go for it. Doesn't sound like you are really very interested in incorporating other methods into your training, or even learning about them before judging. Just sounds like a lot of contradicting statements to me. Edited September 17, 2006 by Rachelle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MonElite Posted September 17, 2006 Share Posted September 17, 2006 (edited) In the spirit of the friendlyness of the forum and a genuine desire to help with L&P's research here are some sites for you Innotek USA the manufacturer Innotek Australia the distributor Dogtra another manufacturer Tri-Tronics yet another manufacturer DT Systems blah blah SportDog etc etc enough people for you to contact? Im sure these people will be able to answer all you questions on how the thing works. Surly someone had done research on the gear before they have produced it and released it on the world wide market... Oh and here is some other people saying stuff about ecollars http://www.safepets.com/debunkingmyths.html http://www.ezdogpark.com/remotecollartrain.htm http://www.finographics.com/schutzhund/obe...motecollar.html http://www.leerburg.com/318.htm Edited September 17, 2006 by myszka Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MonElite Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 BTW MDS sheets are a cop out crock of shite. I think with a MDS sheet was written for water, they would have to warn of its drowning and overdose effects. MSDS for water Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve K9Pro Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 L&P: I am going to state my opinion which is founded on the little facts that I have been able to collect. I am paraphasing Dr Holmes who appeared as a witness for an E collar company in a case against Hugh wirth et al.. He said approx that the e collars were unlikely to cause damage to a dog but were far from a desirable training method. He also suggested that they acted as an unpleasnt slighly painful agent. I believe in this case that the process of discovery allowed that this was so. K9: these comments from Robert I am sure are based on the use of a high level correction... Not low stim method. L&P: I do not think that e collars are a worse /better adversive than many others. The question mark is a) Do we use adversives K9: if we want reliability & there is a need, yes. b) When do we use adversives, what situations why? K9: when a dog has found a behaviour self rewarding & the behaviour is undesireable. L&P: I have a further question from K9force. How is it that the level from an "e" collar is regarded as a stimulation? K9: I didnt invent the word, but I would suggest that it stimulates the dog into understanding the current behvaiour is negative...But you might ask the person who attached the word originally, I use it as it is a recognised international term. L&P: How do you compare the operation of each? K9: I dont. L&P: I would like to see facts, figures, and references please. K9: I suggest you buy one of each & begin performing some tests then. L&P: As you can imagine, I am an Amateur, and do not spend a lot of time musing about these devices. K9: the last conversation you had was telling us how you were the expert, I think your words were, "ask me, Im an expert"... L&P: Such info is easier for you to find, my be your physio friend(s) can help you. I don't mind interpreting data in my role as an engineer or have another do it to once and for all get a reasonable idea of how these things work. K9: but there is absolutely no reason for me to perform these tests, I am not a physio nor do intend treating sporting injuries... Send your enquiry to the e collar manufacturers, see what they say, but dont be surprised if your email ends up in te nut bag file... L&P: BTW MDS sheets are a cop out crock of shite. K9: I wont argue to or for these sheets, however I have persoanlly seen many dogs have an adverse reaction to citronella, I didnt need a sheet to see that.. L&P: I am suprised about the citronella /electric collar comparison. Last I heard it was the other way around.(80/90% success rate, Dr John Fisher mentioned in his book Dogwise). He also suggested that based on reaction tests done on dogs in a controlled trial, they reacted in a completely different way to cintronella. I would like to know how to got to your number, how many dogs you tested, what variables were in the trial. etc. It is so different to these other numbers that I wondered whether you had considered publishing it along with your methodology in a peer reviewed publication so others in the dog world may share your knowledge? It is so startlingly different to these results, truely remarkable. K9: Firstly, what you would like to know is of no interest to me, secondly you have told us all how well trained your dog is & you have no need for either citronella nor electronic collars, you have also told us how you designed an electric fence in the past & that you dont think e collars are all that different, in fact I remember you whinning about regs you had to pass that e collar people didnt. Having that said, if you have no intention of using such a collar, why do you want to know these things, & why do you see to think that we need you in every e collar discussion that occurs here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidoney Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 L&P: I have a further question [for] K9force. How