this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2023
383 points (91.7% liked)

World News

38342 readers
1904 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] dublet@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Apparently requesting to have a fact based discussion is offensive. I merely asked for actual data for some rather extraordinary claims.

[–] squiblet@kbin.social 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I don’t think I seemed offended. I pointed out that the fact you refuted wasn’t what the person you replied to was asserting.

I see the statistics you cite come up as the first result on searches. Did you look at anything else? “Dog attacks in UK annually” has a lot of results for me.

Here’s a BBC article for example:
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-64798162
which states

Last year, there were nearly 22,000 cases of out-of-control dogs causing injury. In 2018, there were just over 16,000.

as far as info on which breeds are involved, I’m sure it’s out there.

[–] dublet@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I pointed out that the fact you refuted wasn’t what the person you replied to was asserting.

There were two claims asserted:

  • "Not a week goes by in the UK without an attack by this breed."
  • "Some survive, many do not."

(Emphasis mine) The first is not something I can find evidence for as there seems to be no break down easily availably by breed. And as for the second, most survive , 0.1% do not.

The down votes being given for asking for data seems like I'm offending some. 🤷

as far as info on which breeds are involved, I’m sure it’s out there.

Does not seem to be as you have also failed to find it. There is aggregate data for all dogs, which yes, is easily found actually refused some of the assertions that the person made.

Banning based on breed seems like a knee jerk reaction based on anecdotes.

[–] squiblet@kbin.social 1 points 11 months ago

True, “many” seems to be an overstatement. Being mauled by a dog isn’t great, either.

Does not seem to be as you have also failed to find it.

That’s a function of how much time I spent looking. You seem to be more engaged in this topic than I am, so perhaps you could find the data.