Dog’s Amazing Hearing from Bark magazine

February 7, 2010

Even during the quiet hours of the night, the world is a noisy place for dogs, who can hear the high-frequency pulse of the crystal resonator used in digital alarm clocks and the bodily vibrations of termites in the walls.

Bark, Feb./March 2010

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

New Treatment Options for Dogs with Obsessive-Compulsive Behaviors?

February 4, 2010

Katie Drummond reports on AOL News that a gene for obsessive-compulsive disorder may have been located in certain dog breeds.

My initial reactions are these: 1.) The concept that a gene “causes” a behavior is, at best, an over-simplification (see Richard Dawkins, et. al). So Ms. Drummond’s lede follows the incorrect pattern of most science writing on this subject. 2.) Surely there exists a more pleasant, more flattering photo of Katie Drummond (left). And 3.) I didn’t know that AOL was still around. Amazing.

But I am a huge fan of Dr. Nicholas Dodman and a long-time subscriber to the Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine at Tufts University’s newsletter Your Dog. If you’re serious about keeping up to date on issues of canine health and training there is simply no better monthly newsletter out there.

What this really means is now that a relationship between the existence of this gene and the obsessive-compulsive behavior in some breeds has been identified it will open up more treatment options. And the possibility that this link may lead to a similar finding in the human genome.

This is, potentially, a breakthrough achievement and it doesn’t surprise me in the least that it comes from Dr. Dodman and his colleagues at the Cummings School.

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

Pedigree Dogs Exposed – BBC documentary

January 21, 2010

We’ve allowed some breeds to become too heavy, some too short-faced, some too heavy-coated, some too short legged, others too short-lived, all in the pursuit of cosmetic points, not sound anatomical points. — David Hancock, dog historian

The 60 minute BBC documentary Pedigree Dogs Exposed is available for viewing on YouTube in 6 parts. If you care about dogs, it should both sicken and anger you. Watch it directly on YouTube here.

The only conclusion you can come to is that annual dog shows like Crufts and Westminster have degraded our best friends into a parade of deformed, disabled, disease-prone mutants. And we’ve done this in just over 100 years of pursuing a eugenics-based system of standardizing dog breeds to a bizarre, artificial aesthetic that values appearance over health and temperament.

For example, did you know that the distinctive ridge of Rhodesian Ridgebacks serves no useful purpose and is actually a mild of form of spina bifida, the incomplete development of the spinal cord or its coverings? You’ll learn all about this and much more in this riviting exposé. Every caring dog owner should watch it.

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

How Smart is Your Dog?

January 18, 2010

Sarah Kershaw has an excellent article about canine intelligence in the New York Times, “Good Dog, Smart Dog.”

The matter of what exactly goes on in the mind of a dog is a tricky one, and until recently much of the research on canine intelligence has been met with large doses of skepticism. But over the last several years a growing body of evidence, culled from small scientific studies of dogs’ abilities to do things like detect cancer or seizures, solve complex problems (complex for a dog, anyway), and learn language suggests that they may know more than we thought they did. Their apparent ability to tune in to the needs of psychiatric patients, turning on lights for trauma victims afraid of the dark, reminding their owners to take medication and interrupting behaviors like suicide attempts and self-mutilation, for example, has lately attracted the attention of researchers.

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

Inside Denver’s “Pit Bull Row”

January 18, 2010


Denver has had a breed-specific ban on pit bulls since 1992. In that time 5,286 pit bulls have been impounded and an estimated 3,497 have been destroyed. Shelters in Denver cannot put pit bulls up for adoption; they must try and find room for them in other Colorado cities.

See the photo essay by Joe Tone in Denver Westworld here.

Click on image for larger size.

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

Dog Books Worth Reading

December 28, 2009

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

“Time to Eat the Dog: The Real Guide to Sustainable Living” — The environmental cost of pets

December 22, 2009

Time to Eat the Dog? The Real Guide to Sustainable Living by Robert and Brenda Vale published this year in England raises the thorny question of whether or not you can justify the carbon foot print of your pet.

