Cesar debate thread

[Britster]

Originally Posted by JeanieK

Why not just put the whole world on Prozac and then there wouold be no wars, everyone would be happy.

Now there is a situation that has been studdied to death. But nothing being done. Too many people on anti depressents, and mind altering drugs. Many of them just need to get a life and to stop expecting the world to make them happy.

Children on drugs, sit in classrooms like zombies.

Now you think we need to drug our animals as well?

I think WAY too many people are on prescription drugs. Yes, some people DO need them but the fact that so many American's on are on anti-depressants is really quite sad. There's sooo many people abusing them and it makes the people who really need them look bad. We can never seem to find our own happiness and everyone always depends on something/someone else to make them happy, but deep down, YOU can only make yourself happy.

And believe me, I've had plenty of experience with anti-depressants/anti-anxiety medicine. A lot of family are on them. I 100% understand the feeling of just being completely lost and depressed in your life. It's the worst feeling in the whole entire world. I lost my 5 year old brother to a drowning incident in 2006 and an entire year of my life was lost during the grieving process of my little buddy. We've been through the terrible lawsuits where we had to hear every last detail of his dying minutes and how much he suffered, and sit through an 8 day trial watching a douche bag defensve attorney make my mother and stepfather cry, talk down to them, and talk as if my little brother were an object and not a human being. I still deal with it every day. I never once took any drug (prescription) even though offered to me and I'm now doing better than ANY one in my family, 3 years later. My mom is still slowly weening off of Xanax, as is my aunt, my step-dad continues to take sleeping pills every night, etc. I prefer to face my problems on my own. But yes, I completely understand in certain times, they are necessary. Losing a child is the worst thing you can go through in your life so I don't judge my parents for it. I see "ADHD" kids who were thrown on Ridialin at the tender age of 8 because they're "ADD".... no, they're EIGHT years old! EVERY single person I knew who took those ADD pills growing up in elem, middle and high school are ALL wacked in the brain. I knew about 8 people who took that medication. Some are suicidal, some are loners, some just got into bigger drugs, some played into the whole ADD thing and used it as an excuse, or thought they were dumb or stupid.

I'm totally going OFF topic and on a tanget. But drugs in general just irk me. Yes, sometimes they're absolutely necessary but only to a certain extent. I don't like so many living things depending on drugs to get through their every day life and don't think dogs should have to, either.

OK, making my post a little back ON topic.... I don't think there's anything wrong with taking advantage of the medical veternarian field for animals. Hey, we've got it, so let's use it, right? Cesar even had an episode where he used accupuncture to calm a dog... but I'm sure someone will come in and say he was being abusive because OMGGzz he stuck needles in the dog! I don't think it's wrong per say to give a dog drugs, but I definitely think the issues should be addressed VERY clearly and evaluated very thoroughly beforehand.

[JeanieK]

Originally Posted by QuickSilver

I'll admit I don't work with dog packs, and that may be more similar to what is commonly thought about wolf packs, since it is often a similar situation -- unrelated members forced to live together and compete for limited resources (kind of a grim description of a home, but you know what I mean). However, I generally believe that dogs do not think we are dogs, and I really do not think they compete with us for rank status.

I have also read (and believe) that rank is fluid in many situations, and a dog/wolf that is dominant in one situation will not be in another. I ALSO don't believe that dogs feel compelled to immediately establish rank with every other dog they meet. I've read that dogs don't care about THEIR OWN rank, they just want to know everyone's place. I don't believe that either, that makes no sense in terms of species. If the top dog gets the best food, of course you care.

Finally, I don't believe resource guarding is and of itself a dominant behavior. Otherwise very submissive dogs will engage in this behavior. (By the way, I also make Thor sit & stay before he eats, and really work on NILF).

See post #315 in the Wolfman, the wolves did compete with him for status, and he had to prove himself.

[JeanieK]

Originally Posted by Britster

I haven't been commenting on this thread in a few hours because I was running some errands and have been out of the house, but I just caught up. I really have nothing more to say yet, as Chattiesmom and Nancy have basically summed up all of my thoughts and are much better explaining than I am so there's no need for me to add more.



I wanted to make a comment on this quote though... I honestly don't believe a person is truly happy alone. That's just my belief. I love my alone time but would never want to live the rest of my life truly alone. I've met a few people in my life who live really sad lives really and they act as if they're happy, but you can see by looking in their eyes that they're not. I know that's a little bit O/T but I just wanted to state my opinion on that. Yes, some adult dogs would prefer to be the only dog in the house but they were not born that way; they were born in a pack. Humans create a dog who wants to be the only dog by spoiling them, and then they learn that when another dog comes into the picture, attention goes off me but I don't think it's a natural way of dogs being. Dogs are highly social creatures who, in my opinion, need interaction of a lot of friends of their own species to fully live their life.