is it that the level from an "e" collar is regarded as a stimulation? K9: I didnt invent the word, but I would suggest that it stimulates the dog into understanding the current behvaiour is negative...But you might ask the person who attached the word originally, I use it as it is a recognised international term. IMO the word comes from standard medical/biological based terminology, that is, stimulating the nerves to give a sensation. Nerves that are activated by electrical impulse (and note that nerve impulses ARE electrical in nature) are generally said to be stimulated in some way. Subjectively, having tried various ecollar levels on myself, the lower levels are more akin to some kind of stimulation and not painful until much higher, with quite a gradient in between. There is the potential for pain there, yes, and that's why the comments about having training supervision (as per Victorian laws) are relevant and appropriate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis Carthy Posted September 18, 2006 Author Share Posted September 18, 2006 (edited) I am sorry folks, I have only just returned and noticed my post as had some replies. I will answer points as soon as I have time enough to read all this. Denis Carthy London UK. Edited September 18, 2006 by Denis Carthy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis Carthy Posted September 18, 2006 Author Share Posted September 18, 2006 (edited) Australdi- Having had experience of a council issued citronella collar...and seeing it resultant malfunction....I'm personally opposed to e-collars! Denis Carthy Hi, Have you noticed this topic has nothing to do with spray collars, such off topic replies usually occur when people know nothing about statics and want to say something of no meaning, fine by me but it's a bit strange to post and imply "I know nothing about e-collars" so lets change subjects. Can you explain to me why your statement above has no rational base? Anyway, as you have mentioned it, spray collars have not sold well for a couple of years, its rubbish, cheap technology (as you say), citronella causes serious health problems and spray collars hardly sell here in UK anymore. Few retailers even bother stocking them and they have such a bad reputation they have been reduced in retail price an average of 50% within this past 12 months, in US they forgotten they ever existed almost, below are the material data sheets to the citronella you sprayed into your dogs face, I am surprised you did not take care to understand the dangers before you risked one. Australdi- I instituted a regime of positive training Denis I am sorry but "positive training" is a commercial product not a method of training, the word “positive’ is used as an operant stimulus word used for commercial purposes and designed to ‘attract’ a potential buyer of the product (pet owner). My guess you did a negative punishment based method but you are reluctant to state that. Australdi- in my own humble experience...they are a poor & lazy substitute for "real" training! Denis Yes I agree, based on what I have read in your post you know very little of training, that’s is especially clear in your misuse of the term “positive training” when you must have used a “punishment” based method, at least we are in agreement Australdi-Your experience is very limited, or as you prefer to call it “Humble”. Snobybobby I was told once by someone who had a vested interest in e-collars that Citronella collars were poisonous??? Denis It's a pity Australdi did not contact you before he used equipement only the naive and innocent would risk. Below are the dangers you exposed your dog too Australd and Snobbybobby meant as poisons. Because you neglected finding out about training equipment, it would be a good keep a check on its eyesight from now, you never know what you have done. Material Safety Data Sheets Citronella http://www.thegoodscentscompany.com/msds/md100301.htmlhttp://libertynatural.com/msd/355.htmhttp://www.naturecraft.net/naturecraft/data/038.htmhttp://msds.farnam.com/msds/m001167.htmhttp://www.cepis.ops-oms.org/bvsapud/i/ful...ol/geraniol.htmhttp://libertynatural.com/msd/22.htmhttp://householdproducts.nlm.nih.gov/cgi-b...&id=6010019http://msds.farnam.com/msds/m000773.htmhttp://www.cepis.ops-oms.org/bvsapud/i/ful...citronellal.htm Edited September 18, 2006 by Denis Carthy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis Carthy Posted September 18, 2006 Author Share Posted September 18, 2006 (edited) Sunny 70 I couldn't think of any other way to train her not to bark when unsupervised, Denis Yes there is Sunny 70, you could have the dogs larynx severed in the de-barking operation, that is the only know option which works, here in UK we have many extremists and their organisations who want that option used. Denis Carthy London UK. www.freewebs.com/deniscarthy Edited September 18, 2006 by Denis Carthy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis Carthy Posted September 18, 2006 Author Share Posted September 18, 2006 (edited) Snobbybobby At least in Vic. we haven't got a commercial barrow to push! Denis I am in UK and I dont sell e-collars so have no 'commercial barrow to push', I do have a training background. I have never met Steve or any other e-collar users here, I don't need to meet any of them I know a competant trainer when when I read them. Steve knows as much about training techniques as he will ever need