Two months ago, the British Medical Journal published a letter written by Rachel Orritt, a Research Assistant and PhD student member of FCRG. The letter (which can be accessed via this toll free link) addresses concerns over the way dog bites are talked about by members of the medical profession and in other spheres. Orritt called for an evidenced based approach, and suggested that medical professionals adopt a balanced viewpoint, taking into account the benefits of dog ownership alongside the risks. Orritt also pointed out that the figures that are frequently used by the government, academics and the media to describe the incidence of dog bites are incorrect.
The letter has generated a lot of interest, from coverage in the veterinary journal ‘The Veterinary Record’ to posts on popular science blogs such as ‘The Dodo’. Other sites that have discussed the letter include Science Daily, Read Medical News, Science Codex, Medical News Today, Entrepreneur.MD, AABSL, CAROdog, DoggyMom, PHD Tree, and Veooz.
The letter has also received a number of responses from various medical professionals, which Orritt has individually addressed. These can viewed here.
Orritt’s research focusses on aggressive behaviour in pet dogs. To learn more about her work, you can follow her on Twitter and read about her projects on her website http://rachelorritt.com. Rachel Orritt can be contacted at firstname.lastname@example.org