What gets me about this thread is how there are a lot of folks who simply want to form a rigid conclusion with one or two snipits of video. For my part I am sickened by what I saw BUT I am also asking questions.
The result of 6 pages of inquiry here is that I still cannot in good conscience make a call without all the facts. We still do not have all the facts.
I recently had a good friend “M” who lost a new show pup suddenly. An initial leaked report from the lab showed some uncoagulated blood in the abdomen which is common in rodenticide poisoning.
M’s good friend and worker was the one in touch with the lab relayed this premature intel. She was sold on this hypothesis from the get go. The dog owner was beside herself unable to find a source. She blamed herself for this purported poisoning and worried endlessly about her other show dogs. They are like her children.
At M’s request I started investigating. The more facts I learned the more the rodenticide theory fell apart. But her friend clung to the idea like a fat kid with cake. I was constantly debunking her wild ass theories, with facts. Meanwhile we were still waiting for that damn necropsy report from the state lab, a month on.
We finally received the report and as I had suggested from day one the pup died of natural causes. There was no sign of rodenticide in the toxicology and plenty of evidence of a sickly pup, despite outward appearances. My dear friend “M” has gotten another show dog with plans to breed more now. She is beyond relieved. For my part, I now know more about rodenticide than I ever wanted to know. That said, if you were to ask me, I would say I know nothing. I am not an expert.
The power of “Confirmation Bias” never fails to amaze me. How people will form a hypothesis, then search for clues to fit that hypothesis is an amazing area of human psychology. We all do it, even myself. The moment you think you are immune to it, that’s when you were most likely caught it’s dirty little snare.
The result of 6 pages of inquiry here is that I still cannot in good conscience make a call without all the facts. We still do not have all the facts.
I recently had a good friend “M” who lost a new show pup suddenly. An initial leaked report from the lab showed some uncoagulated blood in the abdomen which is common in rodenticide poisoning.
M’s good friend and worker was the one in touch with the lab relayed this premature intel. She was sold on this hypothesis from the get go. The dog owner was beside herself unable to find a source. She blamed herself for this purported poisoning and worried endlessly about her other show dogs. They are like her children.
At M’s request I started investigating. The more facts I learned the more the rodenticide theory fell apart. But her friend clung to the idea like a fat kid with cake. I was constantly debunking her wild ass theories, with facts. Meanwhile we were still waiting for that damn necropsy report from the state lab, a month on.
We finally received the report and as I had suggested from day one the pup died of natural causes. There was no sign of rodenticide in the toxicology and plenty of evidence of a sickly pup, despite outward appearances. My dear friend “M” has gotten another show dog with plans to breed more now. She is beyond relieved. For my part, I now know more about rodenticide than I ever wanted to know. That said, if you were to ask me, I would say I know nothing. I am not an expert.
The power of “Confirmation Bias” never fails to amaze me. How people will form a hypothesis, then search for clues to fit that hypothesis is an amazing area of human psychology. We all do it, even myself. The moment you think you are immune to it, that’s when you were most likely caught it’s dirty little snare.