to know and in keeping with the ethic, 'The dogs best interests is the deciding factor in training', including matching a training technique to vast ariations of owner and dog combination (the only in field application that can possibly work). With Steves knowledge and background it's it is obvious he is useing the best of all know techniques, also, your knowledge of the commercial potential of training people with a e-collar is very limited indeed, there is no money in training people with an e-collar compared to other methods, it is the most consistant and reliable training aid there and can adjust almost any situation which happens at any given time. Of course if you wish to explain how the vary the 'intensity' of the reward value of treat with the fluctuations of drive, the only way any stimulus can work, I would be gald to here it. Denis Carthy London UK http://www.freewebs.com/moneybeware/ Edited October 3, 2007 by Denis Carthy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis Carthy Posted September 18, 2006 Author Share Posted September 18, 2006 (edited) Snobbybobby A Dog receiving an electric shock or a noxious smell??? The electric shock is via the neck of the animal and would be equal to the same sensation should a human apply the shock collar to his/her own neck and not a wrist as some would want. Just my humble question Denis, To answer your very humble question, which is in fact a statement Here in Europe Electric Shock Collars have been banned from retail sale for at least a decade and they were only special purpose when they were on sale, they were almost entireley confined to the Dutch and Belgium KNPV police dogs and other service dogs prior to the collapse of communism. You have no electric shock collars on sale in Au and its unlikyyou ever had. Below is what you are referring to, I am posting it so you no longer need to post ‘humble’ posts and attempt spread your own ignorance like a disease History & Evolution of The Modern E-Collar. Chapter 1. In The Begining.The Electric Shock Collar.Germany-UK 1950?s - late 1980?s. There has been e-collars of one sort or another in the UK in civilian hands since around the 1950?s, these were usually brought over from Germany by service personnel and either sold on or loaned by them. A firm called Karenswood, I think from Solihull, used to get them to order or hire. Specific use Electric Shock Collars were very rare, the ones in civilian use were originated by a German Vet as a safety device to be used with his own hunting dogs instead of falt buckle and other collars, know to be highly damageing to the neck vertrate and other skeletal structures. The only collars I knew of in the UK between 1976 and around the late 80?s were electric shock collars, long since obsolete. I was told in 1976, when I first used one, that electric shock collars first came into use in WW2 and were of German origin, I have no reason to doubt this and some German contacts confirm some sort of electric shock collar was known to be in military use in Germany at that time. The difference between an electric shock collar and modern remote trainers was the fact that the e-shock collar had two contact points which contacted either side of the neck, 2 or 3 inches below the ears. Once fired the shock went into the neck and met the electric shock from the other contact point on the other side of the neck. The e-shock collar I used in 1976 and once in the late eighties with someone else?s dog was German in origin, it was not remote and was an electric shock collar. They had one very high level and could not be adjusted to the individual dog. They were only used in extreme circumstances or the ?out? in protection work. They were never designed or intended for ordinary pet use and were not a training collar. They were designed solely for high drive working line dogs and were sometimes used in conjunction with a method and other aids with some pet dogs which had aggression or sheep chasing problems and were in a life, death or rescue situation. Electric shock collars were rare in the UK, everyone I know who were training in either protection sports or training the protection dogs of that point in time as well as many show dog people had heard of ?electric shock collars? but few people had ever seen them and fewer still had ever used them. If I had not rescued a dog from Battersea dogs home I would probably never have seen them, even so a lot of myths about them and their use abounded in those days. There was a more recent electric shock collar which was also made in Germany, possibly by the same manufacturer. It had the same electrodes at the side of the neck and the electric shock also went into the neck from either side, the electric shocks from each contact point met in body as before. They had low, medium and high levels and were remote. These were in use in Europe until the late nineties but no one I have ever spoken to heard of any of them being used here in UK, I saw one in Germany and they seemed to be used pretty much like the old shock collars, as a positive punisher only. It has been illegal to sell these collars for many years, they did not pass the European CE safety standard and were dangerous to humans. The use of these collars fits the description of use given out by KC, APDT, APDT and a few other commercial competitors. The term electric shock is a recognised scientific term, static electro muscle stimulation collars are incapable of delivering an electric shock, anyone using electric shock as their terminology when referring to electro pulse collars would be misleading others. GP's and the NHS recognises the Blacks medical dictionary as one authority. Ch 1 updated 2006.