# Your opinion on Cesar Milan?



## Rescued (Jan 8, 2012)

Just wondering what all the different individual opinions are- his training methods as a whole, has anyone had success with his methods, ect.

I personally don't like him and wouldn't use his methods on my dogs. That being said, our mutts don't have headstrong personalities and aren't mixes of the AKC Working class so we can get away with using treats for most training issues.

Thoughts?


----------



## RonE (Feb 3, 2007)

Hot button topic which will surely lead to several hundred responses.

Or you can cut to the chase and do a quick forum search for Cesar Milan or The Dog Whisperer.

BTW, the REAL dog whisperer is Paul Owens. Cesar is a TV celebrity.


----------



## Rescued (Jan 8, 2012)

RonE said:


> Hot button topic which will surely lead to several hundred responses.
> 
> Or you can cut to the chase and do a quick forum search for Cesar Milan or The Dog Whisperer.
> 
> BTW, the REAL dog whisperer is Paul Owens. Cesar is a TV celebrity.


I didn't even think to search. Should I delete this thread since its been done 458903 times over?

(and I completely agree, I was just trying not to sway potential answers haha)


----------



## Bordermom (Apr 28, 2010)

Personally, I don't think he's the worst thing out there. Shoudl we hit/poke our dogs? Well not if we don't have to, but from what I've seen, he seems to get results where others may not have been able to, and deals with a lot of aggressive type dogs. Anyone who can have that many dogs loose in an area, of those breeds, and not have constant fights and keep them under control must know something. He's got some good points for the average pet owner, like walk your dog, do things with them and so on.

Maybe there are kinder, gentler ways to get the same results, but I've seen much worse on TV and in person with some trainers. 

I'm all for positive methods, I use them for most everything I do, but see it misused a lot too, and the increasing number of 'spoiled dogs' makes me think that sometimes a firmer hand might work better then the inconsistant one with a treat in it. I know with Ticket doing flyball, the first place was all positive, bribe with cookies and that's fine, but he just got wound up at the other dogs getting to play when he had to wait his turn, add in some shelties that snapped at him and I was ready to quit. Put a prong on, went into a different club and one quick pop and an 'enough' and he settled down and got to work without acting up the rest of the evening. The other club's method/suggestion was to start in the parking lot with attention work and slowly move towards eventually (in six months or so was her timeline) having him doing the same in the building.


----------



## Dekka (Mar 20, 2010)

ya do the search..lol

But I have head strong dogs and IME the more head strong the dog the more conversational 'training' is a bad idea. I have worked with JRTs with some very serious bite histories. They had these issues 9/10 because someone thought the needed to intimidate a 'dominant' puppy when all their problems would have been solved if they had simply trained their dog in the first place. (and fixing an untrained dog is most easily done by simply training vs assuming its bad behaviour is some kind of 'dominant' behaviour)


----------



## DustyCrockett (Sep 24, 2011)

I like him. He has a lot to offer.

Maintaining a calm assertive attitude with your dogs, for example.
Give your dog a balance of exercise, discipline and affection.
Diiscipline doesn't mean punishment.
Dogs are not human.
No touch, no talk, no eye contact.
Be sensitive to your dog's state of mind.
Learn to read your dog's body language.

I learned a lot of his concepts from an big 'ol yella hound dog way before I ever heard of Cesar Millan. A dog will follow a confident leader. He will desire to do what you need him to do, and you don't have to use words to communicate. A well-exercised dog is a good dog. It's better to have a cooperative dog than an obedient dog.

But here's a warning: you won't be able to replicate his success using his methods. He is one of a kind. Sure, once in awhile you can tell a dog "shhht" and it will cooperate with you. But most of them won't and you'll look foolish.

And all that "humans eat first, go through the door first" mumbo jumbo is a load of hooey.

That's an opinion based on actual experience.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

Bordermom said:


> I'm all for positive methods, I use them for most everything I do, but see it misused a lot too, and the increasing number of 'spoiled dogs' makes me think that sometimes a firmer hand might work better then the inconsistant one with a treat in it. I know with Ticket doing flyball, the first place was all positive, bribe with cookies and that's fine, but he just got wound up at the other dogs getting to play when he had to wait his turn, add in some shelties that snapped at him and I was ready to quit. Put a prong on, went into a different club and one quick pop and an 'enough' and he settled down and got to work without acting up the rest of the evening.


Why can't bad training...just be? Why, is the methodology thrown out with the bath water?

Sometimes a firmer hand might work, but why not improve the consistency of +R, if that's the problem?

BTW, there is no such thing as 'bribery' in +R.


----------



## Roloni (Aug 5, 2011)

Looks to me like he is trying to train adult dogs ..that are owned by idiots.
His methods may seem unusual at times...
but keep in mind what he is dealing with.. an adult animal that has been trained by stupid people ..
Sometimes its a 7 year old girl who lives in a trailor park...Her Mommy bought her a Tasmanian Devil for her birthday .


----------



## DustyCrockett (Sep 24, 2011)

Roloni said:


> Looks to me like he is trying to train adult dogs ..that are owned by idiots.
> His methods may seem unusual at times...
> but keep in mind what he is dealing with.. an adult animal that has been trained by stupid people ..
> Sometimes its a 7 year old girl who lives in a trailor park...Her Mommy bought her a Tasmanian Devil for her birthday .


Your right about the adult dogs -- you will never learn anything about puppies from that show. But how much "training" is he doing? I've never seen him train a dog to follow a command.


----------



## Roloni (Aug 5, 2011)

DustyCrockett said:


> Your right about the adult dogs -- you will never learn anything about puppies from that show. But how much "training" is he doing? I've never seen him train a dog to follow a command.


I agree...Its mostly about corrective behavior with adult dogs .


----------



## Dekka (Mar 20, 2010)

Roloni said:


> Looks to me like he is trying to train adult dogs ..that are owned by idiots.
> His methods may seem unusual at times...
> but keep in mind what he is dealing with.. an adult animal that has been trained by stupid people ..
> Sometimes its a 7 year old girl who lives in a trailor park...Her Mommy bought her a Tasmanian Devil for her birthday .


Except the dogs on that show aren't usually very bad. Camera crew have talked about how much they have to film just to get the dog 'being bad' on film. He antagonizes the dogs and puts them in positions that make them appear far worse than they are. That is not helping the dog. It makes for exciting TV but its not really how one should work with dogs with issues. In fact behaviourists do the opposite of what he does, and its safe and works for all people (not just big strong men with great timing). When I work with a dog with issues I want the frailest of the elderly as well as small children to be safe with the dog. Just because I could intimidate the dog doesn't mean the problem is fixed.


----------



## Groucho (Jan 12, 2012)

I think Cesar has a lot of good points, I just could NEVER endorse him. His use of the word "dominance" gets old.


----------



## Amaryllis (Dec 28, 2011)

Evil. I think he's evil. He doesn't solve any problem. He creates a state of learned helplessness, shutting the dog down so it won't react to anything anymore. That's not solving a problem, that's suppressing it until the next time.

Look, every day on this board you see questions from people who attempted to recreate this TV drama violence in their home and they don't understand why they were bitten, why their dog avoids them, why their dog isn't learning. That's what Cesar Millan has done. He's created a generation of dog owners who abuse their dogs because "hey, it works on TV". And don't give me that BS about the warning at the beginning of every episode. Of course people are going to try it at home. That's the most predictable possible result of putting that crap on the air.


----------



## TxRider (Apr 22, 2009)

I think nobody here has enough real information on him to really have an informed intelligent opinion about him including myself.. We see a tiny tidbit of him and what he does, and his explanations in a second language as he grew up speaking spanish..

He seems to get results, but even that too we don't get to see enough of to really know.

Most folks get too hung up on the words he uses like dominance, when their definition and his definition of the word aren't really the same.

You even see it here, like the above post, insinuating he ends up putting every dog he works with into a state of learned helplessness which is frankly ridiculous.

Go hang out with him and every dog he works with in person for a few months, not gain an opinion by watching tiny clips of video that some editor pieced together, complete with dramatic music score, edited for sensationalistic appeal, and then I might place some actual value on an opinion.

Dumb dog owners will do dumb things and get bitten. Happened thousands of years before Caesar was born, it'll be happening thousands of years from now after he's dead.

Dogs like every other mammal learn from consequences to their actions, they learn equally well from both positive and negative consequences just like we do. It's up to you to figure out the best way to teach your dog what you want it to know by providing the appropriate consequences. Most of what CM is doing is providing consequences to the dogs actions, and 90% of the time that consequence is a mere vocal "psst".. How absolutely horrible..


----------



## Bordermom (Apr 28, 2010)

Curbside Prophet said:


> Why can't bad training...just be? Why, is the methodology thrown out with the bath water?
> 
> Sometimes a firmer hand might work, but why not improve the consistency of +R, if that's the problem?
> 
> BTW, there is no such thing as 'bribery' in +R.



Well, for one thing, you weren't here to take my dog for six months and work him through the problem at the first training place, spending your own money and time to do so (they would not let me come and work him towards the goal on other nights or come for free - something about insurance which smelled of money grab - why I wasn't permitted to use the parking lot without paying doesn't make sense but...). I'm all for using gentle methods but within reason and budget!

I didn't say I simply tossed a prong on and swung my dog around, hardly! Put the prong on and worked on his attention as usual at home and in the parking lot, then the first tantrum he got one pop, asked to work attention, then click and treat. I know I'm ruining my dog by using both a clicker and a prong at times but he seems ok. Within the first night he was running flyball and behaving himself, having gotten the message that lunging and screaming wasn't going to be just ignored. We ran and got points a month later and he had a great time, no prong needed. 

And I would like to think that after all these years of training I'm pretty consistant, thanks.


----------



## doxiemommy (Dec 18, 2009)

TxRider said:


> I think nobody here has enough real information on him to really have an informed intelligent opinion about him including myself.. We see a tiny tidbit of him and what he does, and his explanations in a second language as he grew up speaking spanish..
> 
> He seems to get results, but even that too we don't get to see enough of to really know.
> 
> ...


If you mean that we don't know enough about him, *based on his tv show*, ok, yes, we only see an edited, final product, without all of the background, and all the steps taken to get to the result. But, google CM and you CAN find "real information" about him. For example, he has NO formal training. His outlook and philosophies, through his own admission, came about as a result of seeing and interacting with the stray/neighborhood dogs near his grandfather's ranch in Mexico. He has no certification. He hasn't studied animal behavior, or training methods. It's all experimentation based on his own thoughts, ideas and experience. 

Yes, he does seem to have a way with some dogs. But, when I am researching who can help me most with my dogs, I want to know what they've learned. I want to know that they are up to date on current methodologies. I mean, for Pete's sake, we (many of us) acknowledge that the alpha stuff is bunk, unscientific and incorrect, not to mention disproved. How did that happen? How did it become disproved? How do we know that it is unscientific and incorrect? Through further exploration, both of the flawed studies that started it, and new info on animal behavior. 

My point is, I want to know that the people I consider hiring to work with my dogs know current information, and are up to date on the science of animal behavior. I don't want them to base their techniques on outdated info or simply an idea.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

Bordermom said:


> Well, for one thing, you weren't here to take my dog for six months and work him through the problem at the first training place, spending your own money and time to do so (they would not let me come and work him towards the goal on other nights or come for free - something about insurance which smelled of money grab - why I wasn't permitted to use the parking lot without paying doesn't make sense but...). I'm all for using gentle methods but within reason and budget!


I'm assuming this is in response to the questions I asked. What I should take from this is...$$$ dictates methodology? I don't see how $$$ could ever dictate methodology. If the first training facility was ineffective, I would say that's an indictment of the facility, not the methodology. 

I also didn't say you helicoptered your dog either. In fact, I haven't questioned your training or results at all. I simply questioned your logic to favor +P over +R...because that's how your posts read. And if the reason is $$$ and/or you didn't like the first facility's rules, well, the logic to use a firmer hand doesn't follow.


----------



## DustyCrockett (Sep 24, 2011)

doxiemommy said:


> I mean, for Pete's sake, we (many of us) acknowledge that the alpha stuff is bunk, unscientific and incorrect, not to mention disproved. How did that happen? How did it become disproved? How do we know that it is unscientific and incorrect? Through further exploration, both of the flawed studies that started it, and new info on animal behavior.


The alpha stuff based on the flawed studies is bunk. But "alpha" is a more general term than that. I avoid using the term "alpha" for the reasons you gave, and so does CM. I know that a wolf pack has a leader, and that in a family the humans have to be leaders to the canines, or else there will be problems. All the humans. I know this to be a fact based on personal experience and observation. I knew it way before I ever heard CM say it.

So, if you are basing your opinion of CM on his promotion of "the alpha stuff" then you must not be watching his show, because he does not do that. He does not kick or hit animals either. He touches them. A touch with a foot is still a touch. Dogs have four feet, they aren't offended by a touch with a foot. He's not striking dogs and inflicting pain. He does not punish dogs, he corrects their behavior while it's happening with a touch, a look and sometimes a verbal sound. Sometimes a leash correction. That's about it. The idea that a tug on a leash hurts a dog is an insult to dogs everywhere.


----------



## doxiemommy (Dec 18, 2009)

DustyCrockett said:


> The alpha stuff based on the flawed studies is bunk. But "alpha" is a more general term than that. I avoid using the term "alpha" for the reasons you gave, and so does CM. I know that a wolf pack has a leader, and that in a family the humans have to be leaders to the canines, or else there will be problems. All the humans. I know this to be a fact based on personal experience and observation. I knew it way before I ever heard CM say it.
> 
> So, if you are basing your opinion of CM on his promotion of "the alpha stuff" then you must not be watching his show, because he does not do that. He does not kick or hit animals either. He touches them. A touch with a foot is still a touch. Dogs have four feet, they aren't offended by a touch with a foot. He's not striking dogs and inflicting pain. He does not punish dogs, he corrects their behavior while it's happening with a touch, a look and sometimes a verbal sound. Sometimes a leash correction. That's about it. The idea that a tug on a leash hurts a dog is an insult to dogs everywhere.


OK, first, you missed my point, but I'll get to that later.

Second, I don't know what CM episodes you've been watching ; maybe the most recent ones, as I've heard he has calmed down. But, I have seen many, many alpha rolls, and pinning of dogs where they really squirming and squealing, and struggling for minutes, not seconds. I also have watched video clips of CM posted on the internet showing him using choke collars to actually string up a dog, off the ground til the dog quits struggling and is barely conscious. If that isn't "inflicting pain" then we have a different definition of pain.

