It is a picture of the online article.

RSPCA - Dangerous Dogs Act

Claim made by: RSPCA
Location: It was an online article in the Times (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/fatal-dog-attacks-rise-after-ban-on-dangerous-breeds-pitbull-terrier-tosa-and-brazilian-and-argentine-mastiffs-0cn8q03vr).
Spotted on: 2017-08-15

I am a daily reader of the Times. On August 15 2017, there was an article published online by the title of “Fatal dog attacks rise after ban on dangerous breeds.” The article quotes some figures and claims made by the RSPCA, which wants the Dangerous Dogs Act reformed. These included that;

1) last year, the RSPCA published NHS data showing that hospital admissions after dog bites had risen by 76 per cent in a decade in England, from 4,110 in 2004-05 to 7,227 in 2014-15,
2) Samantha Gaines, the RSPCA’s dog welfare expert, said: “Other countries have moved away from a breed specific approach and have achieved a reduction in dog bites through education and fostering responsible dog ownership.”.

I would like to see some evidence for these claims from either the RSPCA, and how they fit the wider body of evidence around this topic. Are the case studies in other countries applicable to the UK’s situation? Could the increase in admissions after dog bites be explained by a combination of;

• increase in human population,
• increase in dog population,
• people nowadays more often being admitted to a hospital if they get bitten by a dog,
• and other reasons not indicating a failure of the Dangerous Dogs Act?

Update 2017-08-18

Sign in

×

Sign up

×

Share your request

×