w w w . n e u t e r i n g . o r g
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Human_And_Animal_Behaviour_Forensic_Sciences_Research_Laboratory@hotmail.com - 08 Jul 2006 23:40 GMT w w w . n e u t e r i n g . o r g
Why non-human animals should NOT be spayed or castrated WARNING: This Website Contains Mature Subject Matter You should be an adult to read this page as it addresses sexual and controversial issues.
Purpose of This Website
There are a LOT of websites that explain the reasons one should have one's companion animal neutered; these sites are easy to find. However, this website explains why some people would prefer NOT neutering their best friends. There is a movement in the animal companion community to neuter every non-human being that draws breath and wags a tail... if the poor beast is even allowed to have a tail. In my opinion this precedent has completely gotten out of paw! It's become a matter of "if you don't spay or neuter (two words that mean the same thing) your pet then you aren't a responsible pet owner." The purpose of this page is to defy this paradigm, explain why it's wrong, and suggest some alternative methods of controlling the overpopulation of non-human animals.
A personal note: I suppose the mass sexual mutilation of sentient beings by humanity wouldn't be such a bad thing if humans would include themselves in this hypocritical practice; since it is an overabundance of humanity that poses the greatest detrimental impact on this beautiful planet's environment.
TERMINOLOGY: A "Bitch" is a female canine and a "Dog" is male. Forum Contact What Exactly IS Neutering neutering, n, the sterilization of an animal [syn: fixing, altering, castration], see also spay and emasculate
Neutering, or gonadectomy, is the de-sexing of a male or female animal, whereby the reproductive organs are completely removed. In female animals neutering is called spay, which literally means to cut out with a sword. In male animals neutering is called castration. Both terms, spay and castration, include in their definitions the act of depriving animals of virility or spirit; depriving them of strength or vigor; weakening them; devitalizing them. Surgical Spaying
Long Beach Animal Hospital Surgical Castration
Long Beach Animal Hospital
Click the above images to see complete details of the procedures.
1. Anesthesia is administered. 2. The Bitch is prepped for surgery (spay). 3. A 3-5 inch incision is made in the abdomen, near the umbilicus, through three layers of tissue. 4. A spay hook or finger is used to pull a uterine horn through the abdominal incision. 5. The uterine horn is followed into the body cavity in order to locate the ovary. 6. Three clamps are used to prevent the blood supply to the ovary from hemorrhaging and the ovary blood supply is cut. 7. Sutures are applied to the ends of the blood supply and it's allowed to slip back into the abdomen. 8. Procedures 4 through 7 are repeated for the other ovary. 9. The extracted ovaries are used to pull the cervix out of the abdomen. 10. A clamp is placed at the cervix, the uterus is cut, and the ovaries and most of the uterus are removed. 11. The remaining portion of the uterus is sutured and placed back into the abdomen. 12. The three layers of tissues are sutured and the abdomen is closed. 13. A pain medication is injected and the Bitch is taken to recovery.
1. Anesthesia is administered. 2. The Dog is prepped for surgery (emasculation). 3. An incision is made in the skin in front of the scrotum. 4. The testicle is pushed forward and an incision is made in the subcutaneous tissue just big enough to squeeze it through. 5. The tunics layer of tissues are incised to expose the testicle and associated structures. 6. The blood supply for the testicle is pulled out, sutured, and cut. 7. Each testicle is removed and the sutured tissues which once led to them are pushed back through the incision. 8. The two layers of tissues are sutured to close the incision. 9. A pain medication is injected and the Dog is taken to recovery.
The Ethics of Neutering
"Forced castration is immoral. In 1985, the Supreme Court recognized this when it ruled that involuntary surgical castration constituted cruel and unusual punishment." ~ Atul Gawande
Why am I against neutering my companion animal? Well, the basic answer is pretty simple; I don't want to be neutered myself. I don't want the surgical mutilation of my gender... the loss of my sex and what I was created by God and Nature to be. I consider my companion animals my friends, subjecting them to something that I myself could not tolerate just doesn't seem very friendly to me.
People might say, "but animals don't think like that, they don't care if they are neutered or not." I must reply that I don't subscribe to this theory because neutering alters many behavioral and physical characteristics; it must therefore alter attitudes and drives. Neutering devitalizes an animal and many people see this as an advantage because it makes the animal easier to control. Spay has been shown to cause nervous disorders in Bitches, resulting in worsened separation anxiety and even digestive issues. In Wolves spayed females scent changes and they may need to be separated from their pack or harassed to death by pack members.
Billions of years of trial and error went into the complex living organism. If gonads were simply isolated organs of reproduction then removing them would not be such a consequential issue, but these organs serve complex and interrelated functions involving growth and mental and physical development... they regulate many biological processes other than reproduction... and even have a bearing on social interaction between the animals themselves. Human beings are not wise enough to know the ways of God and Nature; to presume such is the folly of fools. We haven't a clue what our animal companions may think of neuter or how their animal friends may regard them for being de-sexed.
Another reason I'm against neuter is people telling me that I'm irresponsible for keeping an intact animal. They seem to use the sexual mutilation of their "pets" as a soapbox to stand on to hoist up their egos and put themselves above others.
Bob (your) Barker's "be a responsible pet owner, have your dog or cat spayed or neutered" is an example of some people trying to guilt-control other people into thoughtless acts. In fact it's not even an intelligent slogan because spay and neuter are two words that mean the same thing. Population control of domestic animals is a serious issue, as is the population control of the human animal which is totally running amok. Maybe human beings should do first by example, aye, and get themselves neutered too!
People don't want a dog. People want something that looks like a dog.
I am NOT irresponsible for keeping my animal companions intact. In fact, to have intact animals and prevent them from mating requires a good deal more responsibility that most people possess... which is one reason why neutering is so popular; many people are lazy and would rather surgically carve their canine into a servile plaything than deal with the whole creature. Well, fine... if that's your ethic and the only way you can prevent superfluous life, a tormented existence, and an early death then so be it... go out and neuter your "pet," but don't you dare look down on those of us who choose not to do this and call us irresponsible!
Yet another item that troubles me about the neuter craze are people I call Neuter Nazis. These, oh so much better than thou, hypocrites frequently operate animal shelters and rescues while often breeding animals themselves. They are snoods who want to know everything about everyone and snoop into peoples lives, under the guise of inspection, thinking they know what's best for everybody. These people develop adoption contracts the size of a telephone book that are hardly legal and impossible to make binding, and demand neuter as a prerequisite of adoption regardless of another person's ethical or spiritual beliefs and practices. They are simple control freaks who enjoy playing God, and they get off on putting down others who do not subscribe to their practices. What is most important to a Neuter Nazi is their political agenda, NOT the health and welfare of animals. They are quite likely responsible for a huge number of the homeless animals who are put to death annually, because after having a go-round with these people a lot of folk just say to hell with this and go out and buy a puppy. I devote an entire section to these people below.
"In happiness and suffering, in joy and grief, we should regard all creatures as we regard our own self." ~ Lord Mahavira Possible Health Effects of Neutering
* Anesthesia shock and surgical complications (Dogs and Bitches) * Post operative pain and infection (Dogs and Bitches) * Obesity (Dogs and Bitches) * Hypothyroidism (Dogs and Bitches) * Cerebellar Cortical Abiotrophy (Dogs and Bitches) * Loss of estrogen; sex and growth hormone (Bitches) * Intervertebral disk disease (Bitches) * Myasthenia Gravis; muscle weakness (Bitches) * Urinary incontinence (Bitches) * Altered moods leading to nervousness, separation anxiety, and digestive disorders (Bitches) * Vaginal perivulvar dermatitis and recessed vulva (Bitches) * Loss of testosterone; sex and growth hormone (Dogs) * Narrowing of the chest resulting in respiratory disorders (Dogs) * Failure to extrude the penis (Dogs)
Loss of testosterone is directly correlated to: heart disease and myocardial infarction, strokes and cardiovascular disease, senile dementia, osteoporosis and hip fracture.
In human beings testosterone has an important role in the regulation of normal growth, bone metabolism and body composition. Specifically, testosterone deficiency is an important risk factor for osteoporosis and fractures in men. Men with testosterone deficiency have significant decreases in bone density, particularly in the trabecular bone compartment. Testosterone deficiency has been reported in over half of elderly men with a history of hip fracture. Men with testosterone deficiency also have alterations in body composition that include an increase in body fat. Using quantitative CT scans to assess fat distribution, we have shown that testosterone deficiency is associated with an alteration in site-specific adipose deposition with increased deposits in all areas, particularly in the subcutaneous and muscle areas.
Because truncal fat correlates with glucose intolerance and cardiovascular risk, hypogonadism may have important implications with regard to overall health and mortality. In one study, the alteration in skeletal muscle composition was associated with a decrease in muscle strength. Therefore, testosterone deficiency is associated with an enhanced risk for osteoporosis, altered body composition including increases in truncal fat, and, possibly, decreases in muscle performance.
Loss of estrogen leads to an acceleration of the bone-degradation process, which in turn results in a loss of bone mass and a raised risk for incurring bone fractures (osteoporosis). Loss of this hormone also causes violent mood swings, irritability, and depression.
In human beings, a drop in the production of sexual hormones can have considerable consequences for the emotional world of women. Many menopausal women observe a reduction of their general performance, an increasing forgetfulness, an impaired fine motoricity, and a diminution in their powers of memory and of planned, targeted, flexible and adaptable thought. Furthermore, many women display a tendency towards pronounced fluctuations in their mood, and even massive symptoms of depression. Very recent studies indicate that estrogen deficiency also increases the risk for Alzheimer's disease.
The process of aging and the regression of the sexual hormones also involves a degradation of the muscle mass. This results in a deterioration of the coordination of body movements and enhances the tendency for falls. The elasticity of the joints also diminishes. The joints become stiff and painful, especially upon rising in the morning. This is due to the reduction in the production of collagen and a reduced storage of water as a consequence of the estrogen deficiency Why People Neuter
It's the "right thing"
Whenever a special interest group wants a certain something they spread propaganda designed to promote it. There's no difference in the animal companion community. The fact is that there are a lot of domestic animals put to death because people can't cope with all of them. This is the big guilt trip this propaganda is designed to inspire and it is used to push people into spaying and castrating their companion animals.