But even without other dogs, they still have the humans so they are not alone. Dogs left to run the streets will join a pack.

[Britster]

Originally Posted by JeanieK

Apparently you missed the sries on the Wolfman, where the mqan lived with a PACK yup I said PACK of wolves. he lived with them slept with them hunted with them and ate with them and HE was the PACK leader. As LEADER he could come and go, only the leader can do that. Other members must stay with the pack.

When i remove one of my dogs from the PACK, for a trip to the vet etc. and then I return it, they all get on it as if to say, where have you been.

Years ago, I had a very smart little dog that would nip at me when ever I was gone and came back. Cesar and his theory were not around at that time, so I did not realize that this little dog was the leader, and I was not. This little dog also tried to be the leader of a litter of kittens and of a new born colt.

Oh I thought I was the leader cause I would tell her to sit, and she would sit and i would giver her a treat, I would tell her to lie down and she would obey and i would give her a treat. She obeyed all the commands and did all the tricks, but she did them for the treats.

Now I know that I am the leader of my PACK because Cesar taught me how to be, and my PACK responds just as he predicts that they should. I tell them to wait at the door and they sit in a row and wait until I say OK, and they get no treats, they just get me.

That is proof enough to me that his theory works.

Yep!

I find it way more instinctual than anything else. Jackson just GETS me. He will not walk out of the door before/ahead of me, I've never alpha rolled him, I've never poked him to get him to do that, I just use my energy to show him what I want. He does not walk in front of me on a leash, not because I give violent jerks or pulls or shoves or kicks or whatever else people claim Cesar does, I simply am calm, redirect him in the right direction, and he walks right beside me, proud as can be. And honestly, it sounds cheesy, but I do feel proud walking Jackson too so I know he can sense my energy. I walk with my shoulders up usually, dog walking right beside me, and it does feel GOOD, to know we've all got this under control. If we walk past a fence with two barking crazy dogs, he does not bark back, may get a bit excited for a minute, but he continues walking right beside me no problems. When I take him for a walk with my dad's two dogs, they definitely walk like a PACK. They enjoy being close together while walking... if Jackson is too far ahead, he waits up for the other two. However, the Jack Russell who I consider the dominant one of the bunch, is ALWAYS aiming to get in the lead and be in front. She pulls sooo hard on that leash. My stepmom has been working with her but she surely rules the roost. Jackson turns into a different dog around her energy! It's amazing, really.

I just 100% believe that dogs are pack animals. Yes, a lot of people can only own one dog (I myself only have Jackson but up until last week, he lived with at least one other dog 100% of the time) but that dog still has YOU. You two form a pack, form a bond, it's just what happens. If you think your dog would rather go live alone, I think that's totally wrong and untrue. They thrive off of the pack and they help each other. Other dogs have taught Jackson so many things (good & bad, LOL) and I can't imagine what I'd do without Jackson having canine friends.

[QuickSilver]

I feel like we are going really far afield here, and methods for training dogs are getting compared to entire value systems and commentary about modern life, which I don't know how to address. The only reason I brought up the meds thing was as an example of VS continuing to use new discoveries to help dogs. It at most tangentially related to whether Ritalin is over-prescribed.

I feel like there's this undercurrent of "progress is bad" or "people are too soft" which somehow means that all research done in the past 50 years on animal behavior is meaningless, and there's no point in trying to learn anything more than we already know.

[JeanieK]

Originally Posted by QuickSilver

I feel like we are going really far afield here, and methods for training dogs are getting compared to entire value systems and commentary about modern life, which I don't know how to address. The only reason I brought up the meds thing was as an example of VS continuing to use new discoveries to help dogs. It at most tangentially related to whether Ritalin is over-prescribed.

I feel like there's this undercurrent of "progress is bad" or "people are too soft" which somehow means that all research done in the past 50 years on animal behavior is meaningless, and there's no point in trying to learn anything more than we already know.

I honestly do not think Cesars methods are totally new, my father used to trian our own personal dogs using Cesars method of understanding. Oldtimers had a much better understanding of dogs horses etc. They lived more closely with them, they were not treated like people, they were dogs or they were horses not pampered pets.

Our dogs did anything and everything my dad asked them to do. and he never abused them and if he scolded them he always made sure to make up with them before walking away. He also trained horses, back when people actually used horses to work.

He also raised 6 kids and yes we were spanked, and we too would have done anything that our dad asked of us. Well except for those awful teen age years.

if you watch Cesar and then watch Super Nanny, their way of thinking is not so different. In both cases the dogs/children are out of control because the adult humans failed to provide clear leadership. it's as simple as that. once they instruct the parents on how to take back control, the dogs/children change their behavior.

