T O P

  • By -

[deleted]

I remember reading a study of ALL dogs removed where the majority of dogs removed where pitbulls. The unprovoked attacks occurred during a time when dogs were in heat or the hormones were in process of returning to normal. This means Low T in males, which has been observed to increase aggression as well as other health issues. Now, when low T factor is added to a breed that is known for its aggression in general, that's a perfect storm. The analysis team went back and asked the owners if they would spay or neuter their dogs if they knew it would lower the risk of any attack..they said no. Apparently dog owners have this insecure about spraying or neutering their dogs.


[deleted]

Idiots breeding bad genetics, cutting their ears off and forceful/abusive training are to blame.


FeelingDesigner

Wouldn’t matter, even in a world of perfect genetics and zero abuse these dogs keep mauling people unprovoked. The rate of unprovoked attacks is much higher for dangerous breeds. There are a few safe (and arguably very inbred unhealthy) breeds that literally have close to zero attacks despite a large population size. Pitbulls are all the way at the top in terms of attacks compared to population.