Dog Bite-Related Studies

The scientific consensus on breed-specific risk is clear: numerous studies have found that a dog's breed is not strongly correlated with aggression, bite strength, or propensity to bite. Research also shows that breed-specific legislation (BSL) is ineffective, consistently failing to reduce dog bites or improve public safety.

This consensus is significant because it reflects the collective conclusions of the scientific and veterinary communities based on a broad body of comprehensive research — a robust counterbalance to a small number of limited-scope studies that suggest disputed narratives on breed-specific risk, which have been found to be unreliable due to a lack of confirmed breed data, as well as other methodological and statistical errors.

A dog's breed does not determine aggression, bite strength, or propensity to bite.
Breed is not a reliable predictor of aggression or bite risk; most serious incidents involve preventable factors like irresponsible ownership and lack of supervision.
Visual breed identification is frequently inaccurate, resulting in flawed statistics and misleading narratives in media, public discourse, and some medical studies.
84% of fatal dog attacks involve intact dogs, while breed is reliably identified in only about 18% of media-reported cases.
A small number of limited-scope studies that suggest disputed narratives on breed-specific risk contain unsubstantiated claims due to a lack of confirmed breed data as well as other errors.

American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA)

Controlled studies have not identified pit bull-type dogs as disproportionately dangerous.
As the population of specific breeds increases, bite incidents related to those breeds also increase. This correlation is due to the larger population size rather than any inherent risk associated with specific breeds.
The term “pit bull” is particularly ambiguous, encompassing a range of pedigree breeds, informal types, and appearances that cannot be reliably identified. Visual identification of dog breeds is often unreliable, and witnesses may be predisposed to assume that a vicious dog is of this type.
The substantial variation within breeds suggests that it is inappropriate to make predictions about a dog's propensity for aggressive behavior based solely on its breed.
Breed is a poor sole predictor of aggressiveness, and pit bull-type dogs have not been implicated in controlled studies of dog bite prevention.
There is no evidence to suggest that introducing a breed-specific ban will reduce the rate or severity of bite injuries within the community.

Journal of Injury Prevention

After analyzing 43 previous studies on dog bites and dog bite-related injuries, the study concluded that breed-neutral strategies are more effective than breed-specific legislation (BSL) for reducing dog bites.
Evidence from multiple studies supports the idea that the most effective animal control policies apply to all dogs, rather than focusing on specific breeds.
Breed-neutral regulations, such as the enforcement of leash laws, stray dog control, and addressing dogs with a history of aggressive behavior, are the most effective policies for reducing dog bites and improving public safety.

Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association

Dog bite-related fatalities are primarily linked to irresponsible ownership — including failure to neuter, neglect, use of punishment-based training methods, and lack of supervision — not breed. 84% of fatal attacks involved dogs that weren't neutered.
Media reports are unreliable sources for breed identification, with over 40% of breed reports in the media differing from the breed identified by animal control. Furthermore, valid breed determination was only possible in 18% of all incidents.
Most dog-bite related fatalities (DBRFs) were characterized by coincident, preventable factors; breed was not one of these. The study supports multifactorial approaches for dog bite prevention rather than single-factor solutions like breed-specific legislation (BSL).

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)

After analyzing 15 years of dog bite-related fatalities (DBRFs), the CDC recommends breed-neutral approaches for dog bite prevention and public safety, such as the enforcement of animal control laws (e.g., leash and dog-at-large laws) and focusing efforts on irresponsible owners and dogs with a history of aggressive behavior.
Banning specific breeds is considered "unproductive" because most DBRFs are preventable. Additionally, as the popularity of various breeds changes over time, the number of bite incidents related to those breeds also fluctuates (e.g., Rottweilers were the most commonly reported breed involved in fatal attacks in 1995/1996, when their popularity peaked).
The CDC acknowledged that the media is prone to inaccurately reporting the breeds of dogs involved in DBRFs.
The CDC stopped tracking breed-specific data for DBRFs in the early 2000s, as it determined that dog bite prevention is not a breed-specific issue. The CDC also cited difficulties in accurately identifying breeds and accounting for the complexities of the circumstances surrounding each incident.

Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science

Many medical studies analyzed contained factual errors, misinterpretations, omissions, and exaggerations based on misunderstood or inaccurate statistics.
These studies often included misinformation about the significance of breed and breed characteristics in dog bite incidents.
Due diligence was not consistently performed to accurately or scientifically identify the breed(s) involved in the bite incidents.
The study discusses how breed-specific legislation (BSL) is often a form of "panic policy making."

The Veterinary Journal

A total of 62 dogs were visually identified as pit bulls, but only 25 had DNA from pit bull-type ancestry, resulting in a misidentification rate of 60%.
Visual identification of pit bull-type dogs was inconsistent with DNA results, with accuracy ranging from a low of 33% to a high of 75%.
The mean sensitivity for visual identification of pit bull-type dogs was 50%, reflecting errors: 60% of dogs were falsely identified as pit bulls, and 20% of actual pit bull-type dogs were not identified as such.
The lack of consistency in identifying pit bull-type dogs highlights the unreliability of visual breed identification.
This inconsistency in breed identification has significant implications for breed-specific regulations, which rely on the assumption that certain breeds can be identified by appearance and are inherently dangerous. Since injuries from dogs have not decreased following breed bans, public safety is better served by focusing on mitigating risk factors for dog bites rather than targeting specific breeds.

Public Library of Science (PLOS) ONE

53% of pit bull-type dogs (133 of 249) had less than 50% DNA from pit bull-type ancestry, meaning they are mixed-breed dogs rather than purebred "pit bulls" or "pit bull mixes."
98% of pit bull-type dogs (244 of 249) were found to be mixed-breed, with only 2% (5 dogs) being purebred.
Pit bull-type dogs had an average of 43.5% DNA from pit bull-type ancestry (38.5% on average in shelter 1 and 48.4% on average in shelter 2).
Using appearance to determine breed was highly unreliable, with accuracy ranging from 10.4% to 67.7%.
Breed bans in Spain, the Netherlands, Canada, and Italy have failed to reduce dog bite incidents. A recent study in Ireland found no difference in bite severity or medical attention required between restricted and non-restricted breeds.

Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science

No significant difference in aggression between pitbull-type dogs and other breeds such as Golden Retrievers, German Shepherds, and Labrador Retrievers.
Aggression is mostly shaped by a dog's environment, upbringing, and experiences, and cannot be reliably linked to breed. Breed explains less than 10% of the variance in aggression among dogs, a dog's individual experiences play a much larger role.
Only 9% of a dog's behavioral traits are attributable to breed, confirming that breed has a minimal influence on behavior.

Journal of Evolutionary Applications

After testing and analyzing aggressive behavior in two groups of dogs, breeds commonly subjected to breed-specific legislation (BSL), including Akitas, Dobermans, German Shepherds, Rottweilers, and pit bull-type breeds, and breeds not commonly subjected to BSL, including Beagles, Dalmatians, Golden Retrievers, Greyhounds, and Labrador Retrievers, the study found no significant difference in aggressive behavior between the two groups.
The study concluded that breed does not determine aggressive behavior.
The study rejects BSL and concludes that it is unlikely to be an effective tool for reducing dog bite risk.

Science.org

Journal of Veterinary Behavior [1]

Journal of Veterinary Behavior [2]

After testing the temperament of 415 dogs impacted by breed-specific legislation (BSL), including Bullmastiffs, Dobermans, Mastiffs, Rottweilers, pit bull-type breeds, and others, the study determined that there was no indication of dangerousness in specific breeds. The dogs were evaluated for aggression in various scenarios, including dog-human, dog-dog, and dog-environment interactions.
There was no difference in aggression or behavior between pit bull-type breeds (subjected to the strictest regulations) and other breeds impacted by BSL but subjected to fewer regulations, such as Bullmastiffs, Dobermans, Mastiffs, and Rottweilers.
The study concluded that there was no justification for specific breed lists in BSL.