I have also heard him use the term "alpha", as well as "pack leader".

As for my point in the post you quoted: I did not bring up the alpha stuff as a description of CM's philosophy, necessarily. I was simply using it as an example of an "old school" philosophy that has since been disproven. My point was, someone like CM, who has had no formal study or education in methodology or animal behavior, may not be aware of the advances in the study of dogs and their behavior. Personally, I would not like the person training my dogs to be going with the flow, just having an idea and going with it, or using methods because they worked in the old days, regardless of the science available.

To sum up, besides the alpha stuff that I have seen him do, and the stringing up and kicking I have seen him do, my other complaint is that he speaks as if he has a vast amount of knowledge but yet has received no training in order to keep up to date with the current science. 
Perhaps that comes from being a teacher myself... we are constant trying to stay up to date with the best methodology to help our students.


----------



## DustyCrockett (Sep 24, 2011)

doxiemommy said:


> Second, I don't know what CM episodes you've been watching ; maybe the most recent ones, as I've heard he has calmed down. But, I have seen many, many alpha rolls, and pinning of dogs where they really squirming and squealing, and struggling for minutes, not seconds. I also have watched video clips of CM posted on the internet showing him using choke collars to actually string up a dog, off the ground til the dog quits struggling and is barely conscious. If that isn't "inflicting pain" then we have a different definition of pain.


I watch the reruns if they're on when I need mindless entertainment. I've seen a lot of them, I don't always check the date but I don't recall any earlier than maybe 2005.

I've seen him lay dogs over on their side, but it's always been out of control aggressive dogs who were slated for destruction. He held 'em in place until they relaxed. And yes it took minutes in some cases. In every case, they just played out their aggression. I've not seen him do it to punish, only to calm an otherwise uncontrollable animal. I've never seen him do it with an animal that isn't a known biter.

Nah, our definition of pain isn't all that different, we're just not looking at the same incidents. I never saw CM strangle a dog, not even once. I've seen a trainer's website that shows it happening, but I never saw it on the Dog Whisperer. Guess I might have to see that for myself.

Guess I'm not so quick to dismiss personal experience in favor of academic studies.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

DustyCrockett said:


> II've seen him lay dogs over on their side, but it's always been out of control aggressive dogs who were slated for destruction. He held 'em in place until they relaxed. And yes it took minutes in some cases. In every case, they just played out their aggression. I've not seen him do it to punish, only to calm an otherwise uncontrollable animal. I've never seen him do it with an animal that isn't a known biter.


Even if this is true (not saying it is or isn't), I think the "good" of anything he's done has been overshadowed by how many dogs end up killed because their idiot owners try that kind of thing on them. Perfectly average dogs who would not normally take someone's face off but are forced to defend themselves from that kind of rough treatment. I'm sure it's way more than he's possibly saved.

And it's not really "calming" the dogs. It's flooding them until they shut down. Which might seem to work in the short run but can create a dog who later explodes.


----------



## juliemule (Dec 10, 2011)

I have a severe, shut down dog, the worst I have seen. She was abused so horrendously I will not go into details here. Anyway she has been here for two years, I have tried all I know with not one ounce of improvement. So I left her alone. I would invite her on pack walks, to play etc. Finally a few weeks ago she ran up to me and bite my arm! Yay! Now we can easily tug for a brief moment, she bites my arm in a jacket, we wrestle gently and a short chase of a toy. Then done. She will leave the house or yard when my son or his friends are near. Its sad, but she is warming up finally!


----------



## DustyCrockett (Sep 24, 2011)

Willowy said:


> Even if this is true (not saying it is or isn't), I think the "good" of anything he's done has been overshadowed by how many dogs end up killed because their idiot owners try that kind of thing on them. Perfectly average dogs who would not normally take someone's face off but are forced to defend themselves from that kind of rough treatment. I'm sure it's way more than he's possibly saved.
> 
> And it's not really "calming" the dogs. It's flooding them until they shut down. Which might seem to work in the short run but can create a dog who later explodes.


I'm interested in learning more about this -- can you point me toward a source where I can read about those cases you described? Also the theory behind flooding? 

I don't mean to create work for you, so if a link isn't convenient, maybe an author's name, or keywords to search on?

thanks!


----------



## Bordermom (Apr 28, 2010)

Curbside Prophet said:


> I'm assuming this is in response to the questions I asked. What I should take from this is...$$$ dictates methodology? I don't see how $$$ could ever dictate methodology. If the first training facility was ineffective, I would say that's an indictment of the facility, not the methodology.
> 
> I also didn't say you helicoptered your dog either. In fact, I haven't questioned your training or results at all. I simply questioned your logic to favor +P over +R...because that's how your posts read. And if the reason is $$$ and/or you didn't like the first facility's rules, well, the logic to use a firmer hand doesn't follow.


You implied (I could be wrong though) that you felt it was wrong to use any other methods other than +P. And that if I was consistant with the +P, it wouldn't have been an issue. If I'm wrong I apologize!

I have found that some dogs, not all of them, but some, don't have the 'I just want to please' attitude in them as much. So while using positives are great, for some situations a good 'no' works to get them back on track. Some trainers don't like it or don't want to use that sort of thing, and that's fine, but when needed I use what works the best with that dog. To each his own, depends on your goals and the dog.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

DustyCrockett said:


> I'm interested in learning more about this -- can you point me toward a source where I can read about those cases you described? Also the theory behind flooding?


Not sure what you mean by "cases". Dog bites don't make the news unless a pit bull bites a cute little white kid. But I don't need documented cases to know about dogs biting their owners because they do something mean to them. Just read some threads in the training forum, ask a trainer, ask a vet, ask a shelter worker. . .

Flooding is a common training term. It can be used correctly and it can be used incorrectly. Google "flooding in dog training". 

But really, if you were mad and someone bigger held you down until you "calmed down", would that make you a less angry person in general? Not me! While that bigger person was around and in a position to stop me, I might stifle the angry behavior. But eventually. . .pow!


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Bordermom said:


> You implied (I could be wrong though) that you felt it was wrong to use any other methods other than +P. And that if I was consistant with the +P, it wouldn't have been an issue.


Just pointing out, P+ is positive punishment (prong collars, etc.). I think in this context you meant R+, which is positive reinforcement.


----------



## DobermanGuy (Dec 16, 2011)

Willowy said:


> Not sure what you mean by "cases". Dog bites don't make the news unless a pit bull bites a cute little white kid.


Don't know how the color or race of the kid has anything to do with it...

News people tend to report it when ANY kid gets bit and seriously harmed.


----------



## Groucho (Jan 12, 2012)

To help Willowy out, it is just basic human Psychology. Take an introductory course at a CC or University and you'll learn about "flooding". I figured that since dogs are as developed mentally as a toddler (of course this is always debated), that this method of "therapy" must also apply to them. In my animal behavior class, flooding was mentioned also, confirming my belief.
I talk about flooding in my training classes.
As far as the "cases" remarks go, I think Willowy was aiming for dark humor. If they were, I kind of laughed. If Willowy wasn't... I guess I'm just twisted. : P


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

It's a recognized phenomenon that pretty much any crime/accident/incident gets more media coverage when it happens to a white person. Little Native kid gets mauled by the wild dogs on the rez? Maybe there's a teeny box in the "state news" section. Little white kid gets nipped by his grandma's Rottweiler? Big scary headlines, calls for breed bans, etc. I was sort of trying to be funny but it's also true.


----------



## wvasko (Dec 15, 2007)

> who has had no formal study or education in methodology or animal behavior, may not be aware of the advances in the study of dogs and their behavior. Personally, I would not like the person training my dogs to be going with the flow, just having an idea and going with it, or using methods because they worked in the old days, regardless of the science available.


The above pretty much describes me, with the exception that finding something new that works was always a step forward for me. But definitely "no formal study or education in methodology or animal behavior" When I started amateur stuff back in late 50's there were not many programs, nor interest in any. It's a very good thing that through the years I had many dogs teaching and guiding me as I stumbled through the dog world.


----------



## juliemule (Dec 10, 2011)

Willowy said:


> Not sure what you mean by "cases". Dog bites don't make the news unless a pit bull bites a cute little white kid. But I don't need documented cases to know about dogs biting their owners because they do something mean to them. Just read some threads in the training forum, ask a trainer, ask a vet, ask a shelter worker. . .
> 
> Flooding is a common training term. It can be used correctly and it can be used incorrectly. Google "flooding in dog training".
> 
> But really, if you were mad and someone bigger held you down until you "calmed down", would that make you a less angry person in general? Not me! While that bigger person was around and in a position to stop me, I might stifle the angry behavior. But eventually. . .pow!


Doesn't have to be a "cute" kid, I've seen ugly ones make the news too.


----------



## petpeeve (Jun 10, 2010)

DustyCrockett said:


> I never saw CM strangle a dog, not even once. I've seen a trainer's website that shows it happening, but I never saw it on the Dog Whisperer. Guess I might have to see that for myself.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gq62POnD7sA&feature=related


----------



## Groucho (Jan 12, 2012)

petpeeve said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gq62POnD7sA&feature=related


O_O
That is... a very strange method of training.
I work with behavior modification in dogs at the local shelter, and when I work with dogs on LLW and basic commands (to improve "adoptability"), I have NEVER found a reason to yank on the dogs neck with a pinch or choke -- and this is with dogs that are SEVERELY under-exercised and socialized. 
To me, +P has never had any application in my life.


----------



## DobermanGuy (Dec 16, 2011)

Willowy said:


> It's a recognized phenomenon that pretty much any crime/accident/incident gets more media coverage when it happens to a white person. Little Native kid gets mauled by the wild dogs on the rez? Maybe there's a teeny box in the "state news" section. Little white kid gets nipped by his grandma's Rottweiler? Big scary headlines, calls for breed bans, etc. I was sort of trying to be funny but it's also true.


That is so far from the truth it is not even remotely funny.

More often than not - Main Stream Media never (or very rarely) even mentions the race of the people involved.


----------



## RonE (Feb 3, 2007)

I think the reason that Cesar Milan threads tend to go on for a dozen pages or more is because, after the first few, responses rarely have anything to do with Cesar Milan.

Carry on.


----------



## NewfoundlandOwner (Dec 22, 2011)

He knows a lot of good things, but he has an approach that I don't personally agree with. Largely his philosophy is based on flawed wolf studies and dominance theory, which isn't accurate for dog behavior. In the book, "Dog Sense" the author said something like, "In order to understand the behavior of the modern dog, instead of researching wolf pack behavior, it is far more logical to research the behavior of the modern dog". I probably butchered that quote, but you get the idea. Still, Milan does know a lot about dogs, so there are things to learn from him. I particularly like his take that most dog problems are directly due to their owner's problems or mistakes, and that many issues can be solved by making certain your dog gets enough exercise, mental stimulation and attention. I think this is something that most people can agree with, regardless of their opinion of Milan.


----------



## SaraBee (Dec 28, 2011)

Ok Don't hate but i love his show. I Don't always agree with everything he does but I agree that most of the owners are pretty stupid dog owners in the first place. Well alot of them Look as though they are first time dog owners with not much experience. 

I've seen so many episodes of owners getting bitten because it was provoking the dog while it was irritated and not seeing the signs that it's an irritated dog. Like the food aggression episodes. Those episodes i have seen is almost like the owner is annoying the dog on purpose while it's eating. lol. I would never do some of those things to my dog while it's eating. i would just leave the dog alone to eat. 

Maybe it's their lack of experience in owning dogs that they clearly do not know the signs of when their dog is annoyed and just want to be left alone. Does the stupid owners not know to just leave the goddamm Dog alone to eat. lol Once you leave it alone. it would just calm down by itself. You provoke an irritated dog.. Of course it's going to bite you. Stupid owners. lol 

Ohhh what about the episodes of the ones where they make a sad story of how the owners dog's are so aggressive they cant have family or visitors over for months or years. Ummm here's a simple solution. Crate them or put the dogs outside when you have company! lol Company usually leave after about 3 hours anyway. Is it that hard to just crate a dog or put them outside for 3 hours? 

Alot of the things he teaches is common sense. Taking dogs for long walks to drain their energies and giving out a calm vibe does work in calming your dog down.


----------



## juliemule (Dec 10, 2011)

I don't agree with all he says or does by any means, however my dogs must behave, and if I need to take a bone or food dish away for whatever reason, I need to be able to do so. I have wild dogs, but they are not allowed to jump up and bite guests or act like knotheads in public lol.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

Bordermom said:


> You implied (I could be wrong though) that you felt it was wrong to use any other methods other than +P. And that if I was consistant with the +P, it wouldn't have been an issue. If I'm wrong I apologize!


No, I haven't been trying to imply anything regarding your training. I can't judge that from here. You're the best trainer in the world as far as I can tell. I'm just trying to understand the logic to prefer +P over +R as your post suggested. You gave me, the inconsistent use of +R, and something about the rules of the training facility. Nothing that would suggest it's the methodology's fault, or gives reason to prefer +P.


----------



## DustyCrockett (Sep 24, 2011)

Willowy said:


> Not sure what you mean by "cases". Dog bites don't make the news unless a pit bull bites a cute little white kid. But I don't need documented cases to know about dogs biting their owners because they do something mean to them. Just read some threads in the training forum, ask a trainer, ask a vet, ask a shelter worker. . .


So...you don't know of any dogs getting killed because of the Dog Whisperer show?



> But really, if you were mad and someone bigger held you down until you "calmed down", would that make you a less angry person in general? Not me! While that bigger person was around and in a position to stop me, I might stifle the angry behavior. But eventually. . .pow!


I'm human, not canine. 

If I was angry enough and about to do something stupid, and my friends held me back until I calmed down, I'd be grateful for the favor. And no I wouldn't do that stupid thing after they left.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

DustyCrockett said:


> So...you don't know of any dogs getting killed because of the Dog Whisperer show?
> I'm human, not canine.


I know of this happening personally. I can find lots of "cases", but I don't know what level of documentation you want. Would a story on the internet suffice? Does it have to be on CNN or Fox News? What's your criteria for what you'll believe? 

And dogs aren't very different from humans in many ways. Do you really think violence ever helps to reduce aggression or anger, in any species?


----------



## DustyCrockett (Sep 24, 2011)

petpeeve said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gq62POnD7sA&feature=related


ok then, thanks.