As the old addage goes, don't keep repeating the same act and expect different results. In order for the situation or relationship to change, you first have to change yourself.

That is Cesar's magic secret.

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by QuickSilver

I feel like we are going really far afield here, and methods for training dogs are getting compared to entire value systems and commentary about modern life, which I don't know how to address. The only reason I brought up the meds thing was as an example of VS continuing to use new discoveries to help dogs. It at most tangentially related to whether Ritalin is over-prescribed.

I feel like there's this undercurrent of "progress is bad" or "people are too soft" which somehow means that all research done in the past 50 years on animal behavior is meaningless, and there's no point in trying to learn anything more than we already know.

Well I can tell you I do not believe progress is bad, and the good old days were much better, but I can also tell you that life experience has taught me that the experts often change their minds, not just expert opinion, but the individual experts. I don't think people are against new methods, as much as they are against someone saying that a method they have personally found successful is worthless and barbaric. I never see any posts criticizing other famous trainers, or methods, but I see plenty of posts where people criticize Cesar and his methods. I would never tell anyone, you have to believe in Cesar or you don't know anything, yet the reverse is often said here. It's not that we are pushing for Cesar; we are defending him.

[QuickSilver]

JeanieK, I guess I would compare how I feel about training with what you are doing with Partis. What if someone said to you, "yorkies don't need improvement, why fix what's not broken?" Actually, I'm sure many people HAVE said that to you. But there must be something pushing you to want to move forward in this area, explore new possibilities, etc.

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by JeanieK

I honestly do not think Cesars methods are totally new, my father used to trian our own personal dogs using Cesars method of understanding. Oldtimers had a much better understanding of dogs horses etc. They lived more closely with them, they were not treated like people, they were dogs or they were horses not pampered pets.

Our dogs did anything and everything my dad asked them to do. and he never abused them and if he scolded them he always made sure to make up with them before walking away. He also trained horses, back when people actually used horses to work.

He also raised 6 kids and yes we were spanked, and we too would have done anything that our dad asked of us. Well except for those awful teen age years.

if you watch Cesar and then watch Super Nanny, their way of thinking is not so different. In both cases the dogs/children are out of control because the adult humans failed to provide clear leadership. it's as simple as that. once they instruct the parents on how to take back control, the dogs/children change their behavior.

As the old addage goes, don't keep repeating the same act and expect different results. In order for the situation or relationship to change, you first have to change yourself.

That is Cesar's magic secret.

I think this is so true, and again she does not believe in spanking/hitting, but she often uses physical force to carry the child to the time out room. I think children who rule the house are extreemly unhappy, and I think the same is true for dogs.

[QuickSilver]

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

Well I can tell you I do not believe progress is bad, and the good old days were much better, but I can also tell you that life experience has taught me that the experts often change their minds, not just expert opinion, but the individual experts. I don't think people are against new methods, as much as they are against someone saying that a method they have personally found successful is worthless and barbaric. I never see any posts criticizing other famous trainers, or methods, but I see plenty of posts where people criticize Cesar and his methods. I would never tell anyone, you have to believe in Cesar or you don't know anything, yet the reverse is often said here. It's not that we are pushing for Cesar; we are defending him.

I have seen people here say, "if you aren't pack leader, you cannot train." I've read many books that say if you take a dog's abused background into account, you are continuing its abuse. People make all kinds of statements, basically. I personally don't understand how everyone and their mother is shocked when someone comes on and says they rub their dog's nose in their waste (again, not something I would ever do), but they don't say boo about a trainer who has been filmed lifting dogs' feet off the ground with a prong collar. Honestly, I think a dog would rather smell poop - a lot of us try to get our dogs to stop eating it!

I get that people can present their ideas in a very rigid way, and that makes other people respond rigidly.

[JeanieK]

Originally Posted by QuickSilver

JeanieK, I guess I would compare how I feel about training with what you are doing with Partis. What if someone said to you, "yorkies don't need improvement, why fix what's not broken?" Actually, I'm sure many people HAVE said that to you. But there must be something pushing you to want to move forward in this area, explore new possibilities, etc.

I have said nothing about your beliefs on training. I am just saying that Cesar does not abuse dogs. That is what the original accusation was. I have never said that other methods are not effective or wrong, just that his are not abusive and they do work.

I have never worked with an aggresive dog, I aimagine in doing so all sorts of things can happen. You cannot isolate a dog agressive dog and claim his behavior has been corrected if he has not be brought before another dog.