I’ve posted an excerpt of Thorstein Veblen’s thoughts on the extravagance of dogs here on the Cynodictis Project page.  Veblen’s governing principle was that every expenditure about subsistence was “conspicuous consumption”  a purchase whose real aim is to communicate something about the buyer. Owning a dog says to the world, in effect, I have so much income I can afford to waste a portion of it feeding and caring for a non-productive member of the household.

I’ve always thought of this concept in terms of useless rooms in houses. I grew up, at least part of the time, in a house which had a living room that was for show purposes only. The furniture wasn’t wrapped in thick plastic but no one used the room. It was understood. The dog was not allowed in there either, under any circumstances. The living room was for entertaining on a certain level. Evidently did not circulate with the other A-listers because our living room was used once a year or less.

But should we really eat our dogs as the Vales suggest? Even if we are feeling a bit peckish?

They calculate that a medium size dog eats around 360 pounds of meat and 210 pounds of cereal annually. They equate this with the energy consumption of driving a 4X4 SUV 6,200 miles a year, including the energy required to build the car. I don’t suppose that since our family owns only a single car, a Prius at that, it comes close  to offsetting our two ravenous Labradors.

But that’s not the only negative impact our dogs have on the environment.

The Vales claim that dogs decrease the biodiversity in the areas they  are walked. Why would the presence of a domesticated animal in a suburban environment (where most companion dogs live) decrease the local biodiversity? How much of a decrease and what’s the impact of that? I’d like to see and understand the science behind this contention.

They also say that dog feces are responsible for high bacterial levels in rivers and streams, ultimately killing off aquatic life. Again, this statement exists in a vacuum. Surely the run off of excrement from our present method of factory farming, especially chicken and pig farming, are a much greater factor in the fecal pollution of our waterways?

New Scientist magazine had an independent expert calculate the environmental costs of dog ownership and he came to the same conclusions as the Vales: ”Owning a dog really is quite an extravagance, mainly because of the carbon footprint of meat.”

Obviously, someone like me is going to question the specific degree to which pet owning contributes to our use of limited resources. Every expenditure has costs. The point of this provocatively titled book is that every decision we make has an environmental impact.

For most of us this isn’t part of our calculation when considering a purchase, the way we wash our clothes or burial options. For example, I didn’t know that the biggest “cost” of clothes is in our continually washing them.

So I don’t think that anyone really wants you to consider eating your (probably delicious) dog. It makes for a grabber of a title, though.

 

 


[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

Luna is Thankful for Her Ball — 3D

November 26, 2009

Luna-catching_3D800px

This anaglyph shows what I believe is Luna at her happiest. Click on image for larger size.

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

Doggie Lover Doll, A Sex Toy for Dogs — Is this Necessary?

October 31, 2009

The answer to the question posed in the title is obviously (repeat after me) No, a sex toy is not necessary for your un-neutered male dog.*

doggieloverdoll_hard_core

As Thorstein Veblen explained almost a century ago everything above survival level is abundance. He coined the phrase “conspicuous consumption” to describe the resources we spend/waste on showing how far above survival level our income is. Merely owning and maintaining a dog, in the strictest sense, sends the message that you have enough resources that you can support a non-essential animal. Click image for larger size.

In 2007 Business Week reported that Americans spent $41 billion on pets and pet care. Clearly, with a market this large there will be excesses. In 2007 the object of some (deserved) media derision was the product Neuticles, artifical testicles implanted in male dogs after neutering ” to let people restore their pets to anatomical preciseness” according to inventor Gregg A. Miller.

Now from Miami, Florida and São Paulo, Brazil comes the DoggieLoverDoll. Here’s the essential pitch from PetSmiling company’s web site. Their product is

A female canine manufactured in soft rubber with a silicone vagina and an easy to clean reservoir. The product also comes with a tube of water-based intimate lubricant, to increase the useful life of the doll.

This doll comes in three sizes: small, medium and large, to satisfy all existing races. “I had the idea to make this doll when my Maltese started to grab everybody’s legs. I did some research and couldn’t find anything like it, anywhere in the world. I decided to make it!”, reveals Marco Giroto, owner of the PetSmiling company, responsible for this worldwide novelty.

When a dog tries to hump legs, stuffed animals and other objects, he cannot reach an ejaculation. With the DoggieLoverDoll he can. Human beings have their hands to masturbate themselves, now the domestic animals, which have practically no contact with females in heat, can alleviate themselves with a toy designed specifically for them. Dogs have a great sexual appetite and this novelty, surely will better their lives.