----------



## cshellenberger (Dec 2, 2006)

Wow, I prefer not to drop bombs on my dogs. 

I've seen FIRST HAND dogs that Milan has shut down, these dogs generally end up aggressing MORE when pushed and what's worse, they aggress without WARNING first. 

I've seen first hand how other dominance based methods shut dogs down. I learned to train 30 years ago using Keogh's method, watched it ruin dogs and looked for a better way.


----------



## Averyismypei (May 24, 2010)

I dont care for his methods. I prefer Victoria Stillwell by far.


----------



## DustyCrockett (Sep 24, 2011)

Willowy said:


> I know of this happening personally. I can find lots of "cases", but I don't know what level of documentation you want. Would a story on the internet suffice? Does it have to be on CNN or Fox News? What's your criteria for what you'll believe?


When you said the " 'good' of anything he's done has been overshadowed by how many dogs end up killed," I took it to mean actual cases where dogs have been killed because the owners watched that show. If my understanding was contrary to your meaning, you can clarify if you like. 

On the other hand, if you have something handy that led you to that conclusion, it's a topic I might find interesting. Of course published news sources are more credible than internet blogs and public forums, but if you found it credible, your opinion adds weight. 



Willowy said:


> Do you really think violence ever helps to reduce aggression or anger, in any species?


If you're asking whether I would defend the use of violence the answer is no. I don't use violence, with my animals or my children. 

If you're old enough, you might remember when parents used to spank their kids. I (along with many generations) was spanked, and I didn't turn out violent. I like to think we're beyond all that now, but that wasn't always the case.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Well, this one seems like a no-brainer, but it appears to be properly scientific: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168159108003717 Here's a synopsis if you don't want to read the whole study: http://www.upenn.edu/pennnews/news/...says-veterinary-study-university-pennsylvania
Unfortunately, when they asked the owners where they got the idea to do that to their dog, it all falls into the broad category of "trainer"; they didn't have a separate category just for Cesar. I know he didn't invent harsh dog training but he certainly is the most well-publicized dog trainer of all time.

LOL, after reading a bunch of articles on the subject, and the comments about them, I'm somewhat disturbed by the god-like status many of his supporters give him. Scary.


----------



## Corinthian (Sep 21, 2009)

Ignorance. 

When he started, we could excuse his actions as that of a guy simply following the most prevalent message regarding training. The simplest, as he says, most natural approach that we humans take when dealing with other animals – the application of pain and the threat of it.

Many trainers started with the crank’n’yank method. Most learned to move beyond such simplistic, archaic and draconian techniques. Cesar is stuck in the past, and it is difficult to know whether he lacks the intelligence, lacks the motivation or doesn’t care, or can’t afford to care.

After spending years pushing the same idiotic ideas, maybe he is too committed to these ideas and realizes that he can’t afford to take on modern, proven methods. Americans see weakness in growth and intellectual progress, changing one’s mind is weakness, waffling and flip-flopping – he might lose his audience.


----------



## theyogachick (Aug 2, 2009)

I told myself I would stay out of this one, but, here goes.

What everyone needs to understand is that he is a TV personality. He has no credentials, no degrees...no formal training. Does he know animal body language? Yes. Can he do a mean impression of a dog that is frightened, defensive, aggressive? Yes. Does he have SOME methods that may work? Sure. Ignoring at the door, leaving the room when a dog demands attention, etc.

But, his other methods (the strangling first and foremost) are barbaric. And John Q. Public who knows diddly about dogs is going to try these methods and end up bit or worse. Yes, it says "don't try this at home," but you know people do it anyway. And the video posted isn't the only time he made a dog "submit" to the least. There was a Jindo that he strangled as well. It was so bad the wife was freaking out and CM asked her to leave the room becasue they didn't need that negative energy. You are choking her dog and she should just let it happen? Because I tell you what--Gracie was not a good leash walker, but if ANY of my trainers did to her what he does to those dogs, there would have been some pain--and not on the dog's part.

If you enjoy watching, great. But everyone just needs to heed the warning that you should not try his methods at home. BOttom line is that if you have a dog with issues, get professional help.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Here is the Jindo video that theyogachick mentioned. And it's not just the strangling scene, either; it's the whole thing, so you can see the context and hear them talk about making the dog submit (the owner is worried because the dog will not let him flip him on his back while in the house) and whatnot. But if you want to skip straight to Cesar hanging the dog while the wife freaks out, go to 6:20. (Also, at 3:30, you can listen to the husband tell a story about a trainer who tried to hold the dog on its back for 20 minutes while the dog continued to fight -- the dog bit him four times when he finally let go. Shocking, huh? )

"The biggest challenge is for him to go and surrender inside the house."

He does also say that he is "dominating the wild animal" -- he catches himself and says "taming" right after.






The dog clearly just is eventually exhausted and gives up.

(Part two, if anyone is interested. In it, you can see Cesar make the dog lie back on his lap kind of like a baby, in a very unnatural position for a dog.)

Here's what I want to know. According to the owners in the pre-"taming" interview, the dog is completely fine on walks and in the yard (and most of the time), and he only acts aggressively when someone tries to flip him on his back while inside the house. So _why not just stop trying to flip him on his back?_

And you can say Cesar's methods have evolved all you want, but he's never apologized for stuff like this, and these re-runs are still playing. People still think this is the way to deal with aggressive dogs.

And there are more examples here: http://www.4pawsu.com/cesarfans.htm


----------



## Tofu_pup (Dec 8, 2008)

theyogachick said:


> And the video posted isn't the only time he made a dog "submit" to the least. There was a Jindo that he strangled as well. It was so bad the wife was freaking out and CM asked her to leave the room becasue they didn't need that negative energy. You are choking her dog and she should just let it happen? Because I tell you what--Gracie was not a good leash walker, but if ANY of my trainers did to her what he does to those dogs, there would have been some pain--and not on the dog's part.


Yeeeaaahhh...
I decided to watch an episode last night for a little entertainment. He started choking a dog and when the dog vocalized, you know the usual "I'm choking" sounds, Cesar said,"That's nothing." As in, don't mind me choking your dog here. 

I don't like him. But he's a well known tv personality so when he talks, he could say,"2+3=chair" and his clients would be like,"Why didn't I think of that?! Genius!"


----------



## theyogachick (Aug 2, 2009)

Yep. That is the one, Crantastic. I remember watching that episode in shock...and ending it in disgust. Yes, I felt bad for the dog. How could anyone with a heart not feel sorry for him.

If you look carefully, you can clearly see that JonBee's tongue is blue. CM also states that it is all psychological and not physical. That, IMO, is crap. That dog was being physically harmed.

And that dog was not aggressive all the time. Did they not pay attention to the fact that the dog was always outside and not inside? No wonder he was less comfortable in there.


----------



## juliemule (Dec 10, 2011)

Ok, not defending CM, but aren't there times when necessary to need to turn a dog on his back? Or treat injuries? Or take something from a dogs mouth?


----------



## theyogachick (Aug 2, 2009)

juliemule said:


> Ok, not defending CM, but aren't there times when necessary to need to turn a dog on his back? Or treat injuries? Or take something from a dogs mouth?


Absolutely. But, I would rather train my dog to trust those movements than fear them. IMO, if you choke your dog on a leash, he learns that leash=pain. You fight your dog to the ground? Ground=stress.

I am not saying that these issues don't need to be fixed, but there needs to be alternatives to forced submission.


----------



## juliemule (Dec 10, 2011)

Definately, training the dog to tolerate things is way better than being aggressive with a dog. I have heard many people make a statement, " well I can't touch his feet" or belly or tail, or don't go near him if he has a toy, etc. I just don't think that is best being fair to the dog.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Also, if you watch the video, the guy had no problem turning the dog on its back outside -- there's actually a shot of him happily lying on his back in the yard with his tongue hanging out (go to 1:40 or so in the video). It's only inside that he hated being flipped (and a lot of that had to do with the muzzle -- whenever his owners put the muzzle on, he'd automatically be on edge because he knew they were going to try something).


----------



## cshellenberger (Dec 2, 2006)

juliemule said:


> Ok, not defending CM, but aren't there times when necessary to need to turn a dog on his back? Or treat injuries? Or take something from a dogs mouth?


Yes, thereare times, my dogs are taught to do so using positive methods. If I need one of my dogs to drop something, I ASK and reward them for dropping.


----------



## DobermanGuy (Dec 16, 2011)

juliemule said:


> Definately, training the dog to tolerate things is way better than being aggressive with a dog. I have heard many people make a statement, " well I can't touch his feet" or belly or tail, or don't go near him if he has a toy, etc. I just don't think that is best being fair to the dog.


I completely agree. I would rather NOT have a dog around if I had to worry about one of my kids reaching for its bone and possibly getting bit. If that were my situation - I would have a LOT of training to do to fix it.

Positive reinforcement for me is a pat on the dogs head or verbal praise. Dogs can tell when you are happy and when they did good...


----------



## DustyCrockett (Sep 24, 2011)

Willowy said:


> Well, this one seems like a no-brainer, but it appears to be properly scientific: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168159108003717 Here's a synopsis if you don't want to read the whole study: http://www.upenn.edu/pennnews/news/...says-veterinary-study-university-pennsylvania
> Unfortunately, when they asked the owners where they got the idea to do that to their dog, it all falls into the broad category of "trainer"; they didn't have a separate category just for Cesar. I know he didn't invent harsh dog training but he certainly is the most well-publicized dog trainer of all time.
> 
> LOL, after reading a bunch of articles on the subject, and the comments about them, I'm somewhat disturbed by the god-like status many of his supporters give him. Scary.


The title of that article is inconsistent with its findings.



> Several confrontational methods...elicited an aggressive response from at least 25 percent of the dogs on which they were attempted.


One-fourth of the dogs responded aggressively to an aggressive act by the handler. That's a single act and a single response, and 75% of the dogs did *not* respond aggressively. But that's beside the point.

You claimed that the number of dogs destroyed because of CM's TV show "overshadowed" the amount of good he's done. The two episodes mentioned in this thread, the GSD and the jindo, represend a dog saved from lethal injection.

We took in a stray once, who turned out to be a possessive, human-aggressive, dangerous animal. I got bit several times. After $1,000 of "professional training", the dog was destroyed. I'd have gladly held him down until he was exhausted, then held him like a baby to save his life. I'd have even choked him for a few minutes. It'd have been worth it.


----------



## theyogachick (Aug 2, 2009)

DustyCrockett said:


> You claimed that the number of dogs destroyed because of CM's TV show "overshadowed" the amount of good he's done. The two episodes mentioned in this thread, the GSD and the jindo, represend a dog saved from lethal injection.
> 
> We took in a stray once, who turned out to be a possessive, human-aggressive, dangerous animal. I got bit several times. After $1,000 of "professional training", the dog was destroyed. I'd have gladly held him down until he was exhausted, then held him like a baby to save his life. I'd have even choked him for a few minutes. It'd have been worth it.


How many other dogs have been saved by methods that are not this? IMO--there are other ways to deal with this behavior. My trainer specializes in aggressive dogs and he never once has mentioned the need to choke/dominate a dog like this. Ever. And maybe you need to look at it in this way: those dogs have been psychologically broken. He broke their spirit...and says it is a good thing.

That Jindo was NOT aggressive everywhere. Only in the house. They should have worked on making the house a good place...not a place of stress. And the dog on a walk...Gracie is leash aggressive and reacats badly, but I never felt the need to strangle her.

If you think CM is a good "trainer," nothing we say will change your mind and you are entitled to your opinion. I am also entitled to mine--if any trainer EVER did to my dogs what he has done, someone would pulling me off him as I struggled to get to my dog.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

I read that the jindo actually was rehomed after this because he got more aggressive, but I couldn't find an "official" source, so I didn't mention that. I do wonder if he's still alive.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Crantastic said:


> I read that the jindo actually was rehomed after this because he got more aggressive, but I couldn't find an "official" source, so I didn't mention that. I do wonder if he's still alive.


Yea well his "pack leaders" stood by and helplessly watched a stranger strangle him, so, he probably didn't respect them any more. :/


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

DustyCrockett said:


> The two episodes mentioned in this thread, the GSD and the jindo, represend a dog saved from lethal injection.
> 
> We took in a stray once, who turned out to be a possessive, human-aggressive, dangerous animal. I got bit several times. After $1,000 of "professional training", the dog was destroyed. I'd have gladly held him down until he was exhausted, then held him like a baby to save his life. I'd have even choked him for a few minutes. It'd have been worth it.


We don't know if the Jindo and GSD were saved. First of all, there didn't actually seem (from what I saw) a be a real problem with the Jindo, other than his owner thought that not being able to alpha-roll the dog in the house was for some reason an issue. I don't think his life was in danger, or if it was it was because the owner made up some kind of problem that didn't exist. Not sure about the GSD. But we also don't know if those dogs are still alive (or lived to old age, if the episode was that long ago). There are websites claiming that a lot of the dogs he "fixes" are later put down for the same behavioral problems, or for worse aggression. I have no idea how true that is. . .one would have to speak directly to the owners to know that for sure.

What DID the trainers do with your aggressive dog? Anyway, if choking him would fix him long-term. . .maybe it would be worth it. I'm not sure if I would rather be abused and live or die painlessly. Depends on the quality of the rest of that life, I guess. What if the abuse didn't fix him? Then he was abused AND killed, which just really stinks. I see no evidence that aggressive handling like that does change a dog for the better in the long-term.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Found it -- JonBee (the jindo) was given up to Second Chance at Love Dog Rescue. He's not listed there now; not sure if he was rehabilitated or not. Will keep looking. 



> Well… it’s not disputed that Jonbee was given up by his tv owner, Scott Lincoln, to Second Chance at Love Rescue. (SCLR is run by a Cesar disciple.) Jonbee is available for adoption from them. I’m guessing that they have lots of liability insurance to be able to do that.
> 
> I met Jonbee and Scott prior to the Dog Whisperer mess, not after. It was on neutral territory so there wasn’t much to see if there was a house-only issue. Part of what did make me uncomfortable about the entire situation was how Jonbee became a symbol to Scott Lincoln in his fight against cancer. He wasn’t seeing the dog, and look how he inflicted alpha-rolling and who know what else inside the house while in his quest to dominate Jonbee.


From here.

In the Dog Whisperer Ultimate Episode Guide book, it (apparently; I don't own it) says that when Scott's elderly mother moved in with him, JonBee became aggressive again (guess he wasn't rehabilitated after all, huh?) and that's when he was sent to the rescue.