-Remote Electronic Training Collars. Fifty years of UK history, from electric shock to a sensation Second Edition, E-Collars, Historical Clarification, from electric shock to a sensation, 1950s ? 2006. Edited September 18, 2006 by Denis Carthy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erny Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 Thank you Denis. I have always referred to "stimulation" when it comes to talking about our modern day e-collars. Called it that because even when experimentally used on myself, it didn't feel like what I'd expect an "electric shock" to feel like. I have been told that e-collars have come along way, but didn't fully realise how much they have evolved. Thanks for clearing that up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis Carthy Posted September 18, 2006 Author Share Posted September 18, 2006 Erny I have been told that e-collars have come along way, but didn't fully realise how much they have evolved. Thanks for clearing that up. Denis Hi Erny - yes they were allways considered dangerous, but in the very specific confines of their use and as an outright last resort they had a place, thought I'd clear it up a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lab and poodle Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 K9, you again didn't answer the questions after making assertions,you didn't debate the point , you had another go at me, yet you don't know me. what the hell is wrong with you? I really wouldn't want to be associatted with you or your methods if this is how you behave. Of course, you must know everything, and my input on shock and associated issues is not valid. I am glad you have 27 years of experience with electronic engineering and can completely bypass this. You wont give me the data, yet you continue to assert stuff about the safety and nature of the collar. I promise you that if I had a need to buy one, I wouldn't buy it off you. To the moderator: I have no desire to be on this list, it disgusts me. BTW if that vid for your pysio friend was meant to be a demo of prey drive training, it certainly didn't do anything for me. Some one should tell her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis Carthy Posted September 18, 2006 Author Share Posted September 18, 2006 (edited) Snobbybobby The electric shock is via the neck of the animal and would be equal to the same sensation should a human apply the shock collar to his/her own neck and not a wrist as some would want.- Just my humble question Denis It’s humble, as you put it, in two ways, one it is not a question it is a statement of fact and two it is wholly incorrect. The text paper info below gives a simple, easy to understand what they are and what technology is involved, not as simple or as “humble” as yours, nevertheless accurate, it includes a link to the case of Innotek Vs RSPCA Australia, the RSPCA had to pay $100,000 liable to Innotek (scrounged from the public), Innotek had to pay them $30,000 because they called RSPCA liars, which is what liable is. Lab poodle I would disagree on the wording (stimulation instead of shock), Denis I am not surprised you disagree with the facts, anyone infuenced by someone who stopped learning about e-collars in 1993, barked in dogs faces and stratched his head in disbelief when they went to bite, then spoke the magic words "Kill it, thats £100 please" would find themseleves in the position of prefering the extreme absurd to reallity. You cannot disagree unless you disagree with the entire global medical proffesion and the scientists behind the manufacturers of hundreds of items which are incapable of giveing an 'electric shock' but are electro pulse muscle stimulator items. In fact you have no knowledge of e-collars or the training methods so you simply prefere to use words as a replacement for your lack of knowledge and experience in an attempt to influence the thoughts of those with the mental incapacity not see through that, people with that mental capacity probably should not have dog, they would be better with a goldfish. I cannot imagine what kind of excuses you have for failing to keep uptodate with the advantages that modern technology ( e-collars ) has brought to millions of dogs worldwide and has given them a quality of life in a stress free (beyond the normal stress of all learning) training method(s), the old methods of training you use have travelled to you from the Upper Plaisteothene, you probably refuse to move forward because the old methods you probably use are a place of safety for you, hence reading Fisher and it seems he was barking mad. Electro Pulse Muscle Stimulation Technology, Contextual Perspective. Although this paper is dedicated to remote electro pulse muscle stimulation dog training collars I feel it is appropriate to clarify the context and extent of the technological development of electro pulse muscle stimulation technology, its prolific global use in extensive areas of application such as wound healing in all land mammals, beauty cosmetics, massage, toys, electro pulse meditation aids, deep brain implants for such things as Parkinsons and Seratonin stimulation and not least the