If anyone determines that this is a well-executed hoax I would greatly appreciate your letting us all in on the gag.

doggieloverdoll_3_viewsThe tiny footprint of the parent site is just one reason my Spidey-sense is whispering Fake! in my ear. There doesn’t seem to be any retailer I can find on the web offering it for sale. And you can’t purchase it from the PetSmiling web site; there’s no order form, just an email contact. Curiouser and curiouser. If anyone spots this item for sale anywhere, please post a comment with details (and links). Click image for larger size.


________________________________________________________________

*And, if you are not a dog breeder and your dog is a companion, not a working dog, you should seriously consider spaying your female dog and neutering your male dog. There are numerous benefits and the biggest hurdle (usually) is over-coming the projected anxiety of male humans who own dogs.

Get over it.

Help reduce the dog population explosion we’ve had for the past century: too many good dogs chasing after too few good homes.

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

Harmony Farms Dog Food — a new arrival at my market

September 25, 2009

Last week I went cruising down the pet food aisle in my local SUPER Stop & Shop. They are in the midst of renovating the entire store — we just got the all new rolling shopping carts with a gun metal gray finish instead of the standard chrome! Some people will tell you progress is an illusion. Don’t you believe it.

Normally, the dog food brands that are carried in a super market are of middle to low quality, in terms of ingredients. You’ll find lots of corn on the ingredient lists, along with lots of wheat, soy, glutens and, worst of all, by-product meals. These ‘meat meals’ cover a great multitude of sins. These chicken, beef or simply labeled ‘meat by-products’ include all the parts of an animal that are left over after the meat has been stripped off.  Lungs, spleens, kidneys, hearts, brain, blood and more.

It was the genius idea of grinding up cow by-products and adding that as a protein to cow feed that led to the mass outbreaks of  Mad Cow Disease (bovine spongiform encephalitis). This involves a scary little thing called a prion — a folded, infectious bit of protein that attacks the brain and neural structure — every disease prions cause is both untreatable and fatal.

The ‘meat meal’ in your dog food could consist of the euthanized bodies of dogs and cats from shelters, roadkill, diseased or injured “downer cattle”, or zoo animals. Remember that the protein sludge created this way uses the whole animal: heart , brain, hoof and paw, coat and fur.

The take away is stay away from by-products and meals, especially, when choosing dog food.

I stop in the newly revamped dog food section and notice that for the first time the bags if kibble are separated by a divider with a limited selection of premium brands on one side. There is also a small refrigerator section with whole raw foods designed for dogs. I’m impressed. Raw and refrigerated food is too expensive for my budget; I also have some doubts over its perceived value and actual benefit to our dogs.

Back in the kibble I find a brand that’s new to me Harmony Farms. Meat is always the number one ingredient in their dog food. Their foods have no corn, wheat, soy, glutens or artificial coloring, flavoring or ingredients. Click on the chart below to see how their ingredients stack up against Beneful, IAMS, Pedigree and Purina.

dog_food_chart

Price Comparison by the Pound

$1.30 lb. Harmony Farms (17.5 lb. bag)
$1.23 lb. Hill’s Science Diet (40 lb. bag)
$1.17 lb. Evolve (30 lb. bag)
$1.45 lb. Solid Gold (33 lb. bag)
$1.46 lb
. Innova (30 lb. bag)
$1.80 lb. Newman’s Own Organic (25 lb.)
$1.88 lb.
Natural Balance Organic (25 lb.bag)

Of course, there’s some wiggle room in the above numbers since not every kibble sold was packaged at the same weight. Hill’s Science Diet comes across cheapest, in part, because it’s sold in the largest size, a 40 lb. bag. So use this only as a rough guide.

So I’m trying out Harmony Farms for our two Labradors. It is convenient not to make a second trip to a specialty store to buy my kibble.

And being Labradors I’m fairly assured that they’ll eat whatever is placed in their bowls; palatabilityis never an issue with this breed.

If any of you out there have any comments or information about your experience with Harmony Farms Pet Foods, we’d love to hear from you!

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

Next Page »