What about the millions of animals killed as food, most of whom have dramatically worse living conditions than a superfluous dog or cat? These animals are sentient too... meaning they have emotions and feel the things human beings subject them to. Killing for food is, however, a natural process that Nature demands of many beings, especially predators, so I'll not question the act of killing for food... although tormenting an animal to death IS evil... and people do this a lot in industrialized ranching. Killing an animal for no reason other than because the creature is superfluous and because killing is convenient is not civilized in my opinion. This is evidenced by the fact that civilized people don't kill each other this way or for similar reasons... we don't round up our transients and hungry multitudes and kill them. People have an "it's just a dog" mentality... people put their own kind above all other living things and justify their acts by contrived philosophy and religious dogma. This is done regardless of what an animal being may think or feel and without any respect for how they want to live just as much as we do.
So the right thing, it is said, is to keep animals from reproducing, and the easy solution to this is to surgically alter them so they can't reproduce. This may be justified, but neutering is just one way of achieving this goal. Neutering is an invasive procedure that drastically affects an animal's biological processes. There are alternatives to this from as simple as proper containment to tubal ligation and vasectomy. These are much less invasive and respectful, but the problem is that people are brainwashed into this "be a responsible pet owner, have you dog or cat spayed or neutered" paradigm... and because veterinarians make so much profit from these procedures, they rarely suggest the alternatives - or even explain the risks.
Health Concerns
This is a very valid issue. There may be evidence to support improved longevity and health associated with neutering. I won't disrespect those who neuter for this reason. I will say that I personally do not trust the source of this data due to the bias of those who provide it. I have NEVER seen an unbiased study where there was proper scientific methods implemented to show altered verses non-altered canines over a lifetime period with records showing the actual health consequences of each group. Without such an unbiased report I must conclude, being an acute observer of human nature, the facts commonly made public are the propaganda of Neuter Nazis to support and justify their politics.
In short, I don't trust them to tell the truth. I have a thirteen year old Dog who is intact and is the picture of health and happiness. I think ANY animal can get sick and ALL will eventually suffer the effects old age unless they meet a fateful early end. Face it... Nature wants us dead... that's where life leads us all. I had rather put my trust in the fact that life developed over millions and millions of years of trial and error and that this is as good as it gets. Seeing what human interference has wrought upon our earth I simply do not trust the wisdom, or lack of it, to surgically edit such a wondrous creation.
Pressure
People are pressured into neutering their companion animals for many reasons: Animal rights groups and radical anti-breeding groups. Breeders who want to have more control over where people can acquire animal companions. An increasing number of landlord/tenant policies and municipal ordinances, which should have nothing to do with personal choice.
I've seen a movement for mandatory neuter law... this is nothing less than fascism!
There's a tendency for people who choose NOT to sexually mutilate their companion animals to be looked down upon and I've even been insulted and declared irresponsible because I refuse to go with this flow. This pressures a lot of people into neutering without fully understanding that they are surgically altering another living being permanently and taking away the creatures sex. There are alternatives, but they aren't even discussed. To me this too is a form of pressure toward neutering. In my opinion all these things combined is an attitude toward the forced neutering of companion animals... a big brother attitude... and unless we resist this paradigm there may, indeed, be written more laws telling us what we can and can't do with our animals.
Modified behavior
This is often a big selling point for neutering: A neutered animal will be easier to control, wont rove, wont enter heat (estrus), wont mark, will be less aggressive, will smell better, and etc. Some of these things may indeed be true, and for a lot of people they are good reasons to sexually mutilate their "pets."
I regard these reasons as selfish acts of laziness and vanity, however. When someone desires to carve another being into what they want them to be, what I see is a control freak... I see someone who can't love another for who they are... I see someone who must change another to suit themselves. I consider people who would cut into someone they call a friend and tear the flesh and sex out of their bodies, for this reason, a vandal who wants a slave... a servile plaything to show off to their friends and to make up for something they lack in themselves. These are, of course, my personal opinions and a lot of folks will take exception to them.
Also, in my opinion, someone who wants a servile plaything puppet sown to their whim and specification would do better to get a plushie (a stuffed toy animal), rather than subjecting a living being to suffer the knife for their vanity and lack of ability to love and care for the whole living being.
Could there be a conspiracy?
>From the way Neuter is pushed as the ONLY responsible way to control domestic animal overpopulation, I sometimes feel there's some kind of conspiracy in the works. Veterinarians can perform tubal ligation of vasectomy, which are less invasive techniques than neuter, and which allow the production of estrogen and testosterone, thus allowing an animal's normal urges and development, however few of them offer this alternative. I also wonder if breeders haven't been responsible for so much of this push to neuter every canine that moves in order to create a market for their puppy-milled stock. Just some things to think about from one who has found that human beings don't always reveal the ulterior motives behind their actions. Alternate Altering
Repression of heat cycle
Ovaban (megestrol acetate) and Cheque drops can repress a Bitches heat cycle. Both have very serious side-effects so I DO NOT recommend them.
Containment
This is the most natural and least invasive method of preventing mating; keeping your male and female animals away from each other so they cannot copulate. This can require a lot of attention on your part, especially if you have a male and a female companion. You need to know how to read the signs when your Bitch is entering estrus and be prepared to move her to an isolated area and keep her there during heat. You should also be ready to provide massage therapy to calm her anxiety during heat and the lactation of pseudopregnancy to remove carcinogens from her nipples that may cause breast cancer. Dogs should also be relieved occasionally, and will be very appreciative of this, especially when the scent of estrus is in the air. These things require an uncommon, deeply devoted, human companion, so keeping intact animals isn't for everyone.
"Whatever can go wrong will go wrong." ~ Murphy's Law
Believe it or not, if woofs can even touch muzzles, chances are they'll find a way to mate when you aren't paying attention. Consider this the rule: Absolute separation of male and female canines during heat. If you only have male or female animals then it's just a matter of not letting them roam and seeing to their individual needs to comfort and protect them. The key with keeping canines from breeding is to keep Murphy's Law in mind and do whatever necessary to subvert what can go wrong. When you have made certain that NOTHING can go wrong, only then are you behaving responsibly.
Vasectomy and tubal ligation
Vasectomy is a low-invasive surgical procedure whereby the Dog is sterilized without depriving him of testosterone and avoiding possible side effects associated with the loss of this hormone. Vasectomy involves the surgical removal of part of each vas deferens and is a fairly simple procedure.
Tubal ligation is a low-invasive surgical procedure whereby the Bitch is sterilized without depriving her of estrogen and avoiding possible side effects associated with the loss of this hormone. Tubal ligation means, literally, to tie up a small tube within the Bitch. This too is a much less dramatic procedure than neuter. Ask your vet about cutting the tubes instead of clamping them, for clamps have been known to come undone.
Veterinarians tend to shy from vasectomy and tubal ligation surgeries because they do not eliminate production of testosterone and estrogens. Because of this their idea of what a canine animal should behave like is not realized by the human companion. This should not be the vet's decision however - they are not his or her concern so long as you make an informed choice. If you are prepared to live with canines the way nature intended them... if you can love and care for the whole animal... then it's no ones business but your own. You should look around until you find a health care professional who will respect this position. I personally prefer NOT allowing control freaks to cut into my best friends.
Note: if you want a servile plaything to tie up in the back yard and forget about until friends come around to show off too, then these procedures are NOT for you. Have the standard neuter procedure performed, for in the long run your victim will suffer less and live a more "comfortable" lonely and futile existence. And if you have a vanity issue I suggest you consider Neuticle implants for Dogs. How to Care For a Sexual Being
WARNING: This section will likely freak out and offend a lot of people. Herein I express controversial opinions regarding the care of intact companion animals. I don't care what people think... the health, safety, and happiness of my friend is the paramount issue and I put this issue way before the dogma of an insecure multitude. I include these views for like-minded people.
Due to the nature of this section I've placed it on a parental control tagged page: Special Care for Dogs and Bitches The Neuter Nazis
What follows is purely a rant.
Neuter Nazi is what I call a person that is radical about neutering. Neuter Nazis are ruthless in their attempts to see that all animal companions are sexually mutilated, and this agenda is a priority that goes beyond rational good sense and charges blindly into the absurd. It doesn't matter if someone is spiritually or ethically against neuter... it doesn't matter if an animal suffers or even dies from the surgery... nothing matters to a Neuter Nazi except clip and snip! I firmly believe most of these people have ulterior motives for behaving like this.
There are a lot of dogs put to death each year in shelters due to over population caused by uncontrolled breeding. I don't believe as many of these come from "accidental" mating as the Neuter Nazis claim. I think a lot come from people who want to watch "the miracle of birth" or who breed them simply for profit. I think Neuter Nazis hold this idea that they know what is best for everyone! Many of them operate shelters and rescues that intimidate people with contracts and inspections until a lot of folk just give up on the adoption process and buy a pup. So a lot of these animals come from Neuter Nazis themselves!
Neuter Nazi's who do rescue insist that every dog they locate a home for must be neutered regardless of how someone might feel about the practice. They play God with an animal's life so they can wag their ego over someone else's head. It's really a shame that people have to strain compassion to the point of oppression so profound, that it discourages the adoption of animals in need. Many people despise having a sword waved over their head by fanatic zealots on an ego hike: I know I do!
Anyone who defies the will of Neuter Nazis are treated like evil and sometimes even accused of being animal abusers! Neuter Nazis won't stop there... they want to create fascist-style mandatory neuter laws! They want to punish responsible people by charging them more for licensing an intact animal! The person who doesn't want to neuter must pay extra for the sin of puppy mill operators!
It's a shame animals must be put to death just because they are superfluous. On the other paw, millions more are put to death in horrendous ways simply because we eat them. So tell me... why is the life of a cow so much less important than the life of a Bitch? The deaths of dogs in shelters are used as guilt fodder to trip people into neutering their companions... even though millions of animals are treated much worse by human beings, day and night, regardless of neuter or not in industrialized ranching! This makes no sense to me. I don't want to see any animal needlessly killed, but just because I don't believe in neutering my companion does NOT make animal suffering my fault! My companion animals have NEVER produced a single unwanted life! So lay off the guilt trip you control freaks! Yours is NOT the only way! I don't even believe yours is the right way.