pharmaceutical applications replacing traditional pills and potions by a one off payment for an electro muscle stimulation device, designed for the specific purpose. Suppression and sabotage of information about the later was highlighted when pharmaceutical giant Johnson & Johnson was ordered to pay $115,000 liable in its attempts to malign a pharmaceutical use electro pulse muscle stimulation device. The same happened with e-collars in Australia, the RSPCA (Aus) had collected vast sums of money over a 5 year period in its campaign to ban e-collars, it then made a legal liable error and was sued by Innotek, it was ordered to pay $100,000 liable and Innotek was ordered to pay RSPCA $30,000 liable because it called the RSPCA liars. Innotek Vs RSPCA (Aus) http://judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/2002/J020860.yes.htm In simple lay terms this is how electro muscle stimulation appliances work; Of the various devices deliberately designed to cause a sensation a specific number of electrical wave pulses pass between the contact points bouncing off the surface of the skin, say for instance 1000 waves per second. It is the number of bounces on the skin surface per sec which is usually known as the intensity. Originally electro pulse muscle stimulation was painful, however, this problem was resolved in 1892 by French physiologist Jacques d'Arsonval's who found that increasing the frequency of the pulse controlled the pulse to levels giving discomfort in varying degrees as opposed to the sudden onset of pain as we normally understand it. If the speed of the waves bouncing along the skin surface was slowed down to 500 bounces per sec the sensation would decrease, speed up to 2000 waves and the sensation would increase in intensity. If an electro muscle stim device is activated at 500 pulse bounces per sec and the individual feels an irritating but not overwhelming sensation the individual is aware of it but pays little attention to it, if the pulse is left on it accumulates in irritant degree as the seconds pass by, itching is a common phenomena which works by accumulation, cold is another, bad smells etc they accumulate in degree as time passes. In the case of e-training collars, if 1000 bounces per sec reached an accumulated point of discomfort whereby it distracted someone from doing something after 6 sec and the discomfort ceased at the point the behaviour changed then the cessation of the behavioural action would reinforce or reward the pleasant relief behaviour and strengthen it, increasing the behaviour which removed the discomfort. A human example is the frequent movement of removing the discomfort we feel if we sit or stand in the one position to long, we positively reinforce the behaviour of maintaining an acceptable level of comfort, the biological purpose is to prolong the health of limbs and joints. Negative reinforcers catalysing a positive reinforcer are one of the most common operant parts in early human learning, EG, if you go to a restaurant, order a meal you have never tried before and then dont like it, the discomfort experienced by the unpleasant taste is removed by leaving the eal and maybe washing the uncomfortable/unpleasant taste away with water, this decreases the behaviour of eating that food? again positively reinforcing the behaviour of not eating that food anymore. Reward is a function of behaviour which the individual animal learns produces any consequence favourable/appetitive to that individual, punishment is a function of behaviour which any individual animal learns is unfavourable/non appetitive to that individual. Even with an intellect a billion, billion universes beyond that of a dog humans learn and benefit by sensation very early on. A baby cries with hunger pains, its mother comes and stops the pain by feeding it, intensity + duration = accumulating degrees of sensation = babies crying = avoidence behaviour, advantageous to the animal and its well being - we learn not to hold our hands to close the fire for to long to avoid burning, intensity + duration = accumulating degrees of sensation = avoidance learning through pain, advantageous to the animal and its well being - we learn not to wait to long after the hunger pain sensation starts and eat to avoid the unpleasant sensation, or if we cannot eat food as soon as we start feeling hunger pains then we remove the hunger pains by eating, we turn the hunger pain off, avoidence behaviour, advantageous to the animal and its well being - dogs learn to avoid the unpleasant sensation of direct sun and keep to the shade after a short exposure to direct sun, they turn it off to avoid dehydration and possibly other things beyond my understanding, intensity + duration, positively reinforcing low degrees of activity and reducing risks of overheating in those conditions - avoidance learning through pain, advantageous to the animal and its well being, most dogs are more active on cold days, the increase in activity avoids the pain of feeling cold hypothermia related conditions, avoidance, resulting in maintainence of healthy joints, muscles, blood flow correct body temprature condusive the he animals health and well being -avoidance learning through pain, advantageous to the animal and its well being and hundreds of thousands of etc examples in an animals lifetime. As I have stated the working functionality of a modern e - training collar is based on the accumulation