# Fascinating E-collar Training Article Review



## DaniFani (Jan 24, 2013)

Just thought some here would enjoy this article. It's a review of a study done on ecollars. It was very interesting and informative to me. When I read about training techniques I always look at the success rates that the method has proven, not only that, but the TYPE of success....be it, difficult dogs, especially aggression issues, etc.... I find this to be wonderful....36 dogs treated....36 successes...there is no end-all-be-all training method. Most take a little bit from everything...and I am not saying everyone needs to use an ecollar....it's just another tool....just thought some would like to read this article. 

*How effective was this work? Well, in the abstract Tortora states that the program:

… resulted in complete and permanent elimination of aggression in all of the 36 dogs tested. In addition, it produced extremely extinction-resistant prosocial avoidance responses, significant increases in the dogs’ emotional stability, an avoidance-learning and safety acquisition response set, and improvements in measures of the dogs’ “carriage.”

Take a few minutes to let that sink in. If a study demonstrated similar results for clicker or food lure training it would be cited on tens of thousands of sites across the internet. The author would be the darling of popular dog magazines and a regular presenter at dog training conferences. Heck, I bet he’d even have his own television show – and (unlike another popular television dog trainer) there wouldn’t be a torch and pitchfork mob out to lynch him.*

See no evil. Read no evil. Cite no evil. | Smartdogs' Weblog


----------



## mego (Jan 27, 2013)

Very interesting! Shared this with a friend of mine who uses the e-collar and has one of the best trained wolf dogs I have ever seen


----------



## DaniFani (Jan 24, 2013)

Yeah, I just love it because the author did SO MUCH research and cited EVERYTHING that she could. It's rare to find reviews and research anymore that isn't incredibly biased and hugely based on feelings and emotions. My degree is in Organismal Biology, and I have had to do so many research projects I can't even count (mine were mainly in Zoology/Animal Behavior...mostly in Marine Mammals). So I always appreciate and share well thought out, researched, articles.


----------



## Muskeg (Jun 15, 2012)

Yes- thank you for this great article! I'm also a biologist and like to see research to back up theory.


----------



## gsdraven (Jul 8, 2009)

Not at all impressed. The main source for this person's blog is over 30 years old. We have learned so much about behavior, ethology and canine cognition in 30 years.

Most of the articles listed at the bottom say that the author of the blog either could only read the abstract or couldn't access the article at all so I'm not sure how they are being used as references.


----------



## JPF (Feb 5, 2011)

im not sure about research behind it, but i do know that the e collar has worked wonders for our dog. His life is much improved with the e collar: he can now be off leash without worries around other dogs (used to be dog reactive) and have more freedom.


----------



## DaniFani (Jan 24, 2013)

gsdraven said:


> Not at all impressed. The main source for this person's blog is over 30 years old. We have learned so much about behavior, ethology and canine cognition in 30 years.
> 
> Most of the articles listed at the bottom say that the author of the blog either could only read the abstract or couldn't access the article at all so I'm not sure how they are being used as references.


Meh, can't please everyone. I agree we have come a long way in understanding these things....doesn't change the fact that the methods helped save 36 reactive dogs..out of 36 dogs....that's 100% success..I don't care if it was 300 years ago...it's working still, to this day. 

Lots of people with reactive/aggressive dogs become exasperated with "positive only" training. Some even put their dogs down because of the guilt others have attached to ecollars/pinch collars, etc...FOR them. It's important for them to see all the options. Just putting this out there for people. Doesn't matter how old a study is to me, bottom line...it worked.

There are so many emotions that go along with "shock," like the article says, that some don't even consider it as an option. I haven't known anyone who goes straight to ecollars, most train as far as they can with treat luring and clickers. And that's great, and some dogs, NEVER need to have more than a verbal correction, and that's wonderful. I just posted this because plenty of people don't have the rin tin tin/lassie, only-needs-verbal-corrections, dog. They have highly reactive, fear aggressive, "problem" dogs, not dogs that just had an unstructured environment and need some guidance. 