Comments and concernes may be sent to ebon@neutering.org This page has had 2,466 views by 1,791 visitor since 04:59:25 May 28, 2006 GMT.
jotnaringin@yahoo.com - 09 Jul 2006 00:05 GMT Human_And_Animal_Behaviour_Forensic_Sciences_Research_Laboratory@hotmail.com wrote:
> w w w . n e u t e r i n g . o r g > [quoted text clipped - 499 lines] > This page has had 2,466 views by 1,791 visitor since 04:59:25 May 28, > 2006 GMT. <snip>
Wow, what a fantastic article. I agree.
Show Dog Bark
Bigjoe - 09 Jul 2006 09:29 GMT <snip>
Wow, what a fantastic article. I agree.
Show Dog Bark
<<<<<< cut
Please don't quote the whole bullsh*t from the m*ron, thanks.
Picasso - 09 Jul 2006 02:25 GMT now thats annoying, even if i wanted to look at this i cant click it or copy it.
Human_And_Animal_Behaviour_Forensic_Sciences_Research_Laboratory@hotmail.com wrote:
> w w w . n e u t e r i n g . o r g > [quoted text clipped - 499 lines] > This page has had 2,466 views by 1,791 visitor since 04:59:25 May 28, > 2006 GMT. Bigjoe - 09 Jul 2006 09:29 GMT > now thats annoying, even if i wanted to look at this i cant click it or > copy it. > <<<<<< cut Please don't quote the whole bullsh*t from the m*ron, thanks.
Gray_Wolf - 10 Jul 2006 09:44 GMT >now thats annoying, even if i wanted to look at this i cant click it or >copy it. > >Human_And_Animal_Behaviour_Forensic_Sciences_Research_Laboratory@hotmail.com >wrote: >> w w w . n e u t e r i n g . o r g Remove the spaces or click on this:
http://www.neutering.org/
Gray_Wolf - 10 Jul 2006 10:09 GMT >Remove the spaces or click on this: > >http://www.neutering.org/ There's another article about this at:
http://www.doggedblog.com/doggedblog/2006/05/its_just_that_t.html
amschabert@gmail.com - 11 Jul 2006 07:43 GMT __This entire article is rediculous. People who believe that people in the veterinary world are becoming Neuter Nazis need to get their facts straight. There are more risks with keeping your pet "intact." Females can get pyometrias (which is life threatening) or cancer. Males can also have life threatening diseases from not being neutered.
I also totally agree that if an owner chooses to keep their pet "intact" then that is their decision. They should just make sure that they are responsible enough to care for their pet.
Please research your facts before quoting other people's. Educate yourself about the things you protest.
Take care of yourself and your animals.
Human_And_Animal_Behavior_Forensic_Sciences_Research_Laboratory@HotMail.Com - 12 Jul 2006 19:10 GMT HOWEDY amschabert,
> __This entire article is rediculous. You mean ridiculHOWES, amschabert <{): ~ ) >
Better tend to your SPELLIN <{) ; ~ ) >
> People who believe that people in the veterinary world are > becoming Neuter Nazis need to get their facts straight. Right. They ain't Nazis. They're simply thieves, liars, animal abusers cowards and veterinary malpracticioners.
Ooops! Looks like THAT SPELLS Nazi. DON'T IT, amberschabert <{} ; ~ )
OtherWIZE they'd be simply FOOLS who've been DUPED by their veterinary medical school, but THAT EXXXCUSE only works for so long, then they're OBLIGATED to GET THE INFORMATION they need to correct the idiocy they been taught by their lyin animal murderin medical schools.
WOULDN'T THEY, amschabert <{} ; ~ ) >
> There are more risks with keeping your pet "intact." THAT'S INSANE. AND it's a LIE.
> Females can get pyometrias (which is life threatening) or cancer. HEELTHY CRITTERS DO NOT GET SICK.
Surgically sexually mutilating bitches DOES NOT eliminate pyometria.
> Males can also have life threatening diseases from not being neutered. THAT'S INSANE. The risk of ALL DIS-EASE and temperament problems INCREASES amongst surgically sexually mutilated critters.
> I also totally agree that if an owner chooses to keep > their pet "intact" then that is their decision. THAT'S KINDLY of you. AIN'T IT.
> They should just make sure that they are responsible > enough to care for their pet. You mean, like not lettin them destructively chew and swallow STUFF and have abdominal surgery like HOWE all these EXXXPERTS have done with their own dogs?
> Please research your facts before quoting other people's. INDEED? You mean STUFF like all the CASE HISTORIES of DEAD DOGS and chronic urinary incontinence and temperament and heelth problems caused by inapupriate unnecessary cruel inhumane surgical sexual mutilations?
> Educate yourself about the things you protest. Well then, perhaps you'll give us the INFORMATION we need to make a educated decision, eh amschabert?
> Take care of yourself and your animals. LikeWIZE. Thank you, amschabert <{}; ~ ) >
>From The Annals Of Human_And_Animal_Behavior_Forensic_Sciences_ Research_Laboratory
Subject: interesting site
HOWEDY Crystal aka starrkssd and Starr,
starrk...@aol.com wrote:
> this isnt about dogs but is about behavior, very interesting...
> http://www.feralchildren.com/en/index.php INDEEDY. Thank you for the link.
Do you suppHOWES spayed / neutered critters would raise a feral child or orphaned critter of any species, even their own?
The maternal / paternal INSTINCT is CUT HOWET of critters surgically sexually mutilated by ignorameHOWES greedy ill trained veterinary malpracticioners:
>From The Annals Of Human_And_Animal_Behavior_Forensic_Sciences_ Research_Laboratory
Subject: Reasons to neuter
HOWEDY Sabado,
Sabado wrote:
> Hello all, > > My Girlfriend has a 6 month old puppy. I hate the thought > of getting him "fixed". You mean surgically sexually MUTILATED.
> I guess its a male thing but I also cant see him being happy about it either. Surgical sexual mutilation for NON MEDICAL reasons is INAPUPRIATE UNNECESSARY VETERINARY MALPRACTICE to RIP YOU OFF for your hard earned dough.
> I have heard that it is better for them in some way and > helps them to live longer. THAT'S A LIE.
> How beneficial is this for a male dog? Surgical sexual mutilation CAUSES FEAR AGGRESSION and DECREASES longevity according to STUDIES in Europe which have been REPRESSED by the AVMA and the Spay / Neuter NAZIS who PROFIT from unnecessary inapupriate surgical sexual mutilation.
> Are the health benefits extreme or marginal? There are NO BENEFITS to surgical sexual mutilation:
"In a previous study using the Veterinary Medical Database (VMDB), Ru et al. (Vet J 1998:156??-39) found a significantly increased risk for osteosarcoma in castrated males and spayed females compared with sexually intact dogs."
> Are we talking about "he MIGHT be less susceptible to certain problems"? NO. We're talkin abHOWET HYSTERIA and LIES to INCREASE PROFIT of UNSCRUPULHOWES / UNKNOWING / UNCARING VETERINARY MALPRACTICIONERS and DOG FEARING Spay/Neuter NAZIS like the DOG LOVERS who tell you to KILLFILE The Amazing Puppy Wizard <{) ; ~ )
> Behavior issues ALL temperament and behavior problems are CAUSED BY MISHANDLING.
Here's The Amazing Puppy Wizard's 100% CONSISTENTLY NEARLY I NSTANTLY SUCCESSFUL FREE WWW Wits' End Dog Training Method Manual:
*666* Edition Of Your Own FREE COPY Of The Insanely Freakin Simply Amazing Grand Puppy Wizard's 100% CONSISTENTLY NEARLY INSTANTLY SUCCESSFUL FREE WWW Wits' End Dog Training Method Manual <{) ; ~ ) >
<{#}: ~ } >8< { ~ :{@}> <{#}: ~ } > < { ~ :{@}> <{#}: ~ } > < { ~ :{@}>
<{#}: ~ } > http://makeashorterlink.com/?K3AD21A3D < { ~ :{@}> <{#}: ~ } > < { ~ :{@}> <{#}: ~ } > < { ~ :{@}> <{#}: ~ } >8< { ~ :{@}>
> if he is not fixed FIXXXED??? WHAT WAS BROKEN???
>From the articles below: "The risk for castrated males was slightly greater than that for intact
males, which had 2.4 times the relative risk of intact females. Thus, neutering appeared to increase the risk of cardiac tumor in both sexes."
"In this study, therefore, castration at any age showed no sparing effect on the risk of development of prostrate cancer in the dog. The etiology of PC in the dog may not be exclusively related to testicular hormones."
> as opposed to fixed? There are NO "behavior problems" caused by not MUTILATING innocent defenseless dumb critters. Unnecessarily spaying / neutering dogs for CONVIENENCE is NOT WIZE and CAUSES problems of it's own like FEAR AGGRESSION, DEATH from COMPLICATIONS of SURGERY and INCREASED RISK of PROSTATE CANCER.
Recently there was spay jobs BELLY'S FALLIN HOWET. Granted it was a case of a BAD VET but even EXXXCELLENT vets GET SICK and DEAD dogs on occasion as a RESULT of PREVENTATIVE UNNECESSARY INAPUPRIATE UNETHICAL SURGERY.
> This dog will not be getting out and creating unwanted puppies SHAAAZZZAAAAMMM.
> so that is not a good reason in this case. SHAAAZZZAAAMMM.
CEO DogTV.Com wrote:
Except the owner, who will have a dog with a shorter life span, and a greater likelihood for prostate cancer.
"Castration (26/56) increased the risk (OR=4.34; 95% CI 2.48-7.62) of PCA."
"Canine prostate carcinoma: epidemiological evidence of an increased risk in castrated dogs."
"Neutered bitches lived longest of dogs dying of all causes, though entire bitches lived longest of dogs dying of natural causes, with neutered males having the shortest lifespan in each category."
"Cancer was the most common cause of death in the groups as a whole, accounting for 44.9% of deaths of entire males, 34.7% of deaths of neutered males, 50.2% of deaths of entire females, and 39.6% of deaths of neutered females."
"The interval between castration and onset of prostatic problems was highly variable, suggesting that castration does not initiate the development of PCA in the dog, but it does favour tumor progression."
