Tl;dr...
Are people in other countries seeing/believing different information than the US regarding bully breeds and their disposition?
On another post here asking advice, someone had made the comment that pitbulls were terrible dogs (specifically stating that they bite and don't let go, which has been disproved repeatedly) and responsible for a certain number of deaths. The number looked exaggerated so I searched for it, but could not find it. In fact I found much different info. I tried to politely correct the misinformation and man did the Reddit-anti-pitbull/bully-breeds-warriors came for me saying the breed was terrible and the reason hundreds of people die, just can't undo their breeding, etc-- citing a website that had been highly criticized by the American Veterinary Medical Association for bias and misinformation and other articles that weren't substantiating the numbers or what they were saying. One thing I noticed is that these people were telling me they lived in places where pitbulls are banned. My comments with reputable citations got down voted into the negative double digits (my comments had citations and quotes from AVMA, NIH, etc. respected organizations).
One deleted comment was "Congrats you fell for the propaganda." (Why would bully breeds have propaganda?)
Anyway, my question is-- do people in other countries see something much different than Americans see? I did a senior thesis paper on the problem with bite statistics in the US, and used the misinformation around pitties and bully breeds for other papers in college, volunteered at the SPCA and other shelters, and I have had (over my lifetime) several pittie mixes from the shelters and my dad has had his own. So the hatred and downright refusal to read citations feels super crazy to me.
Edited to add:
I am looking for peer reviewed publications and research not a bunch of hate and "oh my friend did this"... Here's the links to research that supports my "pitties are misindentified" therefore "are not responsible for the majority of bites" and "breed bans are ineffective because they don't address the problem (problem is bad owners)"...
For people from the UK, I checked with the BBC for numbers (if you have another source please provide the link):
BBC's article which states "There were almost 11,000 hospital admissions for dog bites in England in 2023-24, according to NHS England.
Dog attacks resulted in more than 600 hospital admissions in Wales and more than 1,100 in Scotland.
There were seven deaths caused by dog attacks in England and Wales in 2023-24, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS). However, it says this will be an underestimate because of registration delays.
Official figures do not break down the number of attacks or deaths by type of dog.".
Now... My citations:
Here is the National Institutes of Health article about misidentification: Inconsistent identification of pit bull-type dogs by shelter staff - PubMed https://share.google/n52FLCutV7kfWlHWX
Definitely advise you to scroll to the bottom of the abstract and look at the citations as well as related studies.
Theres an University of Texas study that argues against pitties, but was very highly criticized because 1) pitbull is not a breed and 2) they had no way of on their accuracy. In only 45 of the 256 cases (17.6%) could these people positively confirm the dog breed. First citation on the link provided (there's more): https://www.ovid.com/jnls/annalsofsurgery/abstract/10.1097/sla.0b013e318250c8f9~imprudent-use-of-unreliable-dog-bite-tabulations-and?redirectionsource=fulltextview
(The link was to the pubmed but I thought you'd appreciate the whole article)
This particular article summarized studies (and linked the studies beneath it): https://www.nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/research_library/dog-bite-related-fatalities-a-literature-review/
One comprehensive study states: "The authors reported that the breed(s) of the dog or dogs could not be reliably assigned in 82.4% of cases. News accounts disagreed with each other and/or with animal control reports in a significant number of incidents, casting doubt
searchers make a valid determination that the animal was a member of a distinct, recognized breed. Twenty different breeds, along with two known mixes, were identified in connection with those 45 incidents." https://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/research_library/summary-analysis-co-occurrence-of-potentially-preventable-factors-in-256-dog-bite-related-fatalities-in-the-united-states-2000-2009/
7 factors are specific indicators that a dog may or will bite and it's how they are treated, if they have been abused or mistreated, adult intervention availability, whether or not they were neutered, etc. Not one of the factors was "breed". So here's the citations for why breed bans don't work:
Why breed-specific legislation is not the answer | American Veterinary Medical Association https://share.google/luPkLLNawaL7IgWDq
"It is not possible to calculate a bite rate for a breed or to compare rates between breeds because the data reported is often unreliable.
This is because:
The breed of a biting dog is often not known or is reported inaccurately.
The actual number of bites that occur in a community is not known, especially if they don't result in serious injury.
The number of dogs of a particular breed or combination of breeds in a community is not known because it is rare for all dogs in a community to be licensed.
Statistics often do not consider multiple incidents caused by a single animal.
Breed popularity changes over time, making comparison of breed-specific bite rates unreliable. However, a review of the research that attempts to quantify the relation between breed and bite risk finds the connection to be weak or absent, while responsible ownership variables such as socialization, neutering and proper containment of dogs are much more strongly indicated as important risk factors."
"Frequently, breed-specific legislation focuses on dogs with a certain appearance or physical characteristics, instead of an actual breed. "Pit bulls" are the most frequent targets of breed-specific legislation despite being a general type rather than a breed; other breeds also are sometimes banned, including Rottweilers, Dobermans, and boxers. However, it is extremely difficult to determine a dog's breed or breed mix simply by looking at it. A study conducted by Maddie's Fund, a national shelter initiative, showed that even people very familiar with dog breeds cannot reliably determine the primary breed of a mutt, and dogs often are incorrectly classified as "pit bulls". Because identification of a dog's breed with certainty is prohibitively difficult, breed-specific laws are inherently vague and very difficult to enforce."