of a static electro pulse stimulus sensation which is not dependant on one element making up the sensation i.e. intensity it is based on two elements, intensity + accumulation in time. If you start to scratch your arm at a level which is uncomfortable but not an immediate overwhelming intensity and continue at that level you will soon find it becomes uncomfortable to a point that you discontinue the behaviour = discomfort + length of time = change in behaviour, i.e stopped the action of scratching. The main reasons e-collars remained behind other developed uses of variable level static stimulation instruments was its use on a moving object, very often under adverse environmental conditions, at long range and with the ability to be perpetually adjusted to the sensory widening and narrowing which occurs with drive activity levels. If analogue technology was still in existence e-collars would have remained as limited use collars. Modern good quality e-collars are the most advanced form of non-satalite, terrestriastal telemetry there is, outside military use. On Channel 4 London region w/e July 7th 2004 an hour long late night program was dedicated to variable level static stimulation erotic M/F sex toys with optional combined vibration. The static sensation is exactly the same as e-collars, needless to say, the body areas had different biological purposes and responded to the sensation appropriately. The fact that static electro pulse muscle stimulation is a sensation and the actual idea that in such a technologically advanced society we have not technologically progressed beyond being able to use electrical sensation beyond an elementary, electric fault electric shock is absurd. Such claims from groups or individuals are untrue and should either be dismissed or put in the context of such extremist groups who opposed Darwin or those who wanted to ban photography because ?Only God can make man in his own image?, those were the extremists of that period, e-collars also attract extremists non of whom have any idea as regards what they are or how they are used, the UK Kennel Club is one and radical extremist organisation calling itself APDT another In the 40,000 - 140,000 years or so of the existence of some species dog/wolf co-existing with man there has always been one persistent problem, distance control and training. More dogs have suffered abuse, euthenasia due to frustration or revolving door rescues because of this than any other single reason, dogs with persistent problems are only securely rehomed on rare occasions. In the UK the e-training collar is giving dogs more freedom and stress free relationships since around 2002/3 when pet owners started to reject the commercial exploitation they had been subjected to in recent years than at any time in the history of the species. E-collars are the easiest to use addition to training aids of every kind and dogs which have had no reliable recall for years can be transformed within one training session by the owner resolving the welfare and problem behaviour caused by the commercial product ?positive training? an appalling rip off in which dogs are subject to horrendous punishments every day and the na?ve, new to dogs, owner indoctrinated that they are rewarding the dog, the opposite is true. The modern, post 1998, static electro pulse muscle stimulation e-training collar has taken the dog out of the Neanderthal dark ages of needing to be on the lead because it is out of control and given it the freedom within safety which is a requirement of the species if it is to live a quality life with stress free owners in a lifelong relationship which comes about by owning a well behaved dog. The only suffering caused by e-training collars is to those who have commercially exploited pet owners in recent years by convincing them their dog has some kind of quasi medical condition which needs a lifetime of expensive ?behavioural treatment?, when it refuses recall, raids picnics, runs at strange children barking at them or general, normal, uncontrolled, disruptive canine behaviour. Below are some examples of electro pulse muscle stimulation products designed for various purposes and which terrify both extremists and the insane.. http://www.kiiko.com/pachi.html http://www.superfoots.com/whiselmust.html http://www.gadgetsuk.com/Electric-shock-pen-p-16649.html http://www.vard.org/jour/05/42/2/walter.html http://www.stockroom.com/c003.htm http://www.isrvma.org/article/57_1_7.htm http://www.zencudo.co.uk/search.phtml?q=el...ock&stype=1 http://www.bodyclock.net/acatalog/electroacupuncture.html www.tritronics.com http://www.odu.edu/engr/bioelectrics/biogateway.htm http://www.medicaledu.com/estim.htm http://www.medicaledu.com/estim.htm http://www.medicaltoys.com/electric.htm http://www.ams.ac.ir/AIM/0031/bouzarj0031.html http://www.bodyshapers.com/htm/modelsp.htm#BUST%20SHAPER http://www.sexelectric.com/fom/home/home.html http://www.cerebrex.com/Merchant2/merchant...ategory_Code=CM http://www.bodyclock.net/acatalog/electroacupuncture.html www.dogtra.com http://www.parkinsonindia.org/deep_brain_stimulation.htm http://www.sexshop365.co.uk/catalog/default.php?cPath=65_192 http://electrosex.nl/index.php?cPath=70 http://www.bodyshapers.com/htm/modelsp.htm#VISAGE%20FACIAL http://www.woundcare.org/newsvol1n3/ar10.htm http://feswww.fes.cwru.edu/ Edited September 18, 2006 by Denis Carthy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now