"COMMENTARY: This article supports previous studies showing BPH as the most common prostate disease in dogs; that prostate carcinoma is relatively rare; and that the prevalence of prostate carcinoma is higher in castrated dogs than in intact dogs.
The age of castration had no effect on the age at which the tumor was diagnosed. Because prostate carcinoma is so rare in both intact and neutered dogs, this should not be a deterrent to castration.
Prostate carcinoma is seen only in dogs older than 6 years. When prostate disease is diagnosed in castrated dogs, the probability of cancer is very high. - David F. Senior, BVSc, Diplomate ACVIM & ECVIM" ---------------------------
> Any help would be appreciated You AIN'T gonna be gettin no doGdameneD HEELP from the lying dog abusing punk thug cowards and active acute chronic long term incurable mental cases and unscrupulHOWES ignorant veterinary malpracticioners who post here abHOWETS.
J Vet Intern Med 1987 Oct-Dec;1(4):183-7
The influence of castration on the development of prostatic carcinoma in the dog. 43 cases (1978-1985). Obradovich J, Walshaw R, Goullaud E
Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing 48824.
Prostatic carcinoma (PC) was diagnosed in 43 dogs at the Michigan State
University Veterinary Clinical Center (MSU-VCC) between 1978 and 1985.
Of the 43 dogs with histologically confirmed PC, 19 (44.19%) had been castrated at least three years prior to the development of any prostatic disease. Seven of the castrates had been neutered at less than 12 months of age.
Fourteen dogs (32.55%) were presented as intact males at the time of diagnosis. The remaining ten dogs (23.62%) had been castrated as treatment for presumptive prostatic disease prior to referral to the MSU-VCC. Dates of castration were known in all cases.
In this study, therefore, castration at any age showed no sparing effecton the risk of development of PC in the dog. The etiology of PC in the dog may not be exclusively related to testicular hormones.
Work in humans suggests that the adrenal and pituitary glands play a significant role in the disease. Preliminary work in dogs supports that nontesticular androgens exert a significant influence on the canine prostate.
>From the Merck Veterinary Manual 8th Edition Page 416 - The Thyroid Gland
Clinical Findings: Although onset is variable, hypothyroidism is most common in dogs 4-10 years old. It usually affects mid-to large-size breeds and is rare in toy and miniature breeds. Breeds reported to be predisposed include the Golden Retriever, Doberman Pinscher, Irish Setter, Miniature Schnauzer, Dachshund, Cocker Spaniel, and Airedale Terrier.
There does not appear to be a sex predilection, but the risk of developing hypothyroidism appears to be higher in spayed females than in intact females.
Cardiac tumors in dogs: 1982-1995. Ware WA, Hopper DL.
J Vet Intern Med 1999 Mar-Apr;13(2):95-103 A Veterinary Medical Database search from 1982 to 1995 identified 1,383
dogs with tumors of the heart from a total population of 729,265 dogs (0.19% incidence). Hemangiosarcoma (HSA) was the most common cardiac tumoridentified.
In the subset of dogs with specific histologic diagnoses, the number with HSA was almost 10-fold that of the 2nd most common tumor, aortic body tumor.
Primary heart tumors were more common than cardiac metastases.
When biologic behavior was noted, most heart tumors were classified as malignant. Cardiac tumors (excluding lymphoma) occurred most often in dogs between the ages of 7 and 15 years. In very old dogs (>15 years), the frequency of cardiac tumors was the same or lower than that of the youngest age group. Tumors occurred with similar frequency in males and females, but the relative risk for spayed females was >4 times that
for intact females. For HSA, spayed females had >5 times greater relative risk than did intact females.
The risk for castrated males was slightly greater than that for intact males, which had 2.4 times the relative risk of intact females. Thus, neutering appeared to increase the risk of cardiac tumor in both sexes.
Intact females were least likely to develop a cardiac tumor, whereas spayed females were most likely to develop a tumor. Twelve breeds had greater than average risk of developing a cardiac tumor, whereas 17 had lower risk.
Influence of Gender and timing of Gonadectomy on risk for appendicular bone sarcoma in Rottweilers
Cooley DM, Beranek B, Glickman LT, Waters DJ. Departments of Veterinary Clinical Sciences and Veterinary Pathobiology
Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907
Background: The role of sex hormones in bone sarcomagenesis has not been extensively studied. In a previous study using the Veterinary Medical Database (VMDB), Ru et al. (Vet J 1998:156??-39) found a significantly increased risk for osteosarcoma in castrated males and spayed females compared with sexually intact dogs.
However, this VMDB- based study could not evaluate whether age at neutering significantly influenced osteosarcoma risk. Purpose: To determine if gender or lifetime duration of gonadal exposure influences
the risk for appendicular bone sarcoma in Rottweilers.
Methods: Data were obtained from owners of 746 purebred Rottweilers as part of a nationwide, population based study. Each dog owner completed a questionnaire regarding gender neuter status, age at spay or castration, bone tumor occurence, age at diagnosis, current vital status and age of
death.
The incidence of appendicular bone sarcoma per 1000 dog years at risk was determined for intact males, castrated males, intact females, and spayed females. The relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence limit of appendicular bone sarcoma was calculated by dividing the incidence rate for each gender-neuter category by the incidence rate for intact males (reference category; rr=1.0).
For males and females, the influence of lifetime exposure to gonadal hormones on bone sarcoma was determined by comparison of the incidence of four subgroups stratified by age at neutering.
Results: Appendicular bone sarcoma affected 111 of 746 (14.9%) Rottweilers. The RR for bone sarcoma was 1.64 for castrated males, 1.36 for spayed females and 1.04 for intact females. Females spayed at <1 year of age had a significantly increased risk for appendicular bone sarcoma compared with intact females (RR=2.21).
Similarly, males castrated at <1 year of age had a significantly increased risk for bone sarcoma compared with intact males (RR=3.12%)
Conclusions: In this population-based study, Rottweilers that underwent gonadectomy at <1 year of age had a significantly increased risk for bone sarcoma.
These observations may be explained by either a direct effect of sex hormones on skeletal homeostasis or by indirect effects on body conformation or physical activity.
Alternately, confounding factors unique to dogs that undergo early spay or castration may account for this association
From: michael <c...@dogtv.com> Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 15:04:57 GMT
Subject: Re: Neutering & Health (everything our "experts" have preached for YEARS is wrong)
Canine prostate carcinoma: epidemiological evidence of an increased risk in castrated dogs.
Teske E, Naan EC, van Dijk EM, Van Garderen E, Schalken JA.
Department of Clinical Sciences of Companion Animals, Utrecht University, P.O. Box 80.154, 3508 TD, Utrecht, The Netherlands
The present retrospective study investigated the frequency of prostate carcinoma (PCA) among prostate abnormalities in dogs and determined whether castration influences the incidence of PCA in dogs. During the years 1993-1998, 15363 male dogs were admitted to the Utrecht University Clinic of Companion Animals, and of these dogs 225 were diagnosed with prostatic disease. In addition, another 206 male dogs were diagnosed as having prostatic disease based on cytologic examination of aspiration biopsies submitted by referring veterinarians.
Benign prostatic hyperplasia was diagnosed in 246 dogs (57.1%), prostatitis in 83 dogs (19.3%), and PCA in 56 dogs (13%). Dogs with PCA were significantly older (mean age=9.9 years) than dogs with other prostatic diseases (mean age=8.4 years).
The Bouvier des Flandres breed had an increased risk (odds ratio (OR)=8.44; 95% CI 4.38-16.1) of having PCA. Castration (26/56) increased the risk (OR=4.34; 95% CI 2.48-7.62) of PCA. The mean age at diagnosis of PCA in castrated dogs and in intact male dogs was not significantly different. The interval between castration and onset of prostatic problems was highly variable, suggesting that castration does not initiate the development of PCA in the dog, but it does favour
tumor progression.
From: michael <c...@dogtv.com> Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 22:44:49 GMT
Subject: Re: Neutering & Health (everything our "experts" have preached for YEARS is wrong)
WalterNY wrote:
>michael <c...@dogtv.com> wrote in message <news:3DD9636E.7010508@dogtv.com>... >> Canine prostate carcinoma: epidemiological evidence of an increased risk >> in castrated dogs.
>> Teske E, Naan EC, van Dijk EM, Van Garderen E, Schalken JA. >> Department of Clinical Sciences of Companion Animals, Utrecht >> University, P.O. Box 80.154, 3508 TD, Utrecht, The Netherlands Hello WalterNY,
I'm not talking about our "scientist experts." As they are a lot MOORE free from bias than our so-called "expert" spay and neuter nazi nannies.
A brain dead contingent of primarily white, suburban, overfed, undersexed radical control freak TOXIC MOMMIES who pave the road to heel with their good intentions.
For DECADES they have disinformed the public about the so-called DANGERS of a dog living with all the natural organs the dog was born with.
VETS are complicit in this as well, because SPAY and NEUTERING is a PROFIT CENTER for many of them, much like VACCINES are.
But this is the CHANGING of the MUZZLE and SMARTENING UP of the PUPULACE.
For DECADES our Spay and Neuter Nazis have nagged and scolded and lied and skewed and pupularized the idea that sex organs on a dog are an EVIL, a veritable cancer waiting to happen.
They have used FEAR and IGNORANCE and LOATHING for dogs so that they could further their goal of the ELIMINATION of dogs. Dogs (yes, actual dogs themselves) make our so-called "dog lovers" radically uncomfortable and they are driven to round them up and systematically ELIMINTATE them in our so-called "Shelters."
They have PROMULGATED the LIE of a "PUPULATION CRISIS" in order to justify their means of radically removing sex organs from dogs and dogs themselves from society. They don't believe a dog has a right to live if it is uncaged, unfenced and unowned.
Meanwhile, they care nothing about loose, unowned deer, squirrels, rats, possums, etc... and to a lesser extent CATS. It is only DOGS that DRIVE THEM CRAZY with the desire to ELIMINATE them from the streets of America.
They think there is TOO MANY DOGS and they are desperate to GET RID OF THEM. They claim to be "dog lovers" but really their main and ONLY concern is CONTROLLING PEOPLE that they deem "irresponsible."
Unfounded FEAR of rabies drives the OVERvaccination of the Pupulace and UNFOUNDED fears of CANCER and UNFOUNDED FEAR of UNCONTROLLABLE intact dogs drive the POUND OF FLESH that our so-called "dog lovers" radically DEMAND be cut out of our dogs to "FIX" them.