EDIT: Apparently he was eventually rehabilitated; see here: http://www.ksby.com/news/your-family-pet-meet-jon-bee-donna-dora-and-steffie/

I doubt you will find much from owners of dogs featured on Cesar's show. I hear he has a very strict non-disclosure agreement. Why would someone who apparently successfully rehabilitates all of the featured dogs have a strict NDA? Beats me.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

juliemule said:


> Ok, not defending CM, but aren't there times when necessary to need to turn a dog on his back? Or treat injuries? Or take something from a dogs mouth?


Gosh. What would be wrong with teaching the dog to be handled?


----------



## xxxxdogdragoness (Jul 22, 2010)

I don't hate the guy & IMO he seems to really love dogs (have you seen his new dog psychology center .... Wow!) if I was rich I would love to make a place like that. Plus his dogs don't seem bad-off, in fact they seem fairly content.

But one thing I have noticed is that he is huge on preaching dominance, lack of overt affection & humanizing a dog , BUT he himself does all that if you watch closely lol he does a lot of saying one thing & doing another.


----------



## juliemule (Dec 10, 2011)

Pawzk9 said:


> Gosh. What would be wrong with teaching the dog to be handled?


Yes exactly. But many people simply say,' oh don't reach down there, he has a bone' instead of teaching manners. Then a child happens to pat the dogs head while he is eating, and gets bit, they need a behaviorist to cure their super aggressive dog, or it is taken to the pound.

So my question, who's fault is this? The dog? Owner? Is a human aggressive dog ever cured really or just managed? After the trainer comes in, gets the dog on track, yet the owner fails to keep this up, is this the trainers fault?
Again, I don't agree with choking a dog, just feel that common sense sometimes goes out the window and so much of these terrible attitudes could be prevented from the beginning.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

juliemule said:


> Yes exactly. But many people simply say,' oh don't reach down there, he has a bone' instead of teaching manners. Then a child happens to pat the dogs head while he is eating, and gets bit, they need a behaviorist to cure their super aggressive dog, or it is taken to the pound.
> 
> So my question, who's fault is this? The dog? Owner? Is a human aggressive dog ever cured really or just managed? After the trainer comes in, gets the dog on track, yet the owner fails to keep this up, is this the trainers fault?
> Again, I don't agree with choking a dog, just feel that common sense sometimes goes out the window and so much of these terrible attitudes could be prevented from the beginning.


Actually, if the dog is only RG, for many dogs that CAN be cured. They just need to learn to trust the human's motives. Some problems are more difficult (and some resource guarders are more difficult) and do require owner compliance and management. As to your scenario. if Cesar manhandles the dog to the ground and takes his stuff away (or an owner thinks that looks like a good idea) do you REALLY think that the dog is going to generalize that he should willingly give a bone to a child? CM's methods are barbaric and stupid, but he is athletic and quick. Still he manages to get shredded on a regular basis (at least the poor Jindo was wearing a muzzle and so helpless against him). What is most dangerous is when people who aren't athletic and quick decide to try it too.


----------



## juliemule (Dec 10, 2011)

No, I believe several of his methods make things worse. I don't believe in using fear to gain respect from a dog at all. I don't use all positive, as I do say no, phooey, and enough, so those are negatives.
So many people want an instant fix to something they likely created over months or years. Resource gaurding I think can be fixed. Though I don't feel true human aggression can be fixed, just managed.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

> Here's what I want to know. According to the owners in the pre-"taming" interview, the dog is completely fine on walks and in the yard (and most of the time), and he only acts aggressively when someone tries to flip him on his back while inside the house. So why not just stop trying to flip him on his back


But that would require common sense....

I saw someone tcchting and trying to alpha roll their pit bull in petsmart today. It was lunging and growling at passing dogs. The lady tried to flip it and the dog launched itself back up at her face. I was really surprised she managed to get out of the way in time. 

I also know of a real case where someone did lose their dog because they alpha rolled it and it attacked back. The dog was put down for biting.


----------



## DustyCrockett (Sep 24, 2011)

Willowy said:


> We don't know if the Jindo and GSD were saved. First of all, there didn't actually seem (from what I saw) a be a real problem with the Jindo, other than his owner thought that not being able to alpha-roll the dog in the house was for some reason an issue. I don't think his life was in danger, or if it was it was because the owner made up some kind of problem that didn't exist. Not sure about the GSD. But we also don't know if those dogs are still alive (or lived to old age, if the episode was that long ago). There are websites claiming that a lot of the dogs he "fixes" are later put down for the same behavioral problems, or for worse aggression. I have no idea how true that is. . .one would have to speak directly to the owners to know that for sure.
> 
> What DID the trainers do with your aggressive dog? Anyway, if choking him would fix him long-term. . .maybe it would be worth it. I'm not sure if I would rather be abused and live or die painlessly. Depends on the quality of the rest of that life, I guess. What if the abuse didn't fix him? Then he was abused AND killed, which just really stinks. I see no evidence that aggressive handling like that does change a dog for the better in the long-term.


My recollection of the jindo story, the guy takes in strays and adopts them out, this one he found in an abandoned lot in a commercial district. He was human aggressive, a biter, that's why they hired trainers. He couldn't find anyone to take him and wouldn't keep him. It was either PTS or back to the streets. But I don't know what happened beyond the show. We'll never know how many of DW dogs go bad, and how many of those is because the owners fail to correct their own mistakes that caused the problem in the first place. They had a "100th episode" aniversary show recently; 100's of people & dogs from past shows were there, so some of 'em managed.

Our stray, a dachshund we called Bob Dylan, I'd have kept working with him except we had young kids in the house, and he bit like he meant it. If we'd had the resources then, that we have now, he might could've been saved. He was always possessive of the weakest person in the room (we called it "protective" at the time). Got along fine with the other dog. I know he was indulged, because he was obese when we found him, and refused to eat dog food.

We used a place called "Man's Best Friend," 2 weeks on-site with a few evening sessions with us, then several follow-up sessions. We learned basic obedience, but I don't know what they did about the aggression. The receptionist referred to him as "the dachshund from hell." I didn't think of it at the time, but that must have been their approach. Guess he had a rough time but had it worked it'd have been worth it. It was a tough decision.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

I posted what happened to the jindo earlier on this page. On the last page, I linked to a site that discusses another failure, Ruby.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

juliemule said:


> No, I believe several of his methods make things worse. I don't believe in using fear to gain respect from a dog at all. I don't use all positive, as I do say no, phooey, and enough, so those are negatives.
> .


I actually don't know very many people who can totally avoid using negatives. I very occasionally use a no-reinforcement marker (not while shaping) and that's a negative. I also use withdrawal of something desired, which is also a negative. Most of the "positive trainers" I know do the same thing, to some degree, and that includes some pretty major "names." I'm not interested in splitting hairs over whether or not someone has ever said "no" to their dog. I want to know if they use pain or discomfort (or the threat of same) to get behavior.


----------



## juliemule (Dec 10, 2011)

The only time I ever use discomfort is on a dog that will not out. Then I grasp the muzzle and using the dogs lip I push it under his teeth. Since the dog does not want to bite his own lip, they usually let go. This can get you bit very easily if you aren't familiar with doing it. Any other training is reward based, either tug, ball, food, or bite.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

juliemule said:


> The only time I ever use discomfort is on a dog that will not out. Then I grasp the muzzle and using the dogs lip I push it under his teeth. Since the dog does not want to bite his own lip, they usually let go. This can get you bit very easily if you aren't familiar with doing it. Any other training is reward based, either tug, ball, food, or bite.


Out is easily trained using +R.


----------



## juliemule (Dec 10, 2011)

Curbside Prophet said:


> Out is easily trained using +R.


Yes, when starting dogs we use positive. When problem dogs come in that refuse to out then sometimes it is used. It is not routine, and is a last option for me. Though I have seen some pretty crappy ways of this problem being handled.


----------



## juliemule (Dec 10, 2011)

How do you train a dog +p that refuses to let go?


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

juliemule said:


> How do you train a dog +p that refuses to let go?


No training can occur in that kind of scenario. If the behavior is emotionally driven, counter conditioning is the priority. Otherwise, you need to get it voluntarily, where +R is best.


----------



## MariJoy (Nov 10, 2011)

Ziggy has a mouthing problem. I have tried to do positive training to no avail, and have resorted to a light dusting of cayenne on my hand, and also placing my index finger vertically, so that the fingernail hits the roof of his mouth - he immediately lets go in all instances. Both methods work for me with no harm to the dog, imo.

He does, however, still go back to mouthing, but I think this is more a teething issue than anything else, and will correct itself in time - and yes, he has appropriate stuff to chew on up the wazoo...


----------



## juliemule (Dec 10, 2011)

Some of these dogs that come with 'training' , are dead set on not outing. I don't know what got them there to begin with, why they are being used currently, or any true history. You can go back to basics with very few, Ada once they are at this point, as soon as you move up to a decoy the fight is on. There is no distracting, and other than letting the dog win and have the sleeve, which you still have the fight of getting it back, I have yet to come up with a better way. I am always open to suggestions, so give me a scenario on what I should try please.


----------



## wvasko (Dec 15, 2007)

> I am always open to suggestions, so give me a scenario on what I should try please.


I also would like a scenario on what should be done as a dog outing is sometime a very tough nut to crack.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

juliemule said:


> Some of these dogs that come with 'training' , are dead set on not outing. I don't know what got them there to begin with, why they are being used currently, or any true history. You can go back to basics with very few, Ada once they are at this point, as soon as you move up to a decoy the fight is on. There is no distracting, and other than letting the dog win and have the sleeve, which you still have the fight of getting it back, I have yet to come up with a better way. I am always open to suggestions, so give me a scenario on what I should try please.


Is a stronger motivator available than the behavior, or at least a competing one? If so, make the sleeve inanimate and wait. The dog can't bite forever, right? At some point he'll let go (out), and you'll have an opportunity to reward that. I won't speak to the persistence required because I'm sure there are thousands of excuses not to be.


----------



## juliemule (Dec 10, 2011)

Not in high fight drive, that I have found. The reward is the bite. Sometimes the sleeve itself, winning the 'prize' and dragging it off. Yet, on hidden sleeves, that doesn't work, and the dog has to release, as he can't take a real arm with lol. It was poor training that got them to this level. 
Waiting it out, on lower drive dogs possible, but it is like resource guarding to the extreme, the minute you move, or put pressure on the dog its game on. I'm talking of extreme dogs, most of them get the out pretty fast. The only other method I have seen is choking the dog out, and I will not resort to that. Using the dogs lip against his teeth is not comfortable, and I have been bit, as several times the dog will let loose then snap back. These dogs, when in fight, you can fire a gun over their head, have anything going on beside them, lift them off the ground, and they do not loosen the grip. This is great, but ideally the out should have been taught before the bite, IMO.

Ill add, you can offer another bite, like the two ball method used for outing a ball or tug, but this can cause many problems, like a another person being bit when not directed, the dog turning looking for a distraction, causing him to let go before the command.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

juliemule said:


> How do you train a dog +p that refuses to let go?


I guess teaching it +p would be pushing the dog's lips into its teeth, as you described. I'm guessing you really mean R+? And we are talking about outing off the sleeve? I would say, you have the decoy go totally passive until the dog outs, then you reward with another opportunity to bite. Of course, that is really a combination of P- (removing the opportunity to fight) and R+ (giving the opportunity to bite/fight) This has the added benefit of not teaching the dog that he should wait until you come in and start messing with his mouth.


----------



## jiml (Jun 19, 2008)

I know of this happening personally. I can find lots of "cases", but I don't know what level of documentation you want. Would a story on the internet suffice? Does it have to be on CNN or Fox News? What's your criteria for what you'll believe? 
>>>>

cmon this is bs. I can point you to lots who say pos training caused there dog to be put down or misbehave. Fact is it wasnt cesar or victoria or any method. It was dumb owners who think dogs are disposable.

That said in one of the latest CM episodes they showed how the dog needed to "submit" too a camera being constantly shoved in his face. Im sure that gets great shots of dogs attacking the camera but is very intimidating to any dog and certainly not real world.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

Speaking of CM, came across this good little article just now: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/heavenlycreatures/2012/01/review-cesar-millans-the-pack-leader-tour/


----------



## xxxxdogdragoness (Jul 22, 2010)

Pawzk9 said:


> Speaking of CM, came across this good little article just now: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/heavenlycreatures/2012/01/review-cesar-millans-the-pack-leader-tour/


There is nothing wrong with choke chains, if used correctly, they are perfectly effective & humane means I'd training. Also, it for me isn't nesessary all of the time, just like kids don't like their parents all of the time, why should dogs be any different.


----------



## titiaamor (Nov 17, 2011)

Pawzk9 said:


> Speaking of CM, came across this good little article just now: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/heavenlycreatures/2012/01/review-cesar-millans-the-pack-leader-tour/


That is a wonderful blog post. Thanks for sharing it.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

dogdragoness said:


> Also, it for me isn't nesessary all of the time, just like kids don't like their parents all of the time, why should dogs be any different.


I don't get your point? Are you saying your dogs don't like you all of the time?


----------



## harleybella (Jan 17, 2012)

I read his book right after I got my dogs. I took them to puppy training a month after I had them and they gave me my money back and said to take them to the advanced classes for dogs. 
I think his information was very helpful but it also depends on the person and their emotions when training.
I'm not saying he is the best or the original, I am just saying his book helped me.


----------



## Corinthian (Sep 21, 2009)

juliemule said:


> How do you train a dog +p that refuses to let go?


This dog will starve to death... I don't think such dog exists.


----------



## Corinthian (Sep 21, 2009)

Glad to see some people are doing more than just simply bitching about Millan on the internet

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/article/20120114/NEWS01/201140325/Dog-training


----------



## jiml (Jun 19, 2008)

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/heavenl...k-leader-tour/>>>>>

Problem I have (and i do not always agree w CM's methods) is when people state that science totally discredits pack theory, or that science totally supports positive training techniques. Thats a lie. Pack theory may have changed drastically but it has not been discredited. And their is plenty of research supporting dif training styles. Some that even shows correction training CAN be less stressful in certain circumstances. 

Why cant the argument be "This is the way I do It, I feel more comfortable and I feel its more humane and it works for me." Instead of quoting someones quote about how science supports my way as the only acceptable way.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

jiml said:


> Problem I have (and i do not always agree w CM's methods) is when people state that science totally discredits pack theory, or that science totally supports positive training techniques. Thats a lie.


