Lies, damn lies and statistics

David Cavil explains the way in which the TV programme Pedigree Dogs Exposed distorted statistics to 'prove' their prejudiced case

Category:

Pets & Animals

Tags:

• dogs
• genetics
• statistics
• our
• animal
• care
• college
• pedigree

[davidcavill]

Mmm - fact usually are. Invention and distortion of the facts may be more interesting but do nothing to advance any argument

[davidcavill]

I think you are basically right. There are more issues of genetic health andf structural conformation among pedigree dogs but most are 'liable' with. Mongrels often have problems with temperament and this actually probably gives the owners more problems than genetics

[davidcavill]

I appreciate your support although I am afraid I cannot agree with you dad. Having worked with crossbreeds and mutts at Battersea for 11 years I can tell you that they too have problems - not the same ones (mostly) but certainly in terms of temperament. I like the quote - I have been striving for the unachievable with the KC for 35 years!

[davidcavill]

No - I do not think they should be banned. They have strayed across the 'distorted' line I have (personally) drawn but they could be back on the right side of it within two generations with a simple out cross. The KC would be happy to allow this - in fact would encourage it. Breeding good dogs is not rocket science and getting it right is not hard. You just need the will and the KC is helping breeders to do it

[davidcavill]

I thought I made it clear that there is a point at which distortion of the natural conformation will affect soundness. Breeds can be distinctive without reaching that point but when it is reached then breeders and judges need to stand back and reconsider their position. See my web log at word press. Just go to the site and type in davidcavill

[davidcavill]

I am very much in favour of show dogs being able to do the job required of them and my own view is that many breeds in the gun dog group are far too heavy. I believe that breeders and judges should always keep the original purpose of working dogs in mind but I am afraid many do not. Perhaps the new demands of the KC will mean we get back to the original purpose of some of these breeds. I hope so

[Davidsingsjazz]

@koala8 No - I do not agree with you. I am a journalist and I know the difference between sound reporting and introducing 'distasteful' elements' which - certainly in this case - did not add to or develop the argument. It did mean it got a lot of publicity though - clearly the objective

[koala8]

@Davidsingsjazz

obviously its distasteful to breeders because its a documentary highlighting the negative aspects of breeding...just because its distasteful it doesn't make it wrong. Usually to make a statement in order to inspire debate/discussion always ends up offending someone...that's just an inevitable fact of life not just in journalism but everywhere else.

[Davidsingsjazz]

@koala8 We are going to disagree about PDE - not bescause there was not a great deal in it that was important and accurate and needed saying but because of its distasteful approach and the implication that because a ralatively small prportion of dogs have genetic problems all dogs are affected and all breeders should therefore stop breeding and are irresponsible - Simples

[koala8]

@Davidsingsjazz

+ her documentary wasnt narrow or misunderstood. it's simply common sense and thats why it struck a chord with the viewers. the judging is mainly based on a visual standard not a health standard. and certain visual characteristics are not for the "betterment" of a dog. Simple as that.

If it was about health, a healthy dog would win irrespective of "breed", a mutt could even win if it was "healthy". but that's not how it works and obviously the truth hurts for some ppl

[koala8]

@Davidsingsjazz

so if breeders breed because they like to breed, they should be willing to accept

criticism from people who are concerned like Jemima Harrison and the general public...why argue against it? it just makes u look more stupid... its like ppl who hunt animals for sport, no one would believe them if they tried to justify their actions. its the same with breeders. you breed for physical traits that's why the dogs are paraded in a show...its not really about health

[Davidsingsjazz]

@koala8 I do breed Finish Spitz because I like them and I think this is true of most breeders. The problem is not accepting that we like and enjoy our breeds but people like Jemima Harrison (and many other individuals and organisations) who make so many assumptions on us based on a very narrow and misunderstood set of precepts.

[koala8]

@Davidsingsjazz

to be honest, breeders would earn more respect by just admitting that they breed cause they like it...simple as that...like ppl who hunt for a sport. they just admit the fact that they enjoy shooting animals..they dont struggle to give reasons or legitimise what they do...breeders breed for enjoyment and their own personal reasons its not cause they care for the health of an animal...if they cared for the health of an animal they would have became vets not breeders

[Davidsingsjazz]

I think we all the same side of the fence. When I was involved in pet insurance there was certainly an increase of premium for those dogs that were known to be short lived and had a genetic condition but I do not think that there is a general and overall premium to be paid because a dog is by definition 'pedigree'. I may be wrong, things change all the time!

[koala8]

@Davidsingsjazz

im not saying that all pedigree dogs have genetic illnesses. all im saying is that the incidence of genetic illness in pedigree dogs must be higher (than mutts) to such an extent that insurance companies are willing to make a commercial decision to charge more for pedigree dogs..