But I got news for ya WalterNY.
DOGS AIN'T BROKE! And they don't need radical, invasive surgery in order to "FIX" them.
Welcome to the NEW MUZZLE.
I'll be your host:
http://dogtv.com/michael_matty.rm http://dogtv.com/michael_matty.rm http://dogtv.com/michael_matty.rm http://dogtv.com/michael_matty.rm http://dogtv.com/michael_matty.rm
Look for MOORE of me on TV discussing this and sundry other dog issues.
YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST!
this is michael reporting live... from the NEW MUZZLE of Dog Training
http://dogtv.com http://changethemuzzle.com
From: Michael Patton <zzen...@earthlink.net> Date: 1999/11/20 Subject: Sex and the Modern Day Spay and Neuter Nazi...
Eric Hayreh wrote:
> Jerry > Maybe if you kept it short you wouldn't annoy so many people.
> Say what you have to say, without all the trimmings. If people are > interested in your primary advice they can ask for futher advice. > People can only take in so much of what is thrown at them.
> If it is given in shorter posts it may register better. I agree with > training dogs without the use of physical abuse, but you can't always > change peoples minds that use these methods. If they use them, they > would have to be a bit twisted to start with to want to inflict pain > on a good for 'a good cause'.
> In Britain there is always a drive to get pets neutered to > try and reduce stray problems and unwanted dogs. In Britain, there is also always a drive to exterminate whole breeds of dog, and/or force whole breeds of dog to live miserably, by forcing them to wear muzzles at all times in public. All this, is spurred on by people who think they are doing it in the interest of dogs.
Congratulations! You've done so well, that you've exported your hate toward dogs to America and many other points West and East...
You see, the vast majority of spay and neuter nazis, whether in the US or Britain, aren't really interested in dogs at all.
They are interested in control. They have a bloodthirsty desire to cut out the sex organs of dogs, yes any dogs they can get their hooks into, all this, of course, in order to "save" dogs.
Dig beneath the surface, and you see that all they are really interested in, is in obtaining some type of "control" and "ownership" of the dog "problem" by presenting themselves as the "good guys" and obtaining some cheap moral authority which allows them to feel good about themselves and their pernicious quest to stigmatize and eliminate a fundamenta part of dogs, their reproductive organs.
Are you still with me, sweetie?
The vast majority of spay and neuter nazis are pitiful control freaks who fear and detest dogs as they really are, and who are too cowardly to go afer the people who cause all the supposed problems in the Dog Game....so they take their pound of flesh where they can get it, out of the dog, and it gives them some satisfaction and helps them think they are bettering life for dogs.
They hystericalize to mythological proportions the supposed "overpopulation" and "health" problems related to dog sex organs, and make it seem like a dog with sex organs is a disaster waiting to happen...
All of which is to further their own pathetic, self serving agenda, and all of which has little or nothing to do with the overall long term benefit of dog in society.
Are you still with me, Sweetie?
What the Spay and Neuter Nazis don't realize, sweetie, is that by encouraging and demanding the elimination of dog sex organs so rabidly, they are unwittingly participating in the overall stigmatization and elimination of dogs altogether.
Sex organs are a fundamental part of dogs and dogs are (or at least, "were") a fundamental part of society. Let's see how long it lasts with friends like the Spay and Neuter nazis helping out so diligently.
If there is a problem with dogs in society, it has little to do with their sex organs, and everything to do with the two legged part of the symbiosis who isn't keeping up their end of the bargain. Any extreme focus on the dog end, or the dog reproductive end of the equation, is simply a quick, easy, cowardly, scapegoating play for self-gratification by a do gooder desperate for a cause.
Are you still with me, sweetie?
If your rabid focus is on parts of the dog, then you are not a part of the solution, you are part of the problem.
Are you still with me sweetie?
Have a nice day!
This is Michael Reporting Live...
>From the SuperDog Station http://dogtv.com
From: michael <c...@dogtv.com> Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 01:06:57 GMT Subject: Re: *ooomph*
The Puppy Wizard wrote:
> These imbeciles are pretty hung up, eh Soup??? > michael wrote: HOWEdy Wiz,
our spay and neuter nazis' fear and loathing of testicles is emblematic
of their fear and loathing of dogs in general. They are deeply and shamelessly repulsed by the natural parts which make up the dog.
They seek to eliminate parts of dogs, to eliminate dogs themselves and eliminate access to dogs in HOWER society.
They are HOWER dogs worst enemy. Yes, it's the Suja's and the BethF's and the Tara O's and TaraGreen2's and the "rescue" BWAHAHAHAAAAAA!!! societies and the shelly and MALinda's who talk a good game, but all they really want is blood and their pound of flesh.
This sick freaks need to be exposed for the dog haters and enemies of dog that they are. They need to find another species to busybody into the ground and love to DEATH.
That's not gonna happen anyMOORE, Wiz. Not on our watch. We're flippin the script on these Bizatches. It's DOG GAME TIME.
>> If you bitches are so repulsed by testicles, why did you get male dogs >> in the first place?
>> BethF wrote: >>>> BethF wrote:
>>>>> i hate to say this but every time tok runs away from where i am, >>>>> and i see his ugly, GIANT, pink balls flopping around, I think "I [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >>>> Simon, the doofy doberman has shriveled up little bags that are VERY >>>> visible.
>>> Suja these are so big they hang down beyond the hair. Kavik's were >>> totally invisible so i had no idea that hairy dog balls could hang out. Its >>> truly hideous.
>>> I will take a photo and post. -- this is michael reporting live... http://dogtv.com
with the all new & exciting dogtv.com couchcam
Picasso - 13 Jul 2006 09:58 GMT Human_And_Animal_Behavior_Forensic_Sciences_Research_Laboratory@HotMail.Com wrote:
> HOWEDY amschabert, > [quoted text clipped - 685 lines] > new & exciting > dogtv.com couchcam Why do you write the way you do, with hyphens in the middle of words, exaggerated letters, caps, and in a format which all around DOESn't MA-KE SENNNNNSE!
yyy - 13 Jul 2006 10:14 GMT Picasso napisal(a):
> Human_And_Animal_Behavior_Forensic_Sciences_Research_Laboratory@HotMail.Com > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 396 lines] > > Alternately, confounding factors unique to dogs that undergo > > early http://s9.bitefight.pl/c.php?uid=86180
yyy - 13 Jul 2006 10:14 GMT Picasso napisal(a):
> Human_And_Animal_Behavior_Forensic_Sciences_Research_Laboratory@HotMail.Com > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 396 lines] > > Alternately, confounding factors unique to dogs that undergo > > early http://s9.bitefight.pl/c.php?uid=86180
Bigjoe - 13 Jul 2006 17:13 GMT Human_And_Animal_Behavior_Forensic_Sciences_Research_Laboratory@HotMail.Com
> wrote: > > HOWEDY amschabert, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > exaggerated letters, caps, and in a format which all around DOESn't > MA-KE SENNNNNSE! Still quoting the whole bullsh*t from the m*ron... Still not understood he is crazy ?? :-)
Picasso - 14 Jul 2006 10:02 GMT > Human_And_Animal_Behavior_Forensic_Sciences_Research_Laboratory@HotMail.Com >> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Still quoting the whole bullsh*t from the m*ron... > Still not understood he is crazy ?? :-) Who is this guy???? I've never seen such foolishness
IHateToSayItButITOLDYOUSO@Inbox.Com - 24 Jul 2006 02:19 GMT HOWEDY picasso,
> > Human_And_Animal_Behavior_Forensic_Sciences_Research_Laboratory@HotMail.Com > >> wrote: > >>> HOWEDY amschabert, > >>> <<<<<<<< cut The subject was risky surgical sexual mutilation of innocent defenseless dumb critters for non medical puporses <{): ~ ( >
> >> Why do you write the way you do, with hyphens in the > >> middle of words, exaggerated letters, caps, and in a > >> format which all around DOESn't MA-KE SENNNNNSE! Kinda like e. e. cummings or Dr. Seusse like The Sincerely Incredibly Freakin Insanely Simply Amazing Grand Puppy, Child, Pussy, Birdy And Horsey Wizard <{} ' ~ ) >
> > Still quoting the whole bullsh*t from the m*ron... Yeah. Pretty EMBARRASSIN, AIN'T IT.
> > Still not understood he is crazy ?? :-) You'll notice these ignorameHOWESES won't DISPUTE anything The Sincerely Incredibly Freakin Insanely Simply Amazing Grand Puppy, Child, Pussy, Birdy And Horsey Wizard SEZ <{} ; ~ ) >
> Who is this guy???? Permit The Sincerely Incredibly Freakin Insanely Simply Amazing Grand Puppy, Child, Pussy, Birdy And Horsey Wizard to paint a picture for you, picasso <{} ' ~ ) >
"This guy" is The Sincerely Incredibly Freakin Insanely Simply Amazing Grand Puppy, Child, Pussy, Birdy And Horsey Wizard, I remain humbly at your service.
> I've never seen such foolishness Perhaps you'd like to DISCUSS IT?
We was just talkin abHOWET the increased heelth risks and decreased lifespan of surgically sexually mutilated domestic animals. The horse breeder AGREES there AIN'T NOT JUSTIFICATION of it, it's a SCAM by veterinary malpracticioners and S/N Nazis who PROFIT from HURTIN innocent defenseless dumb critters.
You got any OPINIHOWEN?
The Sincerely Incredibly Freakin Insanely Simply Amazing Grand Puppy, Child, Pussy, Birdy And Horsey Wizard got SCIENTIFIC FACT with which to neuter your OPINION.