I'm not sure who you are referring to, but, the laws of learning are laws for a reason; unlike pack theory, which is, actually, according to the scientific community, only a hypothesis (not a theory). If you have a problem with the laws of learning being used to support a training approach, then you must also have a problem with gravity being used to support our attraction to Earth? It's really suction cups, right? :conspiracytheory:


----------



## DustyCrockett (Sep 24, 2011)

Well actually...at one time, the earth was the center of the universe and the heavenly bodies were affixed to spheres, which revolved around the earth. This was scientific fact. The most learned people at every accredited university in the world would have confirmed it. You would have been discredited for disputing it (just ask Gallileo).

At one time, it was well known that only a very bad mother would pick up a baby crying in its crib.

Point being, the "laws" of learning were different before, and might well change again.

Pretty sure the "law" of gravity is a theory, like the "laws" of probability. Why isn't the pythagorean theorem a law?


----------



## wvasko (Dec 15, 2007)

DustyCrockett said:


> Well actually...at one time, the earth was the center of the universe and the heavenly bodies were affixed to spheres, which revolved around the earth. This was scientific fact. The most learned people at every accredited university in the world would have confirmed it. You would have been discredited for disputing it (just ask Gallileo).
> 
> At one time, it was well known that only a very bad mother would pick up a baby crying in its crib.
> 
> ...


Wow, definitely something to ponder.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

jiml said:


> http://www.patheos.com/blogs/heavenl...k-leader-tour/>>>>>
> 
> Problem I have (and i do not always agree w CM's methods) is when people state that science totally discredits pack theory, or that science totally supports positive training techniques. Thats a lie. Pack theory may have changed drastically but it has not been discredited. And their is plenty of research supporting dif training styles. Some that even shows correction training CAN be less stressful in certain circumstances.
> 
> Why cant the argument be "This is the way I do It, I feel more comfortable and I feel its more humane and it works for me." Instead of quoting someones quote about how science supports my way as the only acceptable way.


I don't totallly discredit pack theory (though I prefer to look at it as social status, since dogs are social, not pack animals, and interactions tend to be fluid) What I DO discredit is the idea that attempting to act like a dog is a particularly bright, safe or instructional way to work with a dog. Punishment (of both varieties) is a part of the science of Operant Conditioning. So, yes, it is science based as long as you look at what it does (inhibit behavior). I've never heard anyone say "science supports my way as the only acceptable way". Never. And that includes the top trainers. Maybe you did, or maybe it's just another strawman arguement, or something someone told you they heard, or their second cousin heard. I don't doubt that correction training can be less stressful in certain circumstances. Learning is always stressful. Solving problems contains an element of stress. But then, there's eustress and distress. If the dog isn't distressed, I'm fine with that. When all the dog has to do is learn what rules to follow to stay "safe" he may not be particularly stressed because he doesn't have to think, just not do the things he's learned are dangerous.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

DustyCrockett said:


> Point being, the "laws" of learning were different before, and might well change again.
> 
> Pretty sure the "law" of gravity is a theory, like the "laws" of probability. Why isn't the pythagorean theorem a law?


Theories are 'generally' accepted by the scientific community, like the laws of learning and gravity. Dominance theory is not generally accepted, and has never been proven with any living species...this is my point. A theorem is a math term, and not synonymous with theory in science.


----------



## doxiemommy (Dec 18, 2009)

DustyCrockett said:


> We took in a stray once, who turned out to be a possessive, human-aggressive, dangerous animal. I got bit several times. After $1,000 of "professional training", the dog was destroyed. I'd have gladly held him down until he was exhausted, then held him like a baby to save his life. I'd have even choked him for a few minutes. It'd have been worth it.


Worth it? What about the terror or fear or torture the dog experienced at the moments you were doing those things to him? That doesn't mean anything? Regardless of him being "possessive, human-aggressive, dangerous" he still feels fear and the need to protect himself, and I would imagine that choking him or holding him down for 20 minutes would only have added terror and not helped if he was that bad, that $1000 of personal training didn't help.


----------



## DustyCrockett (Sep 24, 2011)

doxiemommy said:


> Worth it? What about the terror or fear or torture the dog experienced at the moments you were doing those things to him? That doesn't mean anything? Regardless of him being "possessive, human-aggressive, dangerous" he still feels fear and the need to protect himself, and I would imagine that choking him or holding him down for 20 minutes would only have added terror and not helped if he was that bad, that $1000 of personal training didn't help.


You "imagine" it would not succeed -- now "imagine" that it did -- that's exactly what I'm saying -- had it not been successful it would not have been worth it. 

Dogs are getting brutal treatment every day, and most people think it's worth it. Right now, thousands of dogs across America are being forced, against their will, to breathe poisonous gas until they are so close to death that you can slice them open with a knife, hack out some of their internal organs, and staple or sew them back together. Perfectly healthy dogs! 

Is it worth it?

It's a rhetorical question. Think of surgery from the dog's perspective; it's some short-term pain & suffering for a long-term benefit, but do dogs think that far ahead?


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

DustyCrockett said:


> If you're old enough, you might remember when parents used to spank their kids. I (along with many generations) was spanked, and I didn't turn out violent. I like to think we're beyond all that now, but that wasn't always the case.


I'll bet you also didn't learn anything useful from the spankings (other than how not to get caught) At least that was their effect on me.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

DustyCrockett said:


> The title of that article is inconsistent with its findings.
> 
> We took in a stray once, who turned out to be a possessive, human-aggressive, dangerous animal. I got bit several times. After $1,000 of "professional training", the dog was destroyed. I'd have gladly held him down until he was exhausted, then held him like a baby to save his life. I'd have even choked him for a few minutes. It'd have been worth it.


IF it had worked. And if it hadn't? Oh well? What were the techniques and philosophy offered by the "professionals"?


----------



## jiml (Jun 19, 2008)

I don't totallly discredit pack theory (though I prefer to look at it as social status, since dogs are social, not pack animals, and interactions tend to be fluid)>>>>

I dont disagree


I'm not sure who you are referring to, but, the laws of learning are laws for a reason; unlike pack theory, which is, actually, according to the scientific community, only a hypothesis (not a theory). If you have a problem with the laws of learning being used to support a training approach, then you must also have a problem with gravity being used to support our attraction to Earth? It's really suction cups, right? :conspiracytheory:>>>>>

no one in particular, just statements in the article that I have heard repeated. And I have no probs w learning theory, and dont think I stated such.


----------



## xxxxdogdragoness (Jul 22, 2010)

Pawzk9 said:


> I don't get your point? Are you saying your dogs don't like you all of the time?


Sorry lol, sometimes it's hard to type on a phone keyboard lol so I don't always say what I'm thinking, sometimes it doesn't even seem that English is my first language :/. What I meant is that no I'm sure that when they are being knuckle heads & I forbid them from doing something fun (which is how i "punish" by taking away what hey most want to do when they aren't listening. But then again I can't ask them so I'm just speculating lol.


----------



## DustyCrockett (Sep 24, 2011)

Pawzk9 said:


> IF it had worked. And if it hadn't? Oh well? What were the techniques and philosophy offered by the "professionals"?


If it hadn't, it would not have been worth it. I don't remember getting advice on the aggression; dog spent a couple weeks on-site with some evening sessions we spent learning basic obedience stuff really. It was kinda sketchy, thinking back on it. It was quite some time ago, we didn't find a lot of alternatives. We had internet but it was 2400 bps dial up, and we were state of the art (we were among the first AOL members). We didn't even have cable TV.

Thing is, facing that situation gives you perspective. When it's *your* dog (even a stray you took in), what won't you do to save it?


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

I guess I don't understand how abusing a dog can be thought to "save it". I've never seen anything good come from that kind of thing (for humans or animals).


----------



## DustyCrockett (Sep 24, 2011)

Willowy said:


> I guess I don't understand how abusing a dog can be thought to "save it". I've never seen anything good come from that kind of thing (for humans or animals).


I agree with that part -- abusing it can never be thought to save it.

I guess I don't understand how saving a dog can be thought to "abuse it."

I guess maybe those who haven't been there, aren't really in a position to judge those who have.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

OK. . .it depends what was done to save it and whether it really saved it or not and whether there was any alternative. 

But there are still some things I don't think can ever be justified.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

DustyCrockett said:


> If it hadn't, it would not have been worth it. I don't remember getting advice on the aggression; dog spent a couple weeks on-site with some evening sessions we spent learning basic obedience stuff really. It was kinda sketchy, thinking back on it. It was quite some time ago, we didn't find a lot of alternatives. We had internet but it was 2400 bps dial up, and we were state of the art (we were among the first AOL members). We didn't even have cable TV.
> 
> Thing is, facing that situation gives you perspective. When it's *your* dog (even a stray you took in), what won't you do to save it?


If pigs had wings... You don't really have any idea that manhandling the dog would have done anything other than make him worse (in fact, you may have paid the trainer to do that to him, since you apparently didn't ask what they were actually doing to your dog.) So, it's fine to say that you'd do anything to save him. But it's sort of beside the point to speculate that this would have caused a positive outcome. Because you have no idea if it would have, so can't really recommend it for aggressive dogs, can you?


----------



## TxRider (Apr 22, 2009)

doxiemommy said:


> If you mean that we don't know enough about him, *based on his tv show*, ok, yes, we only see an edited, final product, without all of the background, and all the steps taken to get to the result. But, google CM and you CAN find "real information" about him. For example, he has NO formal training. His outlook and philosophies, through his own admission, came about as a result of seeing and interacting with the stray/neighborhood dogs near his grandfather's ranch in Mexico. He has no certification. He hasn't studied animal behavior, or training methods. It's all experimentation based on his own thoughts, ideas and experience.
> 
> Yes, he does seem to have a way with some dogs. But, when I am researching who can help me most with my dogs, I want to know what they've learned. I want to know that they are up to date on current methodologies. I mean, for Pete's sake, we (many of us) acknowledge that the alpha stuff is bunk, unscientific and incorrect, not to mention disproved. How did that happen? How did it become disproved? How do we know that it is unscientific and incorrect? Through further exploration, both of the flawed studies that started it, and new info on animal behavior.
> 
> My point is, I want to know that the people I consider hiring to work with my dogs know current information, and are up to date on the science of animal behavior. I don't want them to base their techniques on outdated info or simply an idea.


And what's to say that today's "up to date" is going to end up better than a decade ago's "up to date" or that the person even having been exposed to these ideas is competent to properly administer them? 

I obviously don't place as much faith in certifications as you do. But then I am a high school dropout who has broken new technological ground and been on a stage with Bill Gates, sat around the table with generals in the pentagon and run a software company for 15 years without so much as a high school diploma to my credit... You obviously would never hire me to work on your computer.. and would trust the pimple faced kid from the geek squad with his "certification" instead.. 

I reserve judgment on the man as I have never met him, worked with him, or been exposed to enough information to actually form an intelligent opinion. Those that created animal science did so doing the same thing he does, observation, experimentation, experience, the difference is they have a degree, and they wrote it up in papers and studies. I am sure those esteemed academics are still every bit as much learning new aspects of dog behavior every bit as much as CM still is, and still writing more papers on it.

One thing I do notice though, is that CM's version of alpha is often totally different than other people's version of alpha, and his english as a second language seems to get him into trouble as what he means when he speaks and what people hear when he speaks are often two different things as well.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

TxRider said:


> I reserve judgment on the man as I have never met him, worked with him, or been exposed to enough information to actually form an intelligent opinion. Those that created animal science did so doing the same thing he does, observation, experimentation, experience, the difference is they have a degree, and they wrote it up in papers and studies. I am sure those esteemed academics are still every bit as much learning new aspects of dog behavior every bit as much as CM still is, and still writing more papers on it..



It's a good thing to reserve judgement if you haven't been exposed to enough information to form an intelligent decision. However, there's really no shortage of information (in writing, on video, etc.) on Millan and his methods.


----------



## TxRider (Apr 22, 2009)

Pawzk9 said:


> It's a good thing to reserve judgement if you haven't been exposed to enough information to form an intelligent decision. However, there's really no shortage of information (in writing, on video, etc.) on Millan and his methods.


I have read many pages, seen many videos, and watched his show.. Not enough information, and much of what I see written about him and his methods is obviously very inaccurate. Just as much misinformation as real information, heresay, opinion formed from short video clips, watching a highly edited show created for dramatic effect, and so on... Go work with him for 2-3 months or better yet a year, then you have enough information.


----------



## Corinthian (Sep 21, 2009)

DustyCrockett said:


> Well actually...at one time, the earth was the center of the universe and the heavenly bodies were affixed to spheres, which revolved around the earth. This was scientific fact.


That was never scientific fact. You are trying to re-write history because you don't have FACTS.





> Pretty sure the "law" of gravity is a theory,


 It's both. Like evolution, it is Fact and Theory.


----------



## Corinthian (Sep 21, 2009)

doxiemommy said:


> Worth it? What about the terror or fear or torture the dog experienced at the moments you were doing those things to him? That doesn't mean anything? Regardless of him being "possessive, human-aggressive, dangerous" he still feels fear and the need to protect himself, and I would imagine that choking him or holding him down for 20 minutes would only have added terror and not helped if he was that bad, that $1000 of personal training didn't help.


His scenario also falsely and incorrectly assumes that the results DC wants is the results is what you get. With that kind of imagination, I can also imagine kicking and strangling a dog into a UDX title. 

But neither are very likely.


----------



## DustyCrockett (Sep 24, 2011)

Pawzk9 said:


> If pigs had wings... You don't really have any idea that manhandling the dog would have done anything other than make him worse (in fact, you may have paid the trainer to do that to him, since you apparently didn't ask what they were actually doing to your dog.) So, it's fine to say that you'd do anything to save him. But it's sort of beside the point to speculate that this would have caused a positive outcome. Because you have no idea if it would have, so can't really recommend it for aggressive dogs, can you?


Huh? I didn't recommend it. Duh.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

TxRider said:


> I have read many pages, seen many videos, and watched his show.. Not enough information, and much of what I see written about him and his methods is obviously very inaccurate. Just as much misinformation as real information, heresay, opinion formed from short video clips, watching a highly edited show created for dramatic effect, and so on... Go work with him for 2-3 months or better yet a year, then you have enough information.


