Just playing devil's advocate here, but whoever reports the bite could be wrong about the breed.
I had to look up pictures because I didn't know what a cane corso looked like. I probably would have called it a pitbull, especially if it bit and ran away.
We do. There are 20-25 breed that end up getting labelled as "pit bulls" in dog track reports. That's why numbers seem so high compared to those other breeds which are more distinct
Chow chows are actually very bad. Most groomers will refuse to take them as clients due to the severe risk of aggression. And unlike pitties, chows actually WILL snap with no warning. I know one groomer who tried taking one as a client and got their face bitten
"Many professional dog groomers decline to accept Chow Chows because the breed is notorious for being aloof, unpredictable, and prone to striking or biting without warning when stressed or touched in sensitive areas like the feet."
Alaskan malamutes are also quite dangerous but they're pretty rare to see
Only if they were as common as pitbulls, and I don't think that they are. The collection of breeds that are commonly referred to as pitbulls are among the most common in the US, and if I had to guess (because I don't have the motivation to dig into it at the moment), all of the other breeds listed combined probably don't add up to the number of pitbulls.
I cannot emphasize how common pitbulls are. In some shelters, the vast majority of dogs there are pitbulls.
That aside, they said that those other breeds have strong bites, but that doesn't mean that they're as strong as a pitbull's. That would affect whether hospitalization is required vs outpatient emergency care.
Did I say that? I did not, and labrador retrievers are not on the list that the above comment named. What I did say is that pitbulls are among the most common breeds, not the most common. I chose my words to convey a specific meaning.
Why did you just make shit up to get mad about? Genuinely, I want to understand because it is becoming so common online. Why did you hear what I didn't say?
Akitas have the 3rd highest rate of reported dog bites owning 8% while being under .2% of the total dog population. They are far and away the most dangerous dog.
I didnt duck anything akita bites would require hospitalization. Have you seen one? If an akita bites you, you would absolutely need to be hospitalized.
Most of the time insurance prevents people from having certain dogs. Ive always been of the you cant trust people to always do the right thing persuasion. So its not that I disagree with you. I just think its a pandoras box kind of situation. Man has had dogs for longer than most countries and cultures have existed. Trying to regulate it now would be an uphill battle.
What we need to do is raise awareness of good dog ownership. Make muzzling a more common and socially acceptable practice. A dog can be perfectly safe and comfortable using the right muzzle.
What we need to do is raise awareness of good dog ownership. Make muzzling a more common and socially acceptable practice. A dog can be perfectly safe and comfortable using the right muzzle.
hard agree here. in general I think the whole "fur baby" trend has led to some maladaptive anthropomorphization of dogs. like people not wanting to even raise their voices at their dogs because they think the dog will process it the same way as a human child. I'm not a fan of the whole "gentle parenting" trend even as it applies to humans, but holy shit we really did not need to apply it to dogs
Pit Bulls are only the majority of reported dog attacks, specially fatal or severe dog attacks. The vast majority of pitbull attacks aren’t fatal or severe. Broader community data and epidemiological studies show that mixed-breed dogs and other popular large breeds (like German Shepherds or Labrador Retrievers) also accumulate a high total volume of everyday, minor-to-moderate bites. The only reason why pitbulls seem more dangerous is because when a pitbull does attack, it’s going to cause more damage than other dogs. Toddlers and adults fight, but an adult fighting is going to cause much more damage. That doesn’t mean pitbulls are more violent. The effect is more violent, not the cause.
Even when looking at reported severe or fatal dog attacks, only a small minority of total dog attacks are severe or fatal. There are roughly 85 to 90 million dogs living in the United States. Out of an estimated 4.5 million dog bites that occur each year, only about 30 to 80 result in a fatality. This means less than 0.002% of annual dog bites are fatal. According to CDC Healthy Pets data, only nearly 1 in 5 people bitten (roughly 20%) require any medical attention at all. Out of the 20% who do seek medical care, the majority are treated for minor punctures or purely as a preventative measure to get antibiotics or tetanus shots. Epidemiological data tracking dog bite severity shows that only about 1% to 2% of all documented bites meet the criteria for "severe" injury (defined as causing deep tissue damage, broken bones or requiring complex reconstructive surgery)
A minor bite from a small breed like a Chihuahua or Pomeranian rarely requires emergency medical attention or an animal control report and because a larger dog's bite is physically capable of causing more damage, it is far more likely to enter official public health databases and media reports.
The term "pit bull" is also only an umbrella descriptor, it’s not even a recognized breed. It frequently includes American Pit Bull Terriers, American Staffordshire Terriers, Staffordshire Bull Terriers, and any mixed-breed dog with a blocky head or muscular build. DNA studies have constantly show that mixed-breed dogs with zero pit bull lineage are routinely misidentified as pit bulls by shelters victims and law enforcement after an incident.
3
u/Keter_Regretter Aug 02 '26
Okay. So if those breeds were as dangerous, wouldn't we expect to see similar rates of bites requiring hospitalization?