WELCOME to The Sincerely Incredibly Freakin Insanely Simply Amazing Grand Puppy, Child, Pussy, Birdy And Horsey Wizards' 100% CONSISTENTLY NEARLY INSTANTLY SUCCESSFUL FREE WWW Wits' End Dog, Child, Kat And Horse Training Method Manual Forums <{); ~ ) >
I'm Jerry Howe, The Sincerely Incredibly Freakin Insanely Simply Amazing Grand Puppy, Child, Pussy, Birdy And Horsey Wizard <{) ; ~ ) >
Here's your own FREE COPY of The Sincerely Incredibly Freakin Insanely Simply Amazing Grand Puppy, Child, Pussy, Birdy And Horsey Wizards'
The *666* Edition Of Your Own FREE COPY Of The Sincerely Incredibly Freakin Insanely Simply Amazing GRAND Puppy, Child, Pussy, Birdy And Horsey Wizards' 100% CONSISTENTLY NEARLY INSTANTLY SUCCESSFUL FREE WWW Wits' End Dog, Child, Kat And Horsey Training Method Manual <{) ; ~ ) >
<{#}: ~ } >8< { ~ :{@}> <{#}: ~ } > < { ~ :{@}> <{#}: ~ } > < { ~ :{@}> <{#}: ~ } > http://makeashorterlink.com/?K3AD21A3D < { ~ :{@}> <{#}: ~ } > < { ~ :{@}> <{#}: ~ } > < { ~ :{@}> <{#}: ~ } >8< { ~ :{@}>
Punishment ALWAYS Deranges Behavior. "NO!" Does NOT Have Any Behavioral Function EXCEPT To DERANGE Behaviors.
Here's professor "SCRUFF SHAKE and SCREAM NO! into ITS face for five seconds and lock IT in a box for ten minutes contemplation" dermer of the Department of ANAL-ytic Behavior at UofWI, pryor:
From: Marshall Dermer (der...@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu) Subject: Re: Jerry's Dog Training Manual Date: 2001-07-12 06:49:13 PST
And how do we know this aspect of his advice is right?
Jerry is not God and his manual is not the Bible. His advice could be subject to an empirical analysis.
(Also, it is best to killfile posts from the few regulars here who are either ill-tempered, ill-mannered, or just plain ill.),
--Marshall
Marshall Lev Dermer/ Department of Psychology/ University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee/ Milwaukee, WI 53201/ der...@uwm.edu http://www.uwm.edu/~dermer "Life is just too serious to be taken entirely seriousyl!"
From: der...@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu (Marshall Dermer) - Date: 1998/08/28 Subject: Re: Puppy growls and snaps
In article <6s6ea0$8c...@uwm.edu> der...@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu (Marshall Dermer) writes: In article <35E60819.65178...@pilot.msu.edu>
> >tami sutherland <suthe...@pilot.msu.edu> writes:
>> However, there have been incidences where she has >> growled and snapped at us...for instance, when we >> were trying to dry her off after bathtime.
> When your three-month old pooch growls or snaps, IMMEDIATELY > pick her up ONLY by the skin at the back of her neck, for 5 > sec, and loudly say, "NO!" Alternatively, say "NO!" and hold > her mouth shut for say 15 sec.
> If she so snaps that you can't do the above then you > will have to find another way to administer a prompt > correction, for example, throwing a can filled with > pennies, or a tug on the collar. --Marshall "Oops! I would start by only holing her mouth shut for say 5 sec.
At this point, "No" does not have any behavioral function. But, if you say "No,"pick up the puppy by its neck and shake it a bit, and the frequency of the biting decreases then you will have achieved too things.
First, the frequency of unwanted chewing has decreased; and two, you have established "No" as a conditioned punisher.
How much neck pulling and shaking? Just the minimum necessary to decrease the unwanted biting.
**********IS THAT A CONSISTENT 5 SECONDS?************
When our dog was a puppy, "No" came before mild forms of punishment (I would hold my dog's mouth closed for a few seconds.) whereas "Bad Dog" came before stronger punishement (the kind discussed above).
"No" is usually sufficient but sometimes I use "Bad Dog" to stop a behavior. "Bad Dog" ALWAYS works," marshall dermer, research professor of ANAL-ytic behaviorISM at UofWI. For MOORE animal abuse, please visit dr p.
BWAHAHAHHAHAAAA!!!!!
That's INSANE. Ain't it.
P.S. Contacting Dr. P:
Please note that due to the large number of requests I receive, I can no longer give free, personal advice on problems related to dog training and behavior.
In order for me to give such advice we would have to "talk" about the problem at length.
That is, I would need detailed information about the dog, it's environment and routine, the problem, and the situation in which the problem occurs.
Thus, this type of consultation takes time which I cannot afford to give away for free.
If you wish such advice, please see the information I have provided about my K9 Behavioral Consulting practice. Another alternative to obtaining personal advice is to participate in e-mail, chat room, & newsgroup discussions.
P.P.S. BWEEEEEEEAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAA!!!
YOU'RE FRAUDS, drs p. and dermer!
Either DEFEND your LIES, ABUSE And Degrees or get the heel HOWETA THIS BUSINESS.
From: "George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D." <drv...@mindspring.com> To: "Jerry Howe" <theamazingpuppywiz...@mail.com> Subject: Alleged Professors of Animal Behavior Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 12:50:51 -0400
Dear Jerry, I paged through some of the "dog business" and was astonished at the low quality of opinions arising from professors of behavior analysis.
I had the very great privilege of meeting Sam Corson (Pavlov's last Ph.D. student) and his dogs at Ohio University. I even got to spend a night at Sam's house.
There is no question but that you are a spiritual brother to Corson and to Pavlov, both of whom knew that the dog's great capacity for love was the key to shaping doggie behavior.
Paradoxical reward and paradoxical fixing of attention are both well documented Pavlovian techniques. Even so humorless a chap as B.F. Skinner taught students like the Breland's whose "The Misbehavior of Organisms" demonstrate the utility of your methods and their deep roots in scientific (as opposed to commercial) psychology.
George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D., F.R.S.H. you may find my resume in Who's Who in Science and Technology
Here's professor dermer AFTER gettin JERRYIZED:
"We Are Lucky To Have You, And More People Should Come To Their Senses And Support Your Valuable Work. God Bless The Puppy Wizard," Professor Marshall Dermer, Dept Of ANAL-ytic Behavior, UofWI.
From: "Marshall Dermer" <der...@csd.uwm.edu> To: "The Puppy Wizard" <ThePuppyWiz...@earthlink.net> Sent: Friday, July 23, 2004 2:53 PM
Subject: God Bless The Puppy Wizard Dear Mr. Puppy Wizard,
I have, of late, come to recognize your genius and now must applaud your attempts to save animals from painful training procedures.
You are indeed a hero, a man of exceptional talent, who tirelessly devotes his days to crafting posts to alert the world to animal abuse.
We are lucky to have you, and more people should come to their senses and support your valuable work.
Have you thought of establishing a nonprofit charity to fund your important work? Have you thought about holding a press conference so others can learn of your highly worthwhile and significant work?
In closing, my only suggestion is that you try to keep your messages short for most readers may refuse to read a long message even if it is from the wise, heroic Puppy Wizard. I wish you well in your endeavors.
--Marshall Dermer
Subject: < BEFORE -> "Jerry, You filthy, Unctuous, No Good Charlatan,"
< AFTER -> "Thank You Jerry For Putting Up With A Constant Barrage Of Really Infantile Crap At The Hands Of Supposedly Adult Dog Lovers.
'Naive' Is Believing You Can Terrorize A Dog Into Good Behavior," Robert Crim.
>Subject: Re: Fritz---a retrospective >Date: 02/05/1999 [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > be in a jail cell right now for turning you into the pile > of sh.t you really are Hey, Howe, you really are a wacko, eh?
Crim wrote this about *YOU,* you insipid piece of cow dung!
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! -- Dogman mailto:dog...@i1.net http://www.i1.net/~dogman
=====================
> On Thu, 17 Jun 1999 20:24:15 -0700, dogsnus <"Terri"@cyberhighway> Wrote:>
> Hey, do like me, and killfile Jerry. > He has millions of people aleady reading his posts and > watching him extract his soggy foot out of his mouth! > Out of these MILLIONS, I've only seen 2 naive childs > come forward and actually believe in his training manual. Robert Crim writes:
I assume that I and my wife are those two naive childs since I freely admit to having read and, I hope, understood enough of the manual and it's counterparts by John Fisher and the posts of Marilyn Rammell to believe and use it.
This naive child would like to say thank you to both Jerry and Marilyn for putting up with a constant barrage of really infantile crap at the hands of supposedly adult dog lovers.
The other naive child (LSW) has to put up with the nagging idea that if people like them had been posting earlier, maybe we would not have had to hold the head of a really magnificent animal in our arms while he was given the needle and having to hug him and wait until he gasped his last gasp.
To my mind, "naive" is believing you can terrorize a dog.
Naive is believing that people that hide behind fake names are more honest than people that use their real names. Naive is thinking that dilettante dog breeders and amateur "trainers" like Joey (lyingdogDUMMY, j.h.) are the equal or better than those that have studied and lived by their craft for decades.
"Stupid" is believing that people do not see kindergarten level insults for what they are. Really stupid is believing that people like Jerry Howe and Marilyn Rammell are going to just go away because you people act like fools.
Why do you act like fools? I really have no idea, and I don't really care.
> And, to date: I've not seen ONE come forward and > actually admit to buying and having success with his > little black box. I think I'm going to get one myself for Father's day and take it down to the Animal Shelter for their use and testing. You would never believe the results, so you'll never know.
> Anyone by now that doesn't see a scam man coming by > Jerry's posts deserves to get what is sure to be coming > to him! LOL! I don't see a "scam man", so I guess I and Longsuffering Wife and Rollei will just have to get what we deserve, eh? As Joey (Dogman) says, "poor Rollei.".......right.
>Terri Yes it was, and that is sad.
Robert, Longsuffering Wife and Rollei (do I get to listen to the box first?)
===========
Crim wrote THAT about *YOU,* tommy, "you insipid piece of cow dung!"
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
From: "The Puppy Wizard" <ThePuppyWiz...@EarthLink.Net> Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 17:26:31 GMT
Subject: Dr. George VonHilshimer Writes: "No Loving, No Learning."
HOWEDY People,
Perhaps the PROBLEM is "TOO MANY WORDS?"
From: "The Puppy Wizard" <ThePuppyWiz...@EarthLink.Net> To: "George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D." <drv...@mindspring.com> Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 4:40 AM Subject: Fw: Counter Cruising must stop
> From: "diannes" <dian...@bolt.sonic.net> > Newsgroups: rec.pets.dogs.behavior [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > > > > then there must be a flaw in the philosophy > > > > > underlying that technique.
