Originally Posted By: Susan FAs for your comment that there is "no evidence" that shock collars can burn, my evidence was with my own eyes.
Are you a medical doctor? A researcher who works on human skin? Some other sort of specialist who can tell the difference between a burn from friction and one from electiricty? Do you have some education that enables you to tell the difference between a burn and moist eczema? I ask because even medical doctors can have trouble with this. AND I know that no Ecollar puts out enough current to cause burns.
Did you perform tests to determine that this was a burn or did you simply assume that they were?
In the absence of any of this supporting material and knowing that no Ecollar puts out enough current to cause a burn, I'll have to say that you're wrong. This isn't a matter of your opinion v. mine, it's a matter of science and physics.
Originally Posted By: Susan F I don't understand why you can't make your points without personal insults, derogatory comments
The first insults and derogatory comments were yours. Then you added to it by calling me a liar (indirectly) by saying that you'd seen burns from an Ecollar after I said that it's physically impossible for it to have occurred. Your agenda is obvious, to stop people from using Ecollars by scaring them by spreading myths, misconceptions and outright lies as if they were true.
Originally Posted By: Mynona;205299 and self-aggrandizing referrals to your own web site.
And yet another insult. This is what the anti-Ecollar people always do. They start these kinds of arguments, then go to personal attacks in the hopes that moderators will close down the conversation and stop the flow of information and truth about Ecollars. That may happen, but another one will soon spring up.
Originally Posted By: Susan F As for "trying something new," have you EVER tried clicker training under the guidance of an experienced instructor? Why are you so closed to that?
Now you've made an assumption that turns out to be wrong.
I've used clickers and I still use the method (not the tool the, I don't care for it) when it's appropriate. You've made the faulty assumption that I only use an Ecollar, one that's fairly common among anti-Ecollar folks. The difference between us is that you want people to think that the so-called "kinder, gentler methods" ALWAYS are appropriate and that's simply NOT true.
Originally Posted By: Susan F If your statements are true, then all of Patricia McConnell's, Trish King's, Karen Pryor's, Ian Dunbar's, Suzanne Clothier's and Pat Miller's dogs would be fat, unruly heathens, yet they have more credentials, credibility and success than any shock collar fan I've ever seen.
I'd suggest that you try to read what
I actually said instead of what
it seems you wish I'd said. I was quite clear. Here it is again,
Quote: But since you asked: how many times have we seen grossly overweight dogs because they've been trained with treats and the owner has not cut back on the dog's food to compensate for it?
I NEVER said that it occurred all the time. I was quite clear that it only happens when the owners don't "compensate" for it.
Originally Posted By: Susan F I've never pulled a dog from a shelter that has "clicker trauma," but I have had experience with dogs traumatized by shock collars.
And this has to do with the topic in what way? Dogs can be traumatized with any tool, including the clicker. I saw a woman lose her temper, because she had gotten frustrated with the failure of her attempts to use the clicker, and throw the clicker, striking the dog in the head with it. It's only by luck that the dog wasn't injured. But I'd never cite that as why a clicker should not be used. That would be stupid.
Originally Posted By: Susan F THAT's my experience and my reality. I've also never put a dog on a shock collar for any reason, but my dogs haven't ended up fat and I've had success with their training.
Nice try Susan. But it's clear that you've decided to try and twist what I wrote.
Originally Posted By: Susan F As for the topic at hand, aggression begets aggression. If a dog is already tending toward fear aggression, giving him more cause to be fearful by using aggressive methodologies will reinforce the fear and the response. IMHO.
I agree that might be a result. And so my protocol
http://loucastle.com/critter.htm doesn’t use the Ecollar to stop the aggression. Instead it's a form of behavior modification. Neither the fear nor the response is reinforced. But this is the EXACT SORT OF COMMENT I'd expect from someone with a closed mind who thinks she know how I use an Ecollar. Even a quick read of that protocol will show you how wrong you are. But I doubt that you'll bother. You have you mind made up and don't want to be confused by the facts.
Originally Posted By: Susan F You disagree.
It's not just that I disagree. It's that you're wrong about the burns. It's simply impossible. No Ecollar puts out enough current to cause burns. This is a lie told by anti-Ecollar people to scare people away from them. There is ABSOLUTELY no scientific evidence to support your claim. It would be easy to show, yet no one has done so.
Originally Posted By: Susan F That's your right, but it is also my right to know what I've seen
You have not seen burns. You may think that you have. But the laws of physics say that you're wrong.