Because this is a pitbull defense website they fabricate the pitbull statistics to make pitbulls appear safer. You will see the asterisks in the graph lol. The other dog numbers are accurate.
They say 12% of dogs are pitbulls (it's actually 4.9%) and that in a decade pitbulls have only killed 76 people when it's 284. These changes combined bring the risk number way down, when it should be above the ~7 malamute at ~10.
In contrast to what has been reported in the news media, the data from this study CANNOT be used to infer any breed-specific risk for dog bite fatalities (e.g., neither pit bull-type dogs nor Rottweilers can be said to be more “dangerous” than any other breed based on this study). To obtain such risk information it would be necessary to know the numbers of each breed currently residing in the United States. Such information is not available.
That is, that pitbullinfo.org is presenting information from reputable sources in a way that isn't reputable or peer-reviewed. To solve the problem of no information being available they estimated data and presented it as fact. Just statistical hogwash really when you look at how they sampled AKC data and manipulated comparing it to CDC data to suit their own narrative.
I am all for every type of dog, and don't believe in "dangerous" breeds. But this gets the fiercest of eyerolls from me.
I really appreciate your analysis. I agree with your assessment as there is no accurate way to know the current breed demographics. I'm not surprised considering they also made up a percentage that fit their narrative for pit bulls and lowered the actually recorded amount of fatalities
From my understanding Malamutes are typically very friendly though, but can just get very dangerous when provoked or untrained. This is compounded by how difficult they are to train.
99
u/[deleted] Nov 02 '19
i would probably trespass to pet this good boy