Applied Animal Behaviour Science

Factors such as breed explained less than 10% of the variance in dog aggression, suggesting that individual experiences play a much larger role.
Aggression is strongly linked to an individual dog's experiences and environment. It is not a trait that can be associated with any specific breed.
The factors associated with increased rates of aggression were not breed-specific. These factors included intact dogs (failure to neuter), the dog's age, and exposure to punishment-based training methods.
It is inappropriate to make assumptions about an individual dog's risk of aggression based on characteristics such as breed.

Irish Veterinary Journal

There is no difference in the medical treatment required following a dog bite or in the type of bite inflicted between breeds stereotyped as "dangerous" (breeds targeted by breed-specific legislation, such as German Shepherds, Rottweilers, and pit bull-type dogs) and other breeds of similar sizes and strengths that are not stereotyped as "dangerous" (breeds such as Boxers, Bulldogs, and Labrador Retrievers).
Bites by breeds not perceived as dangerous (non-legislated breeds) are reported at a significantly lower rate to authorities, leading to misleading data in breed-specific statistics on dog bites.

Frontiers in Public Health

Journal of Anatomy

Frontiers In Veterinary Science

International Journal of Environmental Research & Public Health [1]

96% of veterinarians oppose breed-specific legislation (BSL) and overwhelmingly endorse breed-neutral policies, such as public education and stricter leash laws, to reduce the risk of dog bites.
Veterinarians' reasons for opposing BSL include: 89% agreed that BSL does not improve public safety; 76% agreed that BSL is a form of government overreach; and 75% agreed that BSL creates an animal welfare issue.
The majority of veterinarians described their experiences with pit bull-type dogs as either positive or very positive.
There is increasing evidence suggesting that breed bans do not decrease dog bites.

International Journal of Environmental Research & Public Health [2]

70% of U.S. residents oppose breed-specific bans (BSL).
The majority prefer breed-neutral approaches for public safety, including public education about animal welfare and behavior, stricter leash laws, and harsher penalties for irresponsible dog owners.
There is growing evidence suggesting that breed-specific laws (BSL) are ineffective, negatively impact animal welfare, and do little to improve public safety. The ineffectiveness of BSL is attributed to factors such as breed misidentification, which has been reported among the general public, animal shelter workers, law enforcement officers, and healthcare professionals. The inability of most people to accurately identify dog breeds significantly impacts the ability to collect accurate breed-specific bite statistics. Consequently, media stories often spread inaccurate and misleading information about certain breeds.

Frontiers in Public Health

Animal Law Review

Public Library of Science (PLOS) ONE

The Veterinary Journal [1]

The Veterinary Journal [2]

Dog bite incidents result from a complex set of factors, including dog ownership, circumstantial factors, and other variables.
The results of breed risk calculations did not correlate with the breeds targeted by breed-specific legislation (BSL).
The view that aggressive potential is linked to dog breed is concerning, as a dog's tendency to bite or exhibit aggressive behavior depends on more than just genetics. Other factors, such as heredity, experience, socialization, training, health, and victim behavior, all play a role. Therefore, it has been recommended that aggressive potential should be evaluated for each dog individually.

Journal of Veterinary Behavior [1]

Journal of Veterinary Behavior [2]

Journal of Veterinary Behavior [3]

The Canadian Veterinary Journal

International Journal of the Care of the Injured

The Dangerous Dogs Act (DDA) in the UK, which bans several breeds including Japanese Tosas, Dogo Argentinos, Fila Brasileiros, and pitbull-type breeds, is ineffective and does not reduce the number of dog bite-related injuries.
After analyzing medical records on dog bites before and after the DDA was implemented, the study found that the data clearly demonstrates little impact on dog bite-related injuries.
If legislation aims to reduce and prevent injury from animal bites, in its present form the DDA does little to protect the public.

Knowledge

Articles

About

Fan Pics

Studies