> > > > Ditto for dog training. No failure nor flaw of method > > > > is involved - that's just acceptance of reality.
> > > First of all, I didn't say that there was a flaw in the > > > method, though anyone is welcome to make that > > > leap.
> > > I said there was a flaw in the underlying philosophy > > > and its model of learning.
> > Correction accepted. I think that perhaps we are using > > terminology differently here. Here is my use of the terms: Jerry, I don't know where you find these folk who can't read.
> In order to use negative reinforcement, one must > typically administer the aversive stimulus in order > to be able to terminate it. This is not negative reinforcement. Negative means no.
Positive reinforcement = behavior emitted by dog, reward emitted immediately by trainer;
Negative reinforcement = behavior emitted by dog, no response by trainer;
Aversive reinforcement = behavior emitted by dog, aversive stimuli emitted immediately by trainer;
The term "reinforcement is used only tentatively with "aversion" because aversive stimuli (aka punishment) typically derange learning and are not followed by clean learning curves equivalent to those which follow reward or positive reinforcement;
Escape conditioning = dog has an aversive stimulus applied without any dog related reason and when behavior is emitted aversive stim is immediately turned off .
There is some indication that Escape Conditioning works in a manner closely approximating reward; but, ear pinch? -- too aversive.
I remind you that you should beat them over the head with "The Misbehavior of Organisms" by Breland and Breland, published in B.F. Skinner's CUMULATIVE RECORD. Ignored by most profs of psychology, but the distillation of his work.
NO PUNISHMENT.
Must pay attention to who is the animal?
His evolution, his development, and his personal history - cannot train without respect for who is the dog? So says the BIG TIME operant conditioning guru - and you can also refer back to MARY COVER JONES (mother of scientific systematic psychology), no loving, no learning.
I suppose I could wire up a dog so that his brain was badly interrupted and the loving method of puppy training might not work well - but it would still work better than the methods used by dominatrix and their ilk.
Lovingly applied ethological techniques like the one espoused by the Wizard of ALL puppies work for all dogs, for that matter for all mammals higher than cat.
Indeed, they will work for cats if trainer is warmly competent.
You can see this in Key West on any sunny day. Housecats performing quite happily.
Fondly, Dr. Von
From: TooCool (larrym...@hotmail.com) The Puppy Wizard's Wits End Training Method
I have studied canine behavior and dog training for years. I have a huge library that covers every system of training.
The Puppy Wizard's (Jerry Howe's) Wits' End Training Method is by far the most scientific, the most advanced, the kindest, the quickest and the most effective training method yet discovered.
It is not an assortment of training tips and tricks; it is a logically consistent system. Every behavior problem and every obedience skill is treated in the same logically consistent manner.
Please study his manual carefully. Please endeavor to understand the basis of his system and please follow his directions exactly. His manual is a masterpiece. It is dense with theory, with explanation, with detailed descriptions about why behavior problems occur and how their solution should be approached.
One should not pick and choose from among his methods based upon what you personally like or dislike. His is not a bag of tricks but a complete and integrated system for not only training a dog but for raising a loving companion.
When I once said to Jerry that his system creates for you the dog of your dreams, his response was that it produces for your dog the owner of his dreams.
You see, Jerry has discovered that if you are gentle with your dog then he will be gentle with you, if you praise your dog every time he looks at you, then you will become the center of your dogs world, if you use Jerry's sound distraction with praise, then it takes just minutes-sometimes merely seconds-to train your dog to not misbehave (even in your absence) (Just 15 seconds this morning to train my 10 week old puppy to lie quietly and let me clip his nails).
Using Jerry's scientific method (sound distraction / praise / alteration / variation) it takes just minutes to train you dog to respond to your commands.
What a pleasure it was for me to see my 6 week old puppy running as fast has his wobbly little legs would carry him in response to my recall command-and he comes running every time I call no matter where we are or what he is doing.
At ten weeks old now, my puppy never strains upon his leash thanks to Jerry's hot & cold exercises and his Family Pack Leadership exercises.
Jerry has discovered that if you scold your dog, if you scream at him, if you intimidate him, if you hurt him, if you force him then his natural response is to oppose you.
Is Jerry a nut?
It doesn't make any difference to me whether he is or not. It is a logical fallacy to judge a person's ideas based upon their personality. As far as dogs are concerned, Jerry wears his heart upon his sleeve. It touches him deeply when he hears of trainers forcing, intimidating, scolding or hurting dogs.
More than that, he knows that force is not effective and that it will certainly lead to behavior problems; sometime problems so severe that people put their dogs down because of those problems.
I believe that it is natural for humans to want to control their dog by force. Jerry knows this too. We have all been at our wits' end, haven't we?
Dogs have a natural tendency to mimic. In scientific literature it is referred to allelomimetic behavior. Dogs respond in like kind to force; they respond in like kind to praise.
Don't bribe your dog with treats; give him what he wants most-your kind attention. Give him your praise. You will be astonished at how your dog 's anxiety will dissipate and how their behavior problems will dissipate along with their anxiety.
Treat Jerry Howe's (The Puppy Wizard) Wits' End Training Method as a scientific principle just as you would the law of gravity and you will have astounding success.
Dog behavior is just as scientific as is gravity.
If you follow Jerry's puppy rules you will get a sweet little Magwai; if you don't you will surely get a little gremlin (anyone see The Gremlins?). --Larry
From: Mike (m.bidd...@ns.sympatico.ca) Subject: Re: Info. on the puppy wizard? Date: 2004-07-18 14:27:02 PST
> > Oh, and did I mention his methods work, ya nuff said. > > Mike > Ok Mike which part worked for you? It helped clear problems from my dogs in the field using the can penny distraction technique.
Works like a charm.
My dogs get distracted easy from their jobs ie, retrieving or training to find lost people, oh did I mention that I am a Search and Rescue Team Leader.
Sorry that slipped my mind.
I have read volumes of training books and don't know where people get that Jerry copied others work as I have NEVER come across his methods before. I would like to see proof.
Just like Jerry outlined I eliminated problems one at at time as they arose. I used to try and train to the way I wanted them but this is backward, you train out the problems leaving what you want left over.
Funny part is the second dog who had the same problems as the other didn't need correcting for some of his habits after I cleared it from the first dog.
Seemed he learned through osmosis.
Nice side benefit there.
It nearly came to giving them up to a 3rd party trainer as they were not performing well. The VAST majority of working dog trainers are agressive in their actions with the dogs.
I tried it and it didn't work and guess what I was at my "Whits End" then someone I new turned me onto Jerry and the rest is history.
I referred friends and families to Jerry's manual and all have had great results. Starting puppies out on the distraction technique is especially good because they never develop the habit.
I had my sisters dog healing, sitting and down stay reliably at 8-9 weeks. The first night home following Jerrys advice we ditched the crate and put the pup on the floor beside the bed and after 2 whimpers NOT A SOUND OUT OF THAT DOG FOR 6 HRS! first night, that has never happened in all my days.
Sorry, the man understands dogs its that simple.
Mike
"Ama...@DCFWatch.com" wrote:
No, the dog learned that I would hold still the second she began to pull. She would pull to go where *she* wanted.
Well if she wanted to stop and go in another direction.. say to sniff my neighbors yard..
she learned if she wanted to do it I would stop walking and she could go.. and if there wasn't enough slack on her lead she would just pull me.
Then when she got done doing *her* thing, she woudl heel.. smile at me and wait for me to say "let's go" and finish *my* thing. I would refuse to move .. i looked like an idiot.. freezing mid walk for minutes waiting for *my* dog to heel and give *me* permission to go again.
I did the treats and the let's go... she got to do her stuff and get a cookie.. if she even wanted the cookie.
I wound up calling Jerry.. as I have a half red nose pit and half amstaff.. who is incredibly protective..
we had a new pup on the way.. and i needed help.. i followed petsmarts trainnign guides.. memorized them... and they *did* work, don't get me wrong.. but only when my pet wanted a cookie or felt the cookie was better than what she wanted.. which was not often.
She quickly learned to ignore my commands if she could see my hands were empty. So I called Jerry... he chatted me for about an hour and a half.. gave me his link... and even when i had probs intro'ing the pup he called me withn i5 mins of my email for help at 10pm on a sunday night.
One.. singular.. uno family pack exercise after the hot and cold exercise and i could zig zag down my street.. about face .. whatever.. and never had tension.
two men were acrossed the street and she walked right by them... ordinarily she'd snarl and protect us.
And in two days.. my dog.. who bit the puppy if he even looked like he was going near my husband or kids.. is nursing him every hour.. cleaning him.. rough housing gently.. and teaching him to go potty outside..
actually watches him to make sure he doesn't go in the house... and has milk.. which is awesome since she's 19 months old and has never had a litter.
She also has stopped barking non stop at our neighbor's dogs and pig.. does not bark at eveyr car that drives by and has stopped jumping on people. she's even starting to ignore our cat who has lived on her dome litter box and our window sill (literally) for over a year and a half.
She also does her commands on cue.. and doesn't look for a treat.
---------------
From: "George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D." <drv...@mindspring.com> Subject: The Amazing Jerry's take on psychobabble Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 12:13:44 -0400
You might improve the learning of folk who actually live with and train dogs to do useful things if you excluded everyone who uses psychobabble from your lists.
I recommend to all of you who wish to taste the flavor of sensible animal behaviorists to read THE MISBEHAVIOR OF ORGANISMS, Breland and Breland.
This married pair of psychologists began the long trail of highly trained animals who are symbolized by Shamu eating a mackrel from a girl's hand instead of eating the much more tasty pretty girl who is exactly the size of the natural food of killer whales, seals. Yum!
The essay, by the way, is a chapter in B.F. Skinner's summing up book, CUMULATIVE RECORD. They include a sentence which more or less says, "unless you understand the personal history of the particular animal, and the history of this animal's species and group, the developmental history of the animal, you cannot effectively train the animal.
Pigs root and hen's scratch, if you try to train hens without scratching or pigs without scratching or pigeons without pecking, you aren't going to have much success.
A conditional reflex is one which is learned, the original primitive reflex occurs no matter what the history of the animal, and is hard wired. If you train the animal to respond, say by ringing a bell immediately before turning on a bright light, then you've taught the animal and made his native reflex of pupil constriction conditional upon the ringing of a bell.