Well, I don't really know anyone who has to apprentice under someone to form an opinion. The videos represent his viewpoint, even if they don't represent the whole of his methods. He has written books. He has done seminars. The information on what he does and believes is there for the taking. For instance, I've only spent a few real-time days with Sue Ailsby, and while I don't know the whole of her knowledge, I have a pretty good handle on her philosophy. Ditto Suzanne Clothier and a few other trainers. I would love to do a year apprenticeship with either of those fine trainers, but I feel fairly comfortable discussing their way of working with dogs.


----------



## DustyCrockett (Sep 24, 2011)

Corinthian said:


> That was never scientific fact. You are trying to re-write history because you don't have FACTS.


Re-write history? You are presuming. When I took history in college, it was historical fact that the heavenly spheres were scientific fact. At the college I attended it was, anyway. I never took much science. Much history either, come to think of it. But if it's no longer a historical fact, you can just say so. I understand that advancements in learning occur, and what was once fact no longer is. In fact, that's sort of the point. But why am I explaining this to you. Sorry, I usually try not to state the obvious.

At any rate, don't make fun of my Louisiana public school education, it's impolite.


----------



## Corinthian (Sep 21, 2009)

I make no presumptions about your education or lack there of. The facts are that are Geocentrism was never a scientific position.

Restating your error won't make it correct.


----------



## dagwall (Mar 17, 2011)

It wasn't scientific fact, it was simply the accepted knowledge of the time. In some ways this is just an issue of semantics but I'd argue against the term scientific fact. The scientific theory wasn't developed yet at that point. People still believed in spontaneous generation; rotten meat produced maggots, dirty linens and grain produced mice/rats. Cause and effect was enough proof at the time even if you did just set out some rotting meat and came back a day or two later and not observe in between. They came back a few days later and there were maggots therefore rotten meat produced maggots. That was as close as you got to scientific fact. As science grew in methodology it grew leaps and bound in what could be thought of as scientific fact. 

Sorry just a little history of science I felt compelled to share.


----------



## DustyCrockett (Sep 24, 2011)

Curbside Prophet said:


> Theories are 'generally' accepted by the scientific community, like the laws of learning and gravity. Dominance theory is not generally accepted, and has never been proven with any living species...this is my point. A theorem is a math term, and not synonymous with theory in science.


Just trying to get a handle on the vernacular here, as a non-scientist -- if it must be generally accepted by the community before it can be a theory, what is it until it achieves acceptance? Must a theory be proven before it is generally accepted? The "laws" of learning, do they have the same level of acceptance as gravity? Are there no laws in mathematics? I'm not sure where the law of probability fits in, statistics makes my head hurt.

For me this is all pretty much academic, I like the relationship I have with my dogs and it comes without any overt "dominance" moves or motives, but I'm curious, has Goodall's work with chimpanzees fallen out of favor, or do they still follow a "dominance" model?
http://www.janegoodall.ca/about-chimp-behaviour-social-organization.php#DominanceMating


----------



## Corinthian (Sep 21, 2009)

DustyCrockett said:


> For me this is all pretty much academic, I like the relationship I have with my dogs and it comes without any overt "dominance" moves or motives, but I'm curious, has Goodall's work with chimpanzees fallen out of favor, or do they still follow a "dominance" model?
> http://www.janegoodall.ca/about-chimp-behaviour-social-organization.php#DominanceMating


Most people are mentally nimble to pick up that when in a DOG forum, discussing DOGs, and talking about the DOG Whisperer and dominance theory comes up, we are talking about DOGS. Not Chimps.

And of course the reason that dominance has been given the boot (in the way CM presents it) is because fields studies showed that it went from inadequate to blatantly wrong.


----------



## DustyCrockett (Sep 24, 2011)

dagwall said:


> It wasn't scientific fact, it was simply the accepted knowledge of the time. In some ways this is just an issue of semantics but I'd argue against the term scientific fact. The scientific theory wasn't developed yet at that point. People still believed in spontaneous generation; rotten meat produced maggots, dirty linens and grain produced mice/rats. Cause and effect was enough proof at the time even if you did just set out some rotting meat and came back a day or two later and not observe in between. They came back a few days later and there were maggots therefore rotten meat produced maggots. That was as close as you got to scientific fact. As science grew in methodology it grew leaps and bound in what could be thought of as scientific fact.
> 
> Sorry just a little history of science I felt compelled to share.


thank you, this is useful information. at least you didn't presume that I would presume to "re-write history." I have way too much to do before I could take on that project. So back then, scientific method was, shall we say, rustic. Do you think it's possible that 1000 years from now, the scientific method will be advanced so far beyond the mere objective observation and replicative testing of empirical evidence in support of a hypothesis, that future scientists will scoff at our "scientific facts?"

In fact, does the term "fact," when modified by the adjective "scientific," have quite the same meaning? Just curious.


----------



## DustyCrockett (Sep 24, 2011)

Corinthian said:


> Most people are mentally nimble to pick up that when in a DOG forum, discussing DOGs, and talking about the DOG Whisperer and dominance theory comes up, we are talking about DOGS. Not Chimps.
> 
> And of course the reason that dominance has been given the boot (in the way CM presents it) is because fields studies showed that it went from inadequate to blatantly wrong.


It was just a question, Mr. Nimble, about another member's comment concerning the subject of "any living species." Last I checked, chimps fall into that category.

Try to keep up.


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

DustyCrockett said:


> ...if it must be generally accepted by the community before it can be a theory, what is it until it achieves acceptance?


A hypothesis. 



> Must a theory be proven before it is generally accepted?


With repeated testing, a hypothesis is proven into theory, assuming the results of the tests can be repeated. 



> The "laws" of learning, do they have the same level of acceptance as gravity?


The law of gravity is a very good first approximation, but Einstein made it more accurate with General Relativity. I'm not aware of addendums to the laws of learning. That said, not many people bother with Einstein's version because it's too complicated. Does that make it less acceptable? I don't know. 



> Are there no laws in mathematics?





> As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.--Einstein





> I'm not sure where the law of probability fits in, statistics makes my head hurt.


Regarding statistics I've always been told there are 3 kinds...statistics, damned statistics, and lies. So I wouldn't bother too much with them.


----------



## DustyCrockett (Sep 24, 2011)

^ ^ ^
^ ^ ^
best answer, ever!


----------



## Groucho (Jan 12, 2012)

....Where did the Cesar Milan thread go?!


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

Groucho said:


> ....Where did the Cesar Milan thread go?!


Well, I would still contend CM has a better dentist than Einstein ever did.


----------



## dagwall (Mar 17, 2011)

DustyCrockett said:


> thank you, this is useful information. at least you didn't presume that I would presume to "re-write history." I have way too much to do before I could take on that project. So back then, scientific method was, shall we say, rustic. Do you think it's possible that 1000 years from now, the scientific method will be advanced so far beyond the mere objective observation and replicative testing of empirical evidence in support of a hypothesis, that future scientists will scoff at our "scientific facts?"
> 
> In fact, does the term "fact," when modified by the adjective "scientific," have quite the same meaning? Just curious.


I'm not too sure how much further the scientific method can advance really. The biggest factor slowing science back when the earth was flat and the center of the universe was the Church. At some point the Church's stance was the earth is the center of the universe and anyone questioning that was questioning the Church. Those in the fields of science were greatly hindered in advancing their knowledge by fear of persecution/dead by the Church. For the most part we aren't hindered by such forces today and are mostly stalled by the imagination of people to think of what else MIGHT be and the technology to tests these ideas. Science will definitely continue to advance but I don't foresee today's methods being looked back upon as crude as I think of the methods I described to you above.


----------



## KodiBarracuda (Jul 4, 2011)

dagwall said:


> I'm not too sure how much further the scientific method can advance really... Science will definitely continue to advance but I don't foresee today's methods being looked back upon as crude...


I'm sure this is what they thought back then too.


----------



## dagwall (Mar 17, 2011)

KodiBarracuda said:


> I'm sure this is what they thought back then too.


Yes and no. Some are always content with the status que and don't believe there is much more to gain out there. But as for 'science' way back when lots of people KNEW there was more out there, better ways to do things but didn't have the resources/support to advance. There will always be 'new' science but I truly think the scientific method itself doesn't have much further to grow. 

The scientific method being (in VERY general terms): State your theory, test it with controls, be able to reproduce your findings.



Groucho said:


> ....Where did the Cesar Milan thread go?!



Haha I'd much rather discuss science than CM.


----------



## jiml (Jun 19, 2008)

reason that dominance has been given the boot (in the way CM presents it)>>>>>

bingo. I always thought CM used the word incorrectly and way too liberally. part of this I always believed was an english as a second language thing. Also in real life sometimes a simple but technically incorrect description works well in explaining something to some people.


----------



## DustyCrockett (Sep 24, 2011)

dagwall said:


> I'm not too sure how much further the scientific method can advance really. The biggest factor slowing science back when the earth was flat and the center of the universe was the Church. At some point the Church's stance was the earth is the center of the universe and anyone questioning that was questioning the Church. Those in the fields of science were greatly hindered in advancing their knowledge by fear of persecution/dead by the Church. For the most part we aren't hindered by such forces today and are mostly stalled by the imagination of people to think of what else MIGHT be and the technology to tests these ideas. Science will definitely continue to advance but I don't foresee today's methods being looked back upon as crude as I think of the methods I described to you above.


I dunno, in my state the Bible is almost a science textbook.

They had the church holding 'em back, we have wikkipedia.........................


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

dogdragoness said:


> Sorry lol, sometimes it's hard to type on a phone keyboard lol so I don't always say what I'm thinking, sometimes it doesn't even seem that English is my first language :/. What I meant is that no I'm sure that when they are being knuckle heads & I forbid them from doing something fun (which is how i "punish" by taking away what hey most want to do when they aren't listening. But then again I can't ask them so I'm just speculating lol.


I don't think you actually understand what positive punishment is.


----------



## doxiemommy (Dec 18, 2009)

DustyCrockett said:


> I agree with that part -- abusing it can never be thought to save it.
> 
> I guess I don't understand how saving a dog can be thought to "abuse it."
> 
> I guess maybe those who haven't been there, aren't really in a position to judge those who have.


This is a stretch, but bear with me.

I'm a teacher and I see child abuse almost daily. Parents can come up with some pretty crappy stories about why they beat their kids within an inch of their lives. "Their older brother is a deadbeat who ended up in jail, but, not this one, if I have to beat him every day, he won't be going to jail." "She gets the point it's wrong when I hit her, doesn't she?" "She can do without a few meals here and there, she will learn not to complain about what I cook."
[Seriously, all true stories.]

But, take the first example. This dad was genuinely scared about what would happen to the youngest son, and was doing what he thought was best, perhaps, in Dusty's words to "save" his son.
So, then, what is the difference between a parent trying to SAVE a child through severe "discipline" and a parent ABUSING a child. 
We let people (social workers, law enforcement) tell those parents that their "discipline" is really abuse. But, wait, maybe we shouldn't, because if those social workers and law enforcement personnel haven't personally had a son/daughter in that desparate situation, we shouldn't let them judge those who have. [I am being sarcastic.]

Where do we draw the line then, of what constitutes abuse and what doesn't? Someone HAS to judge what we do. We can't just let people try anything on their dogs (or children, for that matter), hoping something will work. There has to be a line, and someone has to enforce that line, and a discussion like this, about what is abuse and what isn't, this is how the line starts forming.

I mean, really, I understand your point about doing whatever it takes to save a dog. But, there are limits, doing "whatever it takes" is a phrase. And, I would sincerely have a hard time with the fact that anyone would consider choking, stringing up a dog NOT to be abuse.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

DustyCrockett said:


> For me this is all pretty much academic, I like the relationship I have with my dogs and it comes without any overt "dominance" moves or motives, but I'm curious, has Goodall's work with chimpanzees fallen out of favor, or do they still follow a "dominance" model?
> http://www.janegoodall.ca/about-chimp-behaviour-social-organization.php#DominanceMating


Umn, dogs aren't chimps? For that matter, I've seen dominance and submission in dog to dog interactions even though the whole "alpha wolf" theory is mostly bunk (I've observed some pretty impressive dominance/submission displays by captive wolves - especially when it is roadkill deer time). Doesn't mean I can't come up with better ways to interact with dogs than trying to act like another dog. For one thing, dogs know we aren't dogs. For another, the things we want from them are completely different from the things other dogs want. Another thing - when you bring dominance into the picture, it's normal for animals to keep asking questions about it. Stupid bullying displays may actually make you look like a weak, stupid bully in the eyes of that dog. Because a dog who acted that way would get put in its place.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

DustyCrockett said:


> I agree with that part -- abusing it can never be thought to save it.
> 
> I guess I don't understand how saving a dog can be thought to "abuse it."
> 
> I guess maybe those who haven't been there, aren't really in a position to judge those who have.


And yet the dog wasn't saved. And you have no evidence that bullying the dog into abject submission would have improved his chances.


----------



## doxiemommy (Dec 18, 2009)

TxRider said:


> And what's to say that today's "up to date" is going to end up better than a decade ago's "up to date" or that the person even having been exposed to these ideas is competent to properly administer them?
> 
> I obviously don't place as much faith in certifications as you do. But then I am a high school dropout who has broken new technological ground and been on a stage with Bill Gates, sat around the table with generals in the pentagon and run a software company for 15 years without so much as a high school diploma to my credit... You obviously would never hire me to work on your computer.. and would trust the pimple faced kid from the geek squad with his "certification" instead..


Well, we can't all be you, can we? I am impressed by your accomplishments. But, really, the percentage of drop outs that go on to set high goals and accomplish them is very small. So, if we accepted the drop out mentality, saying that succeeding is possible without an education, we would have SOME people like you, going on to succeed, and we'd have a WHOLE LOT of people that don't go on to succeed.

My point is, just because you have the DRIVE, and DEDICATION to set goals for yourself, and go after them, without the tools that are useful for others to have in life (diploma, degrees, certifications), doesn't mean that we should just do away with requiring those tools out of others.

What would our society be like then? Please don't pretend that education isn't important and isn't worth something to our society. Just because some can succeed without it, doesn't mean it isn't useful and necessary for others.

As for CM, and trainers, yes, I have to admit, I would want someone training my dogs that I knew had studied the most current information. BUT, I would also want to see them at work, and hear their philosophy. The education/certification wouldn't be enough on it's own.

And, as far as what makes today's up to date better than a decade ago: I suppose my point here is that SOME things have been used to train (or teach) have been proven to be false. I would hate to see someone still employing those techniques that had been proven to be wrong/false, just because those people had not gone on to update their education.