Extreme cases take extreme measures. I have asked what others would have done in the same scenerio. I never got an answer, except thqat he should not have put the dog in that circumstance.

I do not know what your methods are or how many agressive dogs you have rehabilitated, or seen you work. I have seen Cesar work and seen his successes and know that his theory has worked for me, and I'm guessing that he hs handled one or two more red zone cases than you have.

You are probably very good at what you do, but so is Cesar, and I will never believe that he abuses dogs.

And if his shows are edited and cut and all mishaps end up on the editing room floor as yorkiemother indicated, why was the episode with the huskey aired on NGC.

But I do not believe in drugging dogs or children to alter their state of mind. Anyone can calm a drugged dog. I believe that wearing them out with exercise makes much more sense.

[JeanieK]

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

I think this is so true, and again she does not believe in spanking/hitting, but she often uses physical force to carry the child to the time out room. I think children who rule the house are extreemly unhappy, and I think the same is true for dogs.

I've often thought of raising children, and I guess this would also apply to dogs, like going to another planet where you don't know the rules and you get a guide that allows you to do anything you want, never tells you that you are doing anything wrong, then after 18 years, you are told that you have to be on your own now, and suddenly you have no idea of what is expected of you, everytime you do something it is wrong and you are always getting into trouble.

Or would you rather have a guide that explained things to you and made you do the right things and made sure that you were equipped to make it on your own.

Which guide would you rather have? Well the same is true for children.

[QuickSilver]

Okay, then, I feel that I have expressed my opinions on this, but I'm happy to repeat myself. In my non-expert opinion, I don't think Cesar has handled all that many truly extreme, aggressive cases. Lots of his training is fine. However, he often acts in a provocative way towards dogs, and then uses their reactions to prove his original contention. In several episodes in early seasons, I saw dogs make moves as if to bite him (always accompanied by ominous music). If those dogs had really been aggressive, they wouldn't have been posturing. Cesar was actually lucky that those dogs were much less aggressive than he claimed. I'm not even sure it's all Cesar -- I think the format of the show likes to emphasize the scariness of the dogs Cesar is working with and how they are THIS CLOSE to being put to sleep.

As I have also said, most of the owners Cesar works with are c-l-u-e-less. They know absolutely nothing about dogs, most have never taken their problem dogs to a class or a trainer. Who here on YT would complain about their horrifically aggressive yorkie, make no effort to train it, and then decide it should be PTS because it was such a problem? I mentioned a show where a dog rolled on its back in an effort to pacify Cesar and the owners thought the dog was taking a nap!

It is true I have much less experience with dogs than Cesar, and I would not be able to get the kind of results he does - not even close. Maybe in ten years. At the same time, you don't seem to give any weight to people who have studied dogs for years if their opinions don't mesh with your own, so I'm not sure why I should be held to a different standard.

[QuickSilver]

Okay, at this point I think I have (finally) said all I can say, and I'm going to try to keep my mouth shut.

I'm going to try to read all the links posted in this thread, and also watch the Cesar eppy on the Akita.

[kalina82]

i've been gone all weekend and finally finished reading through all the debating that has been going on. i would like to go back to the main topic and not the little off shoots.

I do have to say that i agree that Cesar does not abuse dogs. I just watched that video with the husky and i thought he did a great job. I've worked with dogs like that husky and what he did with the leash is exactly what i would have done as well. if he held that leash any other way that dog would have been all over him. that dog was jumping up at him and biting, if Cesar didn't shorten the leash and hold it as far away from him as possible and with out much room for the husky to move that dog would have gone for his face. Huskies are very snappy dogs. They bite without warning or reason sometimes. their jaws are quick and when they get you, they get you quick and usually multiple times. Some will say that if he didn't tap the dog to refocus his attention that the dog would never have turned on him. if it wasn't going to be that tap that turned him, it would have been something else.

I watched the video first with the sound off. I saw him stare and posture towards that other dog. Cesar tapped him to get his attention off the other dog...he didn't kick the husky. I also did not see the dog being jerked into the air. the dog was lunging up into the air. when the dog's four feet were on the ground the leash was taught but not suffocating. When you have a dog on a leash that is trying to jump and bite at you, what would you do with the leash? hold it loosely at your side or would you tighten up on it and hold it as far up and away from you as possible? He was not struggling for air, he was out of breath from the struggle. he was not blue from lack of air, i've seen dogs lose color from lack of oxygen. he took 2 or 3 large breaths and recovered quickly. Immediately when cesar had him on the ground he loosened the leash on his neck and probably would have liked to do sooner but the dog was too busy trying to bite him. Nor did he lose control of his bladder... it appears that it just rained because everything was damp. I don't agree with what that vet wrote at all.