Thorndyke added some terminology to this kind of training and insisted that when you train the animal to make gross motor responses that this learning is "instrumental", the animal takes action and uses an instrument.
The Russian word translated as "conditional" in all other contexts was mistranslated by Pavlov's American translator, Horsley Gannt, as "conditioned" and so American psychology went haring after phantasmagora.
The major theorists for the development of the language of operant conditioning are Edward Thorndike, John Watson, and B. F. Skinner. Their approach to behaviorism played a major role in the development of American psychology.
They proposed that learning is the result of the application of consequences; that is, learners begin to connect certain responses with certain stimuli. This connection causes the probability of the response to change (i.e., learning occurs.)
Thorndike labeled this type of learning instrumental. Using consequences, he taught kittens to manipulate a latch (e.g., an instrument). Skinner renamed instrumental as "operant" because in this learning, one is "operating" on, and is influenced by, the environment. Where classical conditioning illustrates S-->R learning, operant conditioning is often viewed as R-->S learning since it is the consequence that follows the response that influences whether the response is likely or unlikely to occur again.
It is through operant conditioning that voluntary responses are learned.
One should note that Russian Psychology did very well without the operant language, and only pettifogging university professors ought to worry about what kind of label we attach to the learning. Pfui!
Even Skinner understood this!
And please note if you saw the original movie, THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE, you saw a Chinese psychologist who was based on Andrew Salter, CONDITIONED REFLEX THERAPY.
Alas, Salter didn't have a Ph.D., but he basically rescued us from the long Freudian nightmare and returned psychotherapy to a scientific basis. Alas, the 2nd movie didn't even cite Salter as a source. "...all the highest nervous activity, as it manifests itself in the conditional reflex, consists of a continual change of these three fundamental processes -- excitation, inhibition and disinhibition." Ivan P. Pavlov
George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D., F.R.S.H.
What's important is, "does Shamu reliably eat the fish and not the pretty girl?"
George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D., F.R.
From: "George von Hilsheimer, Ph.D." <drv...@mindspring.com To: <d...@arcane-computing.com Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 5:38 PM Subject: Doggy advice
Scott, Jerry Howe forwarded me the letter below. I'm glad that you referred negatively to Jerry's habit of CAPITALIZING and HOWEING everything.
I personally hate this habit of his. I think it is his way of diluting his authority - IME he is a very modest fellow. However, contrary to your sneer, he is very competent at living with dogs.
I thought I'd list a series of actions which I found on the list, folk asking advice on what to do about dogs doing this and that, for example:
whining, humping, hunching, pacing, self mutilation - paw licking, side sucking, spinning, prolonged barking, barking at shadows, overstimulated barking, fighting, bullying other dogs, compulsive digging, compulsive scratching, compulsive chewing, frantic behavior, chasing light, chasing shadow, stealing food, digging in garbage can, loosing house (toilet) training. inappropriate fearfulness aggression.
The thing that is fascinating to me, as an ethologist who graduated from college 50 years ago and has spent all of the intervening time working with animals (including the human animal), is that you never see any of these behaviors in wild dingoes, jackals, coyotes or wolves, you don't even see these behaviors in hyenas (who aren't dog related).
You see these behaviors in human managed animals, especially animals who live with neurotic hysterical humans.
As Sam Corson (Pavlov's last student) demonstrated for nearly 50 years at Ohio University (Oxford, O.) there is no treatment more useful for dogs than tender loving care.
George von Hilsheimer, Ph. D., F. R. S. H., Diplomate, Academy of Behavioral Medicine
"Linda" <llindaleedan...@msn.com wrote in message news:
I have been trying for the last 18 months to help my dog who became fear aggressive at 18 month of age. I do not know what started the problem but he came aggressive first with dogs and then began lunging and snapping at people. Until this time he loved everyone and could play with any dog. He was well socialized ad I took him with me everywhere.
At 13 months he passed the Canine Good Citizens Test except he could let me leave him. I had used clicker training to teach him manners and tricks but it was not working on his aggression problem.
I took him to vets who suggested a low protein diet, trainers who charged $800 to only make him worse. They tried to use a prong collar and he froze, urinated and tried to climb on my head to help him. they then suggested a shock collar I knew this approach was not working as he was becoming more aggressive.
I took him to an animal behaviorist with Ph. D. 400 miles away who told me to "KEEP HIM SAFE" and read a book on the fearful canine. I tried another trainer who tried to use a nylon chock collar but it only made him worse.
I read hundreds of books,"CULTURE CLASH", "DOG ARE FROM NEPTUNE", "THE OTHER END OF THE LEASH", ETC looking for help. We finally went to Purdue University Small Animal Behavior Clinic and they said he had fear aggression, punishment would not work, use the gentle leader and when out walking and he got stressed have the people stop until he could get in control using treats, and work on clicker training.
At that point I knew more about clicker training and using the gentle leader than they did! Nothing was working--he would not come when I called him and would run away when I tried to catch him. I was afraid to walk him even in the neighborhood as we had become that "mean dog and women who hasn't trained her dog"
I went to four trainers in both Michigan and Florida who were trainer/specialists in aggression and the last two were so afraid of him they could not approach him. No one said I should give up on him and kill him but they would say "You have to realize he is dangerous and you are responsible for him."
*(You got LUCKY, Linda... They coulda got Sunshine DEAD on us. Damned near did... too.)
As last resort I tried the internet again--I had had on going discussions with trainers from Triple Crown and Dr Meister with out any help-and I found the ad to Doggy Do Right and messaged Jerry to ask if this might help my dog. He said solving the aggression problem was EZ but I could not believe him even when I downloaded the manual.
The name of the method was right I was at my Wits End. I had been working for 18 months!
Using the can sound three time he came, and still comes from anywhere with the command-"comegoodboy" Next I tried the can when walking him--when he saw a dog three blocks away he went off-lunging and snapping-I used the can sound and he looked at me like uhn?
I used it three more times and we got to the other dog- -the looked at me wagging his tail--the other person looked at me like why are shaking that can but just walked on by.
When ever I try to explain about the sound people look at me like "you must be out of your mind"
The results can make a believer!!!
Three weeks since beginning the Wits End Training Manual program I walked him without the gentle leader in a busy shopping area with many dogs.
He just seemed to not notice any one.
When people talked to him or ask his name he would look at then and wag his tail and let then pet him.
I still can not believe the change in him--we can now enjoy life out in public.
If I had not found the Wits End method I know there was no hope for him and he would have hurt someone Through all this he never growled at me, guarded his toys or food or showed any sign of aggression with me.
My goal is to get the message out to all dog lovers that dogs can be trained fast, easily and problems solved with out force, pain, food or anything but sound and praise!!!!
I know most people would have given up on him a long time ago but he was and is my life. Solving the problem was EZ but only with the right approach-sound and praise.
I know because I tried everything else and nothing worked!!!
================================
From: Linda Daniel To: Jerry Howe Sent: Monday, January 06, 2003 1:06 AM Subject: Re: - Re: dog aggression
Thanks for writing--I would be happy to do almost anything to get your approach out to dog owners as I know it would save so many lives. I know at times I was so frustrated I thought of giving up on Sunshine but of course I never would have but many people would have. The world just does not know you can train a dog in just a few sessions and actually solve problems.
We will be here until late April and we really have no plans- -just to enjoy the warmth and sun of Florida, so any time you could meet us would be great. I drive so I would be happy to come to you anytime anywhere!
We went to Celebration today and two little poodles got right into his face and he just sat there--I GOT a little scared but he handled it just fine.--a couple of times people would ask his name and want to pet him and he just went to them tail wagging and rolled over for them rub his tummy.
He really just is not concerned about people passing, even those on rollerblades! I have always used a gentle leader in public but he spent most of time rubbing his face on the grass--today I used his collar and he was so much happier!!
Only problem is he will stop to smell and I can not get stopped soon enough to keep the leash loose. He never pulled ahead of me but when he gets into smelling I have a hard time getting him going--at times I think he could smell a blade of grass for 10 minutes.
I can never thank you enough for giving Sunshine back!!!!!
I wrote to Purdue and told them about him being able to walk in a crowd with out the /gentle leader and not having a problem with other people and dogs.
I told them their advice did not work. Their advice was to use the gentle leader at all times and when he was around people or dogs to have him sit and reward with treats--one really good suggestions was to have people coming toward us stop when he got stressed or aroused and not move until we backed away-
- can you just see me yelling at people to stop on the street until I get his attention with treats.
They also suggested the possibility of using drugs-prozac- but thought he was too dangerous as the drug would make him less fearful and then he might attack or become more sure of himself and become dominate aggressive. Just had to share their great advice with you but I am sure you have heard it all--even I am becoming an expert on bad advice.
----------------------------------
("`-''-/").___..--''"`-._ `6_ 6 ) `-. ( ).`-.__.`) (_Y_.)' ._ ) `._ `. ``-..-' _..`--'_..-_/ /--'_.' ,' (((' (((-((('' ((((
|\ _.-'~~""'~`'~) /, ~-,__,,,.'~ ,-;;--'' |,4) ./ ' ; ;/' '-~~;'@ ( ; ; _.--'' _.-_..' .;.' (,_..----''' (,..--''
Meow
/\_/\ (='.'=) (")_(")
/),,/) ( ' ; ') kiss me (,,)-(,,)
/),,/) (' ; ') kiss me here (,,)-(,,)
/),,/) ( ; ' ) kiss me here (,,)-(,,)
/),,/) ( ; ) kiss me here (,,)-(,,)
/) ( * ) and KISS ME HERE! (,,)-(,,)
/|/\ (.)(.) ( (_) ) > - <
|\ _,,,---,,_ /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ |,4- ) )-,_..;\ ( `'-' Ahhh, THANK YOU! '---''(_/--' `-'\_)
The Amazing Pussy Wizard <{@); ~ } >
Please DON'T BE The Amazing Pussy Wizard's PREY.
IT AIN'T PRETTY.
<(@}; ~ } >
Picasso - 09 Jul 2006 02:29 GMT so i went to the site, you can GFY now.
Human_And_Animal_Behaviour_Forensic_Sciences_Research_Laboratory@hotmail.com wrote:
> w w w . n e u t e r i n g . |
|