This article may help some. It is a published scientific study, conducted with controls, variables, and the results are published STILL in psychological journals...it isn't someone spouting off their anecdotal experiences they had with their pet in their backyard. It's purpose was to scientifically test a training theory, on "difficult/problem" dogs, and it did, successfully. Just info for those looking for something outside of what they are trying that isn't working. A lot of the trainers nowadays only share success stories they had with "easy" dogs, and those that have "harder" problem-dogs, are kind of left to their own defenses, feeling guilty if they go to any negative-stigma-based tools.

J,
Glad you found something that worked for your reactive pup. It makes the world of a difference in your life as well as your dog's, I'm sure. Whatever we need to try, tools, methods, etc...(used appropriately and properly) to make that happen, is worth examining. imho


----------



## gsdraven (Jul 8, 2009)

DaniFani said:


> doesn't change the fact that the methods helped save 36 reactive dogs..out of 36 dogs....that's 100% success..I don't care if it was 300 years ago...it's working still, to this day.


There are a lot of reasons why what they did worked to help reactive dogs least of which was the use of the e-collar but that's a different discussion. 

What I disliked about the blog post was the author citing all of these studies and articles as references when she didn't actually get to read the majority of them and therefore they can't be solid reference to back her opinion.


----------



## LouCastle (Sep 25, 2006)

gsdraven said:


> Not at all impressed. The main source for this person's blog is over 30 years old. We have learned so much about behavior, ethology and canine cognition in 30 years.


This thread is about the first study that was mentioned on the blog, not the opinion of the blogger. 

The age of the study has nothing to do with the outcome. It shows that of the 36 dogs in the study, 100% of them responded to the Ecollar training. How does learning that has occurred _"in [the last] 30 years"_ in the fields of _"behavior, ethology and canine cognition"_ affect this outcome? 



gsdraven said:


> Most of the articles listed at the bottom say that the author of the blog either could only read the abstract or couldn't access the article at all so I'm not sure how they are being used as references.


This isn't a scientific study, it's a blog. Blogs don't need "references."



gsdraven said:


> There are a lot of reasons why what they did worked to help reactive dogs least of which was the use of the e-collar but that's a different discussion.


Since you've already taken us off topic, I think it's appropriate to discuss it here. Pray tell, what are those _"lot of reasons"_ why the Ecollar worked on the reactive dogs? I'm especially interested in the _"least of which was the use of the Ecollar"_ part. It seems to me that MOST OF WHICH would be the Ecollar since that's what was used in the study. 



gsdraven said:


> What I disliked about the blog post was the author citing all of these studies and articles as references when she didn't actually get to read the majority of them and therefore they can't be solid reference to back her opinion.


Most people who form opinions against the Ecollar haven't even read one abstract, much less an entire study. Instead they rely on emotions, their own personal experience of getting a shock, either from static electricity, from the wall socket or a lamp, or they take the word of people who, almost universally, have little or no personal experience with modern Ecollars or how modern versions of the tool can be used. How come it's OK for anti Ecollar opinions to be based on emotions, myth, and sometimes outright lies, but for a pro−Ecollar opinion you require that someone read "entire studies?" Seems like a double standard to me.


----------



## DaniFani (Jan 24, 2013)

gsdraven said:


> There are a lot of reasons why what they did worked to help reactive dogs least of which was the use of the e-collar but that's a different discussion.
> 
> What I disliked about the blog post was the author citing all of these studies and articles as references when she didn't actually get to read the majority of them and therefore they can't be solid reference to back her opinion.


This is the perfect place to discuss this, that's why I posted the review. Curious others opinions, so instead of the general, obligatory, response, please humor me. You don't like that the author of the blog formed opinions from summaries, but you yourself formed a complete opinion from reading the summary of this study. Not only an opinion but claiming that the success had little to do with ecollars, when the entire study was on ecollars....


----------



## gsdraven (Jul 8, 2009)

DaniFani said:


> You don't like that the author of the blog formed opinions from summaries


No, the author of the blog is free to form opinions out of thin air if she pleases but don't claim sources you haven't actually read.



DaniFani said:


> but you yourself formed a complete opinion from reading the summary of this study. Not only an opinion but claiming that the success had little to do with ecollars, when the entire study was on ecollars....