My main example was the alpha/wolf pack philosophy (in GENERAL, not just CM's use of it). This type of philosophy was used, thinking it was accurate, based on studies that have since been proven to be false, misleading, and incorrect. So, supposing someone was training, using this philosophy, not knowing it was outdated and disproved, because they didn't continue learning about their chosen profession? It's called professional development, in my chosen career. Having my degrees, and teaching credential doesn't make me the BEST qualified for my position, the fact that I have all that and CONTINUE to learn what is new, and beneficial to my students, THAT is what makes me the BEST qualified, and THAT helps me bring any and all tools to the table so I can help my students be their best.


----------



## xxxxdogdragoness (Jul 22, 2010)

Doxiemommy>> that's terrible, tho i will say that I have gone to bed without dinner bc I wouldn't eat what mom cooked lol .... But that was my choice not hers.

Training debate aside, it's only a matter of time before science finds the "next big thing" in dog training, then we'll be saying the same things about today's methods that were saying about what CM practices.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

dogdragoness said:


> Training debate aside, it's only a matter of time before science finds the "next big thing" in dog training, then we'll be saying the same things about today's methods that were saying about what CM practices.


Only if one refuses to keep up with what is available. Dog training is more an evolution than a matter of the "next big thing". If one is interested in learning, that is. Even clicker training has evolved tremedously as we learn how to better use the information available. There's a way big difference between Gary Wilkes (my first clicker workshop) and for instance, Sue Ailsby or Leslie Nelson. And there are people like Ken Ramirez who are breaking incredible new ground in how much animals can understand. All it requires to keep up with the latest is the interest to do so.


----------



## cshellenberger (Dec 2, 2006)

jiml said:


> http://www.patheos.com/blogs/heavenl...k-leader-tour/>>>>>
> 
> Problem I have (and i do not always agree w CM's methods) is when people state that science totally discredits pack theory, or that science totally supports positive training techniques. Thats a lie. Pack theory may have changed drastically but it has not been discredited. And their is plenty of research supporting dif training styles. Some that even shows correction training CAN be less stressful in certain circumstances.
> 
> Why cant the argument be "This is the way I do It, I feel more comfortable and I feel its more humane and it works for me." Instead of quoting someones quote about how science supports my way as the only acceptable way.


Because Pack Theory and Learning Theory are two different things. Pack animals have different structures and societal rules depending on species, However any animal can learn using the four quadrants of Learning theory (pack animal or not). 

Also, most people have misinterpreted pack theory (including Milan) and have mistakenly thought that it applies outside of species (the human dog relationship). The fact is, most 'alpha' are merely the parents (therefore the leaders) very seldom does a parent wolf FORCE one of it's progeny into submission, submission is FREELY given. The only ones who force submission are lower ranking members of the pack trying to establish a higher ranking as they mature and trying to determine who will be the next reproducing pair. Other than that the only time you'll see forced submission is if an outsider is trying to come into a pack and hten it's a threat to kill (trying to run off the intruder) THEREFORE 'alpharolling' is to most dogs a THREAT and the dog defends itself, it's a breach of the social order. 

On that note I've also seen and heard Milan take calming signals as the dog 'not paying attention' or 'being dominant' when in fact the dog is trying to send a message that it's uncomfortable or not trying to be a threat. I highly reccomend you read "On Talking Terms With Dogs: Calming Signals" by Turid Rugaasto understand what I'm taling about. YOu'll see Milan in a whole other light afterwards.


----------



## DustyCrockett (Sep 24, 2011)

doxiemommy said:


> This is a stretch, but bear with me.
> 
> I'm a teacher and I see child abuse almost daily. Parents can come up with some pretty crappy stories about why they beat their kids within an inch of their lives. "Their older brother is a deadbeat who ended up in jail, but, not this one, if I have to beat him every day, he won't be going to jail." "She gets the point it's wrong when I hit her, doesn't she?" "She can do without a few meals here and there, she will learn not to complain about what I cook."
> [Seriously, all true stories.]
> ...


A lot of verbiage there. I guess my words weren't bad enough, so you added "stringing up"? 

This is all academic.

I don't use violence with my dogs or with anyone else.

Anyone asks me what to do about their aggressive dog, I say "hire a professional." I don't have experience or training to deal with it or advise anyone else. 

If you find a professional with hundreds of satisfied clients and pay them for advice, you generally consider their opinion carefully before tossing it aside.

How much experience and training in dealing with aggressive dogs do you have? How many satisfied customers?

I guess your experience as a teacher would be beneficial -- if your children eat from bowls on the floor and poop in the back yard. Describing that analogy as a stretch didn't do it justice. 

Another dog we used to have, the sweetest pet you can imagine. She was muzzled, held down against her will, stuck with needles, had stuff shoved up her bottom, so frightened the smell from her glands made you weep, and throwing hair all over the place. More than once she was subjected to this treatment. Annually in fact. And that's not the worst. She was poisoned with gas to within an inch of her life, sliced open like a Christmas turkey, some of her internal organs hacked out and sewed up like a cheap purse.

All that abuse, for what? I had no proof she would have caught parvo or corona or rabies, or ovarian cancer, or got pregnant.

Short-term pain and suffering in exchange for long-term benefit, but can you explain that to the dog?

If someone becomes hysterical, and you slap them in the face hard enough, they come back to their senses. Mythbusters proved it is so. And do they immediately attack you? No they do not. They suffer the short term pain, and thank you for helping.


----------



## wildfire_1982 (Jan 16, 2012)

i personally prefere Victoria Stillwell ... she's an excellent trainer who doesn't believe in physical negative punishments but instead encourages good behaivor with positive rewards and that works awesome for ALL breeds. she handles all breeds, pure 'n mix. 'n mutts... including "dangerous" breeds.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

DustyCrockett said:


> A lot of verbiage there. I guess my words weren't bad enough, so you added "stringing up"?
> 
> Another dog we used to have, the sweetest pet you can imagine. She was muzzled, held down against her will, stuck with needles, had stuff shoved up her bottom, so frightened the smell from her glands made you weep, and throwing hair all over the place. More than once she was subjected to this treatment. Annually in fact. And that's not the worst. She was poisoned with gas to within an inch of her life, sliced open like a Christmas turkey, some of her internal organs hacked out and sewed up like a cheap purse.
> 
> ...


Oh, good grief. Now Cesar Millan is the same thing as your friendly neighborhood vet? Of course, my vets are gentle with my dogs. They don't need to muzzle them and don't cause them to express their anal glands. (But of course, we don't do annual vaccinations) And I've observed the spay surgery. I expect my vets to treat my animals with respect. I would expect any trainer to do the same. Then, I would not send my dog off for training if I didn't know exactly what the trainer's methods and philosophy were.


----------



## DustyCrockett (Sep 24, 2011)

Pawzk9 said:


> Oh, good grief. Now Cesar Millan is the same thing as your friendly neighborhood vet? Of course, my vets are gentle with my dogs. They don't need to muzzle them and don't cause them to express their anal glands. (But of course, we don't do annual vaccinations) And I've observed the spay surgery. I expect my vets to treat my animals with respect. I would expect any trainer to do the same. Then, I would not send my dog off for training if I didn't know exactly what the trainer's methods and philosophy were.


context. who said CM is like a vet?

It's not at all unusual for a dog to have a phobia about the vet's office. I'm kinda surprised that I have to explain this to you. This particular dog had a bad experience as a pup, being treated at the emergency clinic, after which every veterinary office was an evil place. Curious, none of that ever made her even the slightest bit aggressive. The differences between actual experience and theory can be pretty interesting, don't you think?

I realize your human sensibilities are offended by the comparison, but what about the canine sensibilities? The dog isn't thinking, "what? you're a Doctor of Veterinary Medicine? Well, go right ahead." Or "oh, that's a thermometer? In that case, just stick it right up in there, sir."

Surgery is easier to stomach when you can shut your mind off from the violence of it. It takes place in a sterile field in a quiet room -- but you are still slicing open the abdomen and cutting away internal organs. It's an assault on the body. Any idea how painful it is to recover from abdominal surgery? I know you know there's risks of death and permanent injury. And for what? So you can feel good about doing your part to prevent overpopulation?

I'm surprised at the personal nature of your remarks. Generally, that indicates an inability to consider points of view other than your own. Hopefully you'll get better at it as you get a little life experience under your belt.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

I dunno. . .isn't that like saying beating your child because you think it'll keep him out of prison is the same as taking him to the doctor for shots/tonsillectomy/etc.?Preventive action, right?


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

If your vet poisoned your dog to within an inch of her life, they weren't doing anesthesia right. 

Might want to ask them to update their post-op pain control protocols, too.


----------



## DustyCrockett (Sep 24, 2011)

Willowy said:


> I dunno. . .that like saying beating your child because you think it'll keep him out of prison is the same as taking him to the doctor for shots/tonsillectomy/etc. Preventive action, right?


Are we exchanging ideas and perspectives here, or are we just trying to prove that one of us is evil?

It's similar, as far as "preventive action" goes.

It'd be a lot closer if you said, administering corporal punishment to keep him off death row is a bit like subjecting him to a painful and scary medical procedure, assuming the child is incapable of understanding what's happening and why.

There was a time when all the experts said parents should be using corporal punishment on their children. (Fortunately, I was a child during that time, not a parent -- I don't have the stomach for striking children.)

Nowadays, any slap on the wrist is considered a beating by some. Somewhere between that slap on the wrist and a full out brass-knuckles beating, lies a degree of physical punishment that I would accept as reasonable to save a dog's life, if I were so advised by a qualified person.

Some might say that PTS is a better option than even the slightest degree of physical punishment, and that's a valid point of view. (Some will feel morally superior about it; that's their problem.)

Otherwise, it's just a question of degree, and I don't really no what degree we're talkin bout.

Now you aren't going to jump back in and claim that I advocated child-beating are you? What the heck, I've already been compared to a childbeater once in this thread, I can take the heat.


----------



## DustyCrockett (Sep 24, 2011)

sassafras said:


> If your vet poisoned your dog to within an inch of her life, they weren't doing anesthesia right.
> 
> Might want to ask them to update their post-op pain control protocols, too.


Sorry, I didn't know that "inch" was actually a unit of measurement used by anesthesiologists. I don't know how far an inch is, in this context, or how many inches away from death you are during that kind of surgery. If it's six inches away, or 18, that's ok. Also, I don't know how much pain a dog feels after surgery. I believe it is some pain, though. If it's completely painless, let me know, I'll stand corrected.

I do know that when a loved one comes out of abdominal surgery, her skin is so cold to the touch, I mean cold like a corpse, and it's because she's been put into a very deep sleep. It's unnerving, and not something you want to experience again. Anesthesia in any other setting is a poisonous gas, right?


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

I guess I don't know what you're advocating then. Especially since every "qualified person" will have a different opinion about what constitutes reasonable physical punishment, the most qualified person to solve the problem may not use any physical punishment at all, there's no guarantee that physical punishment will help the matter, and there's a possibility that physical punishment will make matters worse and result in the dog's death (or push the human child toward behavior leading to jail).

I'm glad you feel lucky to be on the receiving end of physical punishment. It messed me up pretty badly (perfectly "normal" spanking any pro-spanker would have thought reasonable). So that show the variables involved, too.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

DustyCrockett said:


> Sorry, I didn't know that "inch" was actually a unit of measurement used by anesthesiologists. I don't know how far an inch is, in this context, or how many inches away from death you are during that kind of surgery. If it's six inches away, or 18, that's ok. Also, I don't know how much pain a dog feels after surgery. I believe it is some pain, though. If it's completely painless, let me know, I'll stand corrected.


Well maybe YOU shouldn't have chosen to use it as a unit of measurement in the first place. And anyway, anesthesia is not any amount inches away from death - it's simply a state of unconsciousness when done correctly. And since dogs cannot tell us how much pain they experience after surgery, it behooves veterinarians to design a pain management protocol that assumes they experience a similar level of pain that a human would getting a similar surgery. In my experience, veterinarians are MUCH more aggressive and conscientious about pain control than human doctors are, so while no procedure can be pain free most of it can be avoided.



> I do know that when a loved one comes out of abdominal surgery, her skin is so cold to the touch, I mean cold like a corpse, and it's because she's been put into a very deep sleep. It's unnerving, and not something you want to experience again.


Patients should not wake up that cold. 



> Anesthesia in any other setting is a poisonous gas, right?


I'm struggling to think of another setting where gas anesthetics would actually be used anyway (other than abuse, which happens occasionally), but wrong. No more than alcohol or water are poisonous liquids simply because they CAN be toxic.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

That^^^^ 

Or any more than taking a Tylenol (or giving your dog a Rimadyl) is poisoning yourself because too much is toxic.


----------



## doxiemommy (Dec 18, 2009)

DustyCrockett said:


> A lot of verbiage there. I guess my words weren't bad enough, so you added "stringing up"?
> 
> *I added "stringing up" because I had used that description before in a previous post to describe CM choking the dog, NOT to add to YOUR comment. Keep up.*
> This is all academic.
> ...


Obviously, I consider some of the things CM has done to be abuse. Obviously you consider it preventative care. (my description)
I consider education to be important, in order to keep up to date on advances in training and animal behavior, and you don't find that as important.
My references to education aren't and never will be to infer that children and dogs should be educated/treated/trained the same. That would be silly.


----------



## DustyCrockett (Sep 24, 2011)

Willowy said:


> I guess I don't know what you're advocating then. Especially since every "qualified person" will have a different opinion about what constitutes reasonable physical punishment, the most qualified person to solve the problem may not use any physical punishment at all, there's no guarantee that physical punishment will help the matter, and there's a possibility that physical punishment will make matters worse and result in the dog's death (or push the human child toward behavior leading to jail).
> 
> I'm glad you feel lucky to be on the receiving end of physical punishment. It messed me up pretty badly (perfectly "normal" spanking any pro-spanker would have thought reasonable). So that show the variables involved, too.


I'm advocating, "do what it takes to save the poor sucker, within reason." Like just about every other aspect of life, it requires a person to exercise judgement, predict possible outcomes, evaluate risks, compare costs to benefits. If you have the most qualified person at your disposal, you'll likely make a better decision, but even the best decision doesn't guarantee the outcome you want.

Just to be clear, I'm approaching this as a purely academic exercise; anybody asks my advice on aggression issues, I say "seek professional help." I consider my dogs valued, loved, bona fide family members. Canine family members, not human. I think more harm than good is done by those who make decisions without regard to the difference. 

I said earlier I thought maybe I'd have accepted choking if it'd been offered as a choice. Guess that's what started us down this path. How much choking, I don't know, I'm not qualified to say, I'd have to rely on somebody with training and experience. It offends my human sensibilities, too; I can predict what it would be like for me, and wouldn't accept it for a human being. But I also know that a dog's neck is much different from mine, much more powerful, muscular, protected by a thick coat of fur and folds of loose skin.

It's an opinion; you can agree, disagree, mull it over, dispute, argue, debate, skoff, but just cause you disagree doesn't make you a bad person, or me either.

I don't so much feel myself lucky to have been spanked as a child -- more like, lucky that I wasn't expected to engage in it myself. Experiences like yours are clearly why it lost popular appeal.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

At least among the parents of young children I know, it appears that spanking has NOT lost its popular appeal. . .but that's a whole different topic.

Possibly a collar pop would feel somewhat different to a dog than a human. But when it comes down to actual choking, something that causes the dog visible distress, I don't think the experience is any different for them. Mammals all have similar nervous systems, pain is felt in similar ways.


----------



## TxRider (Apr 22, 2009)

doxiemommy said:


> Well, we can't all be you, can we? I am impressed by your accomplishments. But, really, the percentage of drop outs that go on to set high goals and accomplish them is very small. So, if we accepted the drop out mentality, saying that succeeding is possible without an education, we would have SOME people like you, going on to succeed, and we'd have a WHOLE LOT of people that don't go on to succeed.


So then it might seem that CM might be one of those few, as after all he has come from an uneducated background and set high goals and accomplished them very well.



> My point is, just because you have the DRIVE, and DEDICATION to set goals for yourself, and go after them, without the tools that are useful for others to have in life (diploma, degrees, certifications), doesn't mean that we should just do away with requiring those tools out of others.


And my point is that a degree demonstrates you have passed an educational program, not necessarily that you can competently work in that field and that not having passed said educational course by no means eliminates a person from being more competent than the person with a degree in that field.

And as you yourself stated, CM as a non academic probably did not even have any idea the "disproven" theory of alpha philosophy your talking about even existed, nor does his use of it probably relate to those old studies in any way whatsoever. 

It seems to me quite likely that his use of language tends to make people think he is basing his philosophy on something he is not and confusing the issue as he is using the terms with a different meaning than those terms have to those who have an academic background and automatically assume he is basing his philosophy on outdated studies he likely has never even heard of.

For example when I have watched I get the impression most of his dominance/alpha stuff he uses isn't anything related to the outdated wolf alpha type philosophy that everyone cackles like hens about, but as I have seen him explain it is what a mother dog uses with pups to teach them as they grow up not what an alpha male wolf does to subordinate pack members.

Which is why I reserve judgement a lot, because I have seen enough of this misunderstanding of terms and misinformation and opinions and rants and assumptions based on faulty understanding and such that I place little faith in most of them. And really, 90% of what I see him do is non contact body language, and a lot of sharp "psst" sounds, which I see very little to criticize about. The other 10% can be questionable, mostly light touches and such that reasonable people can differ on, and then a small amount of forceful contact that is much more questionable in it's use.


----------



## graemeo (Oct 26, 2011)

I find it amazing that people aren't more skeptical about what they see on a network TV show with all its editing and careful scripting.


----------



## TxRider (Apr 22, 2009)

wildfire_1982 said:


> i personally prefere Victoria Stillwell ... she's an excellent trainer who doesn't believe in physical negative punishments but instead encourages good behaivor with positive rewards and that works awesome for ALL breeds. she handles all breeds, pure 'n mix. 'n mutts... including "dangerous" breeds.


And she's pretty cute too..


----------



## TxRider (Apr 22, 2009)

sassafras said:


> If your vet poisoned your dog to within an inch of her life, they weren't doing anesthesia right.
> 
> Might want to ask them to update their post-op pain control protocols, too.


Yup that would be more like heartworm treatment and injecting with arsenic based poisons, which does kill a certain percentage of patients, and leaves most of them quite ill for 24-48 hours.


----------



## doxiemommy (Dec 18, 2009)

TxRider said:


> So then it might seem that CM might be one of those few, as after all he has come from an uneducated background and set high goals and accomplished them very well.
> 
> *He MIGHT be, but not in my opinion, because his success is based on some methods that are violent, or some methods that are based on flawed ideas, and are, in some ways, harmful. If someone else chooses to look at that and say "whoopee! he's done so much with so little!" fine, but not me.*
> 
> ...


I stand by education and training. Having the education can NEVER be a detriment, but it CAN be beneficial.


----------



## DustyCrockett (Sep 24, 2011)

doxiemommy said:


> Obviously, I consider some of the things CM has done to be abuse. Obviously you consider it preventative care. (my description)
> I consider education to be important, in order to keep up to date on advances in training and animal behavior, and you don't find that as important.
> My references to education aren't and never will be to infer that children and dogs should be educated/treated/trained the same. That would be silly.


Let's call it corrective instead of preventive, and say I would accept some things you would reject as abusive. 

I find animal behavior a fascinating subject, and as I enjoy my canine relationships, I have an interest in hearing about advances in the field. When it comes to training I place a higher value on experience. If that seems contradictory, maybe I haven't considered it thoroughly. I never hired a trainer except for the one time, and it was a long time ago. 

I understand you wouldn't advocate equal treatment of kids & dogs; I intended to make a point, but it does seem silly now.

I don't envy you your job. I can't even imagine coming face to face on a regular basis with people who justify child abuse.

*"It's certainly termed violence if you CHOKE a person."* Agreed. 

Yet dogs are choked all across America on a daily basis. At this very moment, people are putting _choke_ chains on their dogs, in anticipation of choking them. I know, it's different from what we saw in the CM video, but what would people do if somebody walked into the mall with their kids on choke chains? If they were using 'em the way they are commonly used on dogs, I mean.

Your opinion that choking a dog constitutes violence is a perfectly valid one; my opinion, choking a dog is violent only if done violently and with malice, is just as valid. Here again, I'm not telling anybody to choke a dog, nor am I choking any dogs. May I refer you to the 3rd paragraph of my preceding post for clarification of my position on choking.

*"...having hundreds of satisfied customers may only mean that those customers are not aware of the possible disadvantages..."* Agreed.

It's just an indicator of a person's success in their field; just a factor one considers in evaluating a service provider.

*...my examples of child abuse that I see as a teacher was to illustrate that we DO, as a society have a line drawn..."* Sorry, I made a bad inference, I thought you meant the line for humans and canines is the same. But I do agree 100% that society draws the lines. Thats three major points of agreement.

*...Preventative medical care is different than using force and violence to change behavior. ...* This is a perfectly valid point of view, which I understand, and agree it is true, from the human's perspective.

It's not clear to me whether you have considered it from the patient's perspective, when the patient is not able to comprehend what is being done or why; they just feel the pain. I believe that is the relevant viewpoint. If you have considered this and find it makes no difference, I still respect your opinion, although I disagree with it.

*...Keep up. ...* good catch.


----------



## Corinthian (Sep 21, 2009)

While we've gone off into tangents of anaesthesica, invermectin, vets and everything else, I think that there is one thing we can all agree: Millan is ignorant, archaic trainer with no understanding of ethology or psychology.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

DustyCrockett said:


> context. who said CM is like a vet?
> 
> It's not at all unusual for a dog to have a phobia about the vet's office. I'm kinda surprised that I have to explain this to you. This particular dog had a bad experience as a pup, being treated at the emergency clinic, after which every veterinary office was an evil place. Curious, none of that ever made her even the slightest bit aggressive. The differences between actual experience and theory can be pretty interesting, don't you think?
> 
> ...


Well, if that lengthy rant wasn't trying to compare routine vet procedures to strong-arm/bullying training methods, I'd be very curious as to what point you thought you were making. My remarks were that I would not take my dog to a trainer OR a vet clinic where my dogs weren't treated wth respect. As to a little life experience, LOL. I'll be 62 on Sunday and have had dogs all my adult life. Have been teaching others to work with dogs for well over 30 years. I wonder how long it takes to get that "little life experience." As to major abdominal surgery - yup. Still recovering. And I am not one of the spay-and-neuter-everything proponents. If you read my posts, you would know that.


----------



## cshellenberger (Dec 2, 2006)

I can tell you right now, if ANYONE did the thing CM does in this video to MY dog, I'd demand they be charged with animal cruelty. He repeatedly kicks the dogs and when the dogs attempt to defend themselves (rightfully so) he either chokes them out or kicks them down. Frankly if it were anyone else being shown doing this people would be screaming about it, but because it's a the called 'DOg Whisperer" he's praised. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFCGtatpCwI

Oh, I personally knew three dogs he 'rehabbed' all had to be put down when the aggression issues escalated due to the train ing their owners subjected them to backfired.


----------



## xxxxdogdragoness (Jul 22, 2010)

Ok .... Here's a thought, is any way really "wrong" or "right"? Or is it one persons OPINION of wrong/right, weather it be mine or someone else's? I think the best way is the one that works for the dog in question (sans abuse of course.


----------



## jiml (Jun 19, 2008)

I never saw what people do in his kicking thing. If thats abuse your ideas of such are just diff than mine. Now there are some things that I have seen him do that I would not allow on my dog but that aint one of them.




cshellenberger said:


> I can tell you right now, if ANYONE did the thing CM does in this video to MY dog, I'd demand they be charged with animal cruelty. He repeatedly kicks the dogs and when the dogs attempt to defend themselves (rightfully so) he either chokes them out or kicks them down. Frankly if it were anyone else being shown doing this people would be screaming about it, but because it's a the called 'DOg Whisperer" he's praised.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFCGtatpCwI
> 
> Oh, I personally knew three dogs he 'rehabbed' all had to be put down when the aggression issues escalated due to the train ing their owners subjected them to backfired.


----------



## xxxxdogdragoness (Jul 22, 2010)

True but I use CM type techniques & my dogs have never twisted their giblets, tho sans the "kicking" & choking. I will admit to leash popping & "touching" & body blocking


----------



## DustyCrockett (Sep 24, 2011)

Pawzk9 said:


> Well, if that lengthy rant wasn't trying to compare routine vet procedures to strong-arm/bullying training methods, I'd be very curious as to what point you thought you were making. My remarks were that I would not take my dog to a trainer OR a vet clinic where my dogs weren't treated wth respect. As to a little life experience, LOL. I'll be 62 on Sunday and have had dogs all my adult life. Have been teaching others to work with dogs for well over 30 years. I wonder how long it takes to get that "little life experience." As to major abdominal surgery - yup. Still recovering. And I am not one of the spay-and-neuter-everything proponents. If you read my posts, you would know that.



I guess 30 years of doing something entitles you to a little arrogance. Maybe you're not so judgemental in person. If we all had your level of skill and knowlege, you'd be out of a job.

Just purely for your benefit, I'm going to quote myself from earlier in this thread.

On the medical procedure comparison:


> It's not clear to me whether you have considered it from the patient's perspective, when the patient is not able to comprehend what is being done or why; they just feel the pain. I believe that is the relevant viewpoint. If you have considered this and find it makes no difference, I still respect your opinion, although I disagree with it.


Here is my point:


> Somewhere between that slap on the wrist and a full out brass-knuckles beating, lies a degree of physical punishment that I would accept as reasonable to save a dog's life, if I were so advised by a qualified person.
> 
> Some might say that PTS is a better option than even the slightest degree of physical punishment, and that's a valid point of view. (Some will feel morally superior about it; that's their problem.)
> 
> Otherwise, it's just a question of degree, and I don't really no what degree we're talkin bout.





> I'm advocating, "do what it takes to save the poor sucker, within reason." Like just about every other aspect of life, it requires a person to exercise judgement, predict possible outcomes, evaluate risks, compare costs to benefits. If you have the most qualified person at your disposal, you'll likely make a better decision, but even the best decision doesn't guarantee the outcome you want.
> 
> Just to be clear, I'm approaching this as a purely academic exercise; anybody asks my advice on aggression issues, I say "seek professional help."





> It's an opinion; you can agree, disagree, mull it over, dispute, argue, debate, skoff, but just cause you disagree doesn't make you a bad person, or me either.


----------



## Corinthian (Sep 21, 2009)

cshellenberger said:


> I can tell you right now, if ANYONE did the thing CM does in this video to MY dog, I'd demand they be charged with animal cruelty. He repeatedly kicks the dogs and when the dogs attempt to defend themselves (rightfully so) he either chokes them out or kicks them down. Frankly if it were anyone else being shown doing this people would be screaming about it, but because it's a the called 'DOg Whisperer" he's praised.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFCGtatpCwI
> 
> Oh, I personally knew three dogs he 'rehabbed' all had to be put down when the aggression issues escalated due to the train ing their owners subjected them to backfired.



The man is such a tool. I'm still surprised that these mindless dog owners stand slack jawed doing nothign as Millan abuses their dogs. 

How much trust is being engendered if some stranger comes into your live and kicks you around while the supposedly leaders do nothing? If my "alpha" did nothing while some guy was kicking me, that would be the end of my trust.

And of course, the whole ideas on which he bases his actions are utter nonsense.


----------



## AussieNerdQueen (Jul 28, 2010)

DustyCrockett said:


> I guess 30 years of doing something entitles you to a little arrogance. Maybe you're not so judgemental in person. If we all had your level of skill and knowlege, you'd be out of a job.


You told Pawz she needed life experience. She told you she has thirty years of experience, and now she's judgemental for referencing her experience? She'd be 'out of a day job' if YOU had that much experience? Wow.

I'd be able to read your opinions and take you _a lot_ more seriously if you didn't constantly fall back on below the belt and personal attacks to make your point. In fact you've spent so much of this thread big-noting yourself and putting others down I don't have a clear picture of what your point of view _is_. If you can't win a debate without being so condescending, you probably don't have as good a point as originally thought. An argument should be able to stand for itself.


----------



## wvasko (Dec 15, 2007)

dogdragoness said:


> True but I use CM type techniques & my dogs have never twisted their giblets, tho sans the "kicking" & choking. I will admit to leash popping & "touching" & body blocking


Geeze I thought I was the only self-confessed Negative reinforcement trainer.


----------



## RonE (Feb 3, 2007)

If this alleged Cesar Milan thread continues for another hour, some folks are going to be getting a time out.

So it won't.


----------

