Upper Class Canines

03/28/2025

These collars ,if used appropriately, are merely another tool in the tool box. In the wrong hands, they are like any other collar.

Research, not rhetoric
This is from a 2001 peer-reviewed study published in Applied Animal Behavior Science that examined hunting dogs’ behavior toward sheep and the controlled use of electric collars as a deterrent.
Key point, the collars were only used when dogs were within 1–2 meters of sheep to prevent attacks. The timing was deliberate to avoid confusion or unnecessary distress.
The result?
Most dogs didn’t even need a shock, and NO LASTING SIDE EFFECTS WERE OBSERVED!
Before jumping ton the keyboard, read the actual science.
This study shows that, when used precisely and ethically, tools like electronic collars can save lives (both dog and sheep) and avoid harsher outcomes down the line.
Emotion has its place in training, but evidence should lead the conversation.

03/28/2025

Watch dogs acting among themselves. "Punishment " is metered out when a perceived infraction has occurred. IT is part of tge way dogs communicate.

The Science they DON’T want you to read.
Contrary to the propaganda pushed by force-free ideologists, punishment isn't a last resort! it's often the ONLY option that works in real world cases.
“Punishment is effective in reducing problem behavior in clinical populations, and in some cases, may be an essential component of treatment... Punishment also may be preferable to reinforcement-based treatments when problem behavior must be suppressed rapidly to prevent serious physical harm.”
Before you hit the keyboards, let me remind you - These are NOT opinions. These are peer reviewed facts backed by decades of applied and basic research.
It’s time we stop demonizing the use of aversives in training and behavior treatment and start demanding evidence-based discussions.

https://youtu.be/XjHTivWiqT8?si=2Mzm9TY_1MeJTKKY

03/02/2025

I love this

02/22/2025

A recent paper claims to show a link between punishment (or what they love to call “punishment based training”) and increased aggression in dogs.
This paper is by no means a study!
Here’s why it falls short of credible science: it’s a compilation of previously published SURVEYS and REPORTS, based on owner self-reports and behavior clinic assessments.
The paper once again relies entirely on other people’s data, without any actual observations or controlled experiments.
The findings are based on owner recollections, which are prone to bias and inaccuracies, and behavior clinic samples that *only represent dogs with pre-existing issues.
The paper uses cross-sectional surveys and retrospective case reviews, which cannot establish cause and effect!!!
Are aggressive dogs more likely to receive punishment, or does punishment cause aggression? This paper does not provide the answer!!!
Bottom line is this is not a scientific study. It’s a narrative filled with SPECULATIVE associations and BIASED data. Before you take its claims at face value, consider the glaring methodological flaws.

02/14/2025

For years, fluoxetine (Prozac) has been pushed as the answer to behavioral problems in dogs. Veterinary behaviorists and force-free advocates love to cite “science-backed” studies to justify long-term medication use. But here’s a big problem, most of these studies are flawed, biased, and rely almost entirely on owner-reported data.
Take, for example, the 2009 study on fluoxetine for compulsive disorders in dogs (Irimajiri et al., J Am Vet Med Assoc). It claimed fluoxetine helped, yet the only improvement came from owners’ OPINIONS, not actual behavioral measurements. When researchers looked at objective data the dogs’ actual behavior logs they found NO SIGNIFICANT difference between the medicated and placebo groups. But guess which result gets cited?🤫
How about the 2007 study on fluoxetine for separation anxiety (Simpson et al., Veterinary Therapeutics). The conclusion? Fluoxetine was effective … but only when paired with a structured behavior modification plan. And yet, thousands of dogs are medicated without any meaningful training, as if a pill can replace actual learning.
Sad reality is that Dogs are being drugged, not rehabilitated.
Ask any serious trainer what happens when they get a dog that’s been on fluoxetine for years. They take the dog off the meds, implement a sound training plan, and SHOCKINGLY the dog improves.
Not because fluoxetine “worked,” but because the dog finally got what it needed: clarity and proper training.
Yet, the AVSAB keeps pushing these medications while dismissing legitimate training as “aversive” or “outdated.” They’d rather chemically suppress behavior than actually address it.
The real question isn’t whether fluoxetine has some effect but why so many dogs improve when you REMOVE the drug and train them properly?!!!
Behavioral change comes from learning, not sedation. It’s time to stop pretending otherwise.
I know I am not the only one noticing that dogs on fluoxetine don’t get better - they just get dull.
The dog isn’t learning or adapting, just becoming more passive.
This can actuallY DELAY proper rehabilitation, because the dog’s emotions and responses are chemically suppressed rather than modified through learning.
Thinking about making a solo podcast to talk about the dog I have in training right now, one of the many that end up euthanized after YEARS of being on SSRI’s and the pandemic of prescribing psychotropics like flea medication