I've read more than a summary of the study. I've read up to and including the section on safety training and am making my way through the rest. And I didn't state any opinion on the study except that the safety training could easily have been done without the use of an e-collar and that the training itself and not merely the use of the e-collar is the basis for the behavior modification (which is really what the study was about, not the e-collar).

For the record, I also never stated an opinion on e-collars and yet it was assumed that I have some emotional bias against them. Not true. I don't prefer to use them in my training but have no agenda for or against their use.


----------



## LouCastle (Sep 25, 2006)

gsdraven said:


> No, the author of the blog is free to form opinions out of thin air if she pleases but don't claim sources you haven't actually read.


I've seen dozens of discussions here on the Ecollar. Never have I seen you make such a statement when the opinion of the poster is anti-Ecollar. It still seems as if there a double standard. 



gsdraven said:


> And I didn't state any opinion on the study except that the safety training could easily have been done without the use of an e-collar


The study was not a comparison between training that uses the Ecollar and other tools/methods. I don't think that you have any idea what tools/methods would have worked with the dogs in the study. 



gsdraven said:


> and that the training itself and not merely the use of the e-collar is the basis for the behavior modification (which is really what the study was about, not the e-collar).


What? The study was done specifically so that the use of the Ecollar for this issue, could be examined. 



gsdraven said:


> For the record, I also never stated an opinion on e-collars and yet it was assumed that I have some emotional bias against them. Not true. I don't prefer to use them in my training but have no agenda for or against their use.


Then why the double standard on how people form opinions about them? 

It also appears that you missed some of my questions. Earlier I asked this, _"How does learning that has occurred 'in [the last] 30 years' in the fields of 'behavior, ethology and canine cognition' affect this outcome?"_ 

And this, _"...what are those 'lot of reasons' why the Ecollar worked on the reactive dogs? I'm especially interested in the 'least of which was the use of the Ecollar' part."_


----------



## gsdraven (Jul 8, 2009)

LouCastle said:


> The study was done specifically so that the use of the Ecollar for this issue, could be examined.


Very first line from the study summary: 

"This study sought to identify the behavioral characteristics and appropriate treatment of a form of instrumental aggression in companion dogs, herein recognized as avoidance motivated
aggression."

and the last line from the summary

"All in all, the data seem to suggest that safety training may create in dogs a sense of control over environmental stressors. By teaching the dogs a behaviorally balanced
battery of prosocial "coping" responses, they may be developing the canine counterpart of "self-efficacy" or "courage." It is suggested that this cognitive modification mayprovide the antithesis of "learned helplessness" and may be of prime importance to the success and stability of the results."​

NO mention of the e-collar. Have _you_ read it? Or even the summary?



LouCastle said:


> It also appears that you missed some of my questions.


Didn't miss a thing.


----------



## DaniFani (Jan 24, 2013)

gsdraven said:


> No, the author of the blog is free to form opinions out of thin air if she pleases but don't claim sources you haven't actually read.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Response in bold.


----------



## jafo220 (Mar 16, 2013)

Just throwing this out there, but I like threads like this. I have not read the article but to me there are owners of dogs out there that may benefit from information like this that they would not normally be privy to. 

From reading the responses, I sense there are some who just don't believe in ecollar training. I myself would only try this with the help of an experienced trainer for one and my dog would have to be really bad off attitude wise for me to venture into this type of training. 

I myself have nothing against ecollar training as long as it is done in a responsable none abusive manor. For now I'll continue with positive training but if it were necessary I wouldn't hesitate ecollar training my dog.


----------



## DaniFani (Jan 24, 2013)

jafo220 said:


> Just throwing this out there, but I like threads like this. I have not read the article but to me there are owners of dogs out there that may benefit from information like this that they would not normally be privy to.
> 
> From reading the responses, I sense there are some who just don't believe in ecollar training. I myself would only try this with the help of an experienced trainer for one and my dog would have to be really bad off attitude wise for me to venture into this type of training.
> 
> I myself have nothing against ecollar training *as long as it is done in a responsable none abusive manor*. For now I'll continue with positive training but if it were necessary I wouldn't hesitate ecollar training my dog.


I think we can all agree with this statement in regards to ANY tool used in training. And thank you for your response, it's exactly the reason I posted the link/article/review. There are options upon options when it comes to training, and every dog is different. Whatever works for you and your dog, that makes you both have a healthy, stable, long-lasting bond/relationship, that's fantastic in my eyes. I am just saddened when I see someone (general someone) in real life or on this forum who is so caught up in using one and only one method, and in turn both the dog AND the owner suffers because of it (be it long lasting anxiety, fear, aggression, etc...), and the owner never tried other options because of silly mis-placed emotions, feelings, stigmas, and "fad" attitudes.

I myself am learning so much from all the trainers, helpers, sports people, etc...that I have been honored to be mentored by. I am by no means an expert, I just love finding research, experiments, and proven methods, and then discussing those methods with others. I don't think anyone can be "done" learning about dog training, I don't think anyone "knows it all," and that's exciting and fun to be a part of.


----------



## gsdraven (Jul 8, 2009)

DaniFani said:


> You can NOT without a doubt say that the training would have worked without the ecollar....if you can, well kudos to you for being able to conduct and conclude a scientific experiment completely in your head...let me know how publishing that goes.... The *safety training occurred, was proofed, and then the ecollar used to clarify the command* and make it reliable, the whole while building the confidence and "fixing" the dog, through the big picture...you can't pick and choose what YOU think matters in an experiment, and throw out a key component just because YOU think so. Saying that the training could have been done without the ecollar is so ignorant...imo. You have NO proof of that.


I can say without a doubt that you can do the type of training used in the study without the use of an e-collar. I've done it. I've worked with other trainers that have done it. And I've read books, articles, watched videos and attended seminars where it's been done. And I can discuss it without getting emotional or attacking someone personally. 

I didn't throw anything out of the study. I took the extra step to actually read the full study, think on it and form my own opinion. What my additional knowledge of the full study coupled with my experience tells me is that the e-collar was not the saving grace for those dogs. 

The e-collar is ONE tool/method used to "clarify the command and make it reliable". If that's the one you prefer and trust, good for you (general you, not YOU) but you (general you, not YOU) cannot discount other methods that you simply don't like or don't fit the agenda. 

Nowhere did I mention positive only methods or suggest that those were the way to go much less the only option. And, I find that the people who scream the loudest about "positive only" training are those that don't actually understand it... much like the people who scream the loudest against the use of chokes/prongs/e-collars.

But, that's the beauty of an internet forum. You get lots of different opinions, experiences and levels of knowledge and get to pick and choose which fits your style best and what to ignore.


----------



## jafo220 (Mar 16, 2013)

gsdraven said:


> I can say without a doubt that you can do the type of training used in the study without the use of an e-collar. I've done it. I've worked with other trainers that have done it. And I've read books, articles, watched videos and attended seminars where it's been done. And I can discuss it without getting emotional or attacking someone personally.
> 
> I didn't throw anything out of the study. I took the extra step to actually read the full study, think on it and form my own opinion. What my additional knowledge of the full study coupled with my experience tells me is that the e-collar was not the saving grace for those dogs.
> 
> ...


 
I am an avid ally of what ever training works for a particular dog within acceptable uncruel unabusive reason. 

I think you are also missing the whole point of this thread. It's clearly to offer other options to owners who are otherwise overwhelmed with a hard to train dog that they may not realise exists. I don't think this thread is here to champion ecollar training, just offering some data to support it if it's a necessary viable option.


----------



## gsdraven (Jul 8, 2009)

jafo220 said:


> I think you are also missing the whole point of this thread. It's clearly to offer other options to owners who are otherwise overwhelmed with a hard to train dog that they may not realise exists.


I didn't miss it at all. In fact, I've also said there are many options which should be relative to the discussion if it is in fact about what you say it is.

But the author of the blog and others have missed the point of the study that was done. That's fine. The study does not promote the e-collar at all but some people need it to. Again, everyone is free to draw their own conclusions and not be attacked for it. 

For me, the conclusion was that training (regardless of tool used) where the dog gained confidence and certain coping skills was needed to modify their aggression (in the study, specifically called avoidance aggression); the e-collar was actually referenced very little and was not a focus. How you go about that training can vary.


----------



## katdog5911 (Sep 24, 2011)

Don't really care if the e collar helped 36 reactive dogs or 3600 reactive dogs. It is working for MY dog. I started out with positive only training...it works great with a lot of things I train my dog to do. Did not help with the reactivity at all. Or very little. The e collar is absolutely giving me a reliable recall, better attention, and less reactivity. I also use a prong, which has helped but the e collar is a lot easier on my neck/back issues and the prong limits me to on leash only. Someone else training my dog may have had better success with different methods, but for me, the e collar is a miracle.


----------



## PupperLove (Apr 10, 2010)

I agree with Kathy. It has done the same for my dog. When he goes over his threshold, which takes VERY little in almost any situation involving other dogs, it is near impossible for me to break that focus- that fear of the other dog- even if it is the most docile creature on earth. If the focus is not broken, it results in snapping at other dogs which easily can turn into a fight. When we go out with our friends who have dogs, he wears his e-collar. He overcomes his fear much faster and gets to play and experience freedom he otherwise cold not around other dogs and with us. *He thinks things through instead of simply reacting,* and in turn, calms down and gets into play mode much faster than he does without it. In my experience, with a reactive dog with such a low threshold, thinking things through completely goes out the window unless he is constantly, CONSTANTLY exposed to the same stimuli over, and over, and over. Sometimes that isn't feasible. It is tiring. Yes, we do training and we socialize as much as we can, but the e-collar is easier- it works, he's not afraid of his collar.

I am not sure what methods they used in the study, but it really helps my dog overcome things. When he sees his collar he gets excited, because he knows he is about to have fun!

**and yes, we do clicker/positive training too, it is a lot of fun!!


----------



## LouCastle (Sep 25, 2006)

gsdraven said:


> Very first line from the study summary: "This study sought to identify the behavioral characteristics and appropriate treatment of a form of instrumental aggression in companion dogs, herein recognized as avoidance motivated aggression."
> 
> and the last line from the summary
> 
> ...


I read the study when it was released. Tortora is well known to scholars of the Ecollar. He's written three books on the topic and was employed by the largest maker of the tools. You can read about him on the IACP (International Association of Canine Professonals) website. CLICK HERE. Why you think it's necessary or even appropriate that a summary detail what tools/methods were used, is a mystery. Since there were no other tools/methods used in the study, it's obvious that they were investigating the Ecollar for this methodology. 

Earlier I wrote, _"It also appears that you missed some of my questions."_ 



gsdraven said:


> Didn't miss a thing.


You made several statements that raised several questions. Some reason that you won't answer them? Of course you're not required to, but if you won't support them with at least, an opinion, much less some facts, there's no reason that anyone should accept them. 

Earlier you wrote,


gsdraven said:


> For the record, I also never stated an opinion on e-collars and yet it was assumed that I have some emotional bias against them. Not true. I don't prefer to use them in my training but *have no agenda for or against their use. * [Emphasis Added]


It seems that your avoidance of my very simple questions, put the lie to this part of your remarks.


----------



## LouCastle (Sep 25, 2006)

DaniFani said:


> You can NOT without a doubt say that the training would have worked without the ecollar....if you can, well kudos to you for being able to conduct and conclude a scientific experiment completely in your head...let me know how publishing that goes....


Gotta agree here for the most part. What gsdraven said is nothing but opinion while what was done in the study was nothing but proof. 



DaniFani said:


> I have yet to see a study of 30+ REACTIVE dogs taken on positive only training, that were "fixed" and ended up with reliable commands.


And I doubt that you ever will. 



DaniFani said:


> I HAVE seen lots of reactive/FA/DA dog's owners go to positive only training, spend THOUSANDS of dollars on the training, only to be told, whelp, it's in the genetics...nothing to be done but manage the environment. The dog is left to live out it's life in fear, anxiety, and stress.


I have personal experience with just such a dog. The owner was well versed on the so−called "kinder gentler methods and had worked with the dog for almost two years and had met with little success. I worked one session with the Ecollar, doing nothing but teaching the recall and the dog went from literally trying to kill me to climbing into my lap and licking my face. You can read about it by CLICKING HERE. Also on my site is the story of the rehabilitation of a fear−aggressive dog that was done by someone who had never before used an Ecollar for this, in two evenings of work. CLICK HERE for that story.


----------



## LouCastle (Sep 25, 2006)

gsdraven said:


> I can say without a doubt that you can do the type of training used in the study without the use of an e-collar. I've done it. I've worked with other trainers that have done it. And I've read books, articles, watched videos and attended seminars where it's been done. And I can discuss it without getting emotional or attacking someone personally.


Yes of course you can. Please point us to a scientific study that shows these things occurring with tools/methods other than the Ecollar that was used in the Tortora study. 



gsdraven said:


> I didn't throw anything out of the study. I took the extra step to actually read the full study, think on it and form my own opinion. What my additional knowledge of the full study coupled with my experience tells me is that the e-collar was not the saving grace for those dogs.


Well, the Ecollar was used in the study and of the 36 dogs, ALL OF THEM came around. Again, can you show us something similar for any other tool or method? 



gsdraven said:


> The e-collar is ONE tool/method used to "clarify the command and make it reliable". If that's the one you prefer and trust, good for you (general you, not YOU) but you (general you, not YOU) cannot discount other methods that you simply don't like or don't fit the agenda.


I eagerly await your posting of other scientific studies that used other tools/methods used for this and that had the same degree of success. 



gsdraven said:


> And, I find that the people who scream the loudest about "positive only" training are those that don't actually understand it...


Am I _"screaming the loudest about 'positive only' training?" _ [Which BTW is impossible, but that's another discussion]. I don't think so. I understand it quite well. I've been using it for decades. But I know that it has little application for the timely rehabilitation of fear aggressive dogs.


----------



## LouCastle (Sep 25, 2006)

gsdraven said:


> But the author of the blog and others have missed the point of the study that was done. That's fine. The study does not promote the e-collar at all but some people need it to. Again, everyone is free to draw their own conclusions and not be attacked for it.


It doesn't need to promote the Ecollar. It was used in the study and that's plenty enough. Please direct us to a scientific study using ANY other tool/method that had such a 100% rehabilitation rate. 



gsdraven said:


> For me, the conclusion was that training (regardless of tool used) where the dog gained confidence and certain coping skills was needed to modify their aggression (in the study, specifically called avoidance aggression); the e-collar was actually referenced very little and was not a focus. How you go about that training can vary.


I'll disagree about as strongly as one can. The crux of the study was that the Ecollar was the only tool that was used to rehab these dogs. People who don't like that particular tool tell us how they make the dogs afraid, how they ruin relationships and how they're abusive. In this study, NONE of those outcomes occurred.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

Question out of curiosity...some say that my dog might have been possibly trained the wrong way with the e collar, which is possible. Is it possible for the e collar to cause more anxiety or stress in a dog? This might sound silly, but I put one on my dog, didn't even use it and he got very bad poop within the same day. I have also noticed that if he is over excited this happens. Another instance would be if kids are over and they leave to even take the garbage out, he runs back and forth to the doors, I take him out and he has loose stool. Back to the e collar...he actually got his off, wants nothing to do with it, but once its off everything goes back to normal after a day or so...is any of this possible?


----------



## Merciel (Apr 25, 2013)

llombardo said:


> Is it possible for the e collar to cause more anxiety or stress in a dog? This might sound silly, but I put one on my dog, didn't even use it and he got very bad poop within the same day.


Yes.

The e-collar, like any other tool that relies on positive punishment, is easy to misuse out of ignorance and/or anger. Many people do. If your dog has learned to associate the collar with fear or pain, he might well have a stress response that could cause loose stool.


----------



## DaniFani (Jan 24, 2013)

Lee, great stories attached to your links.

Question: I have read a few of theories as to WHY the ecollar seems to work so well with reactive/fearful dogs. In your link you say that the dog knows that if it holds the sit, or holds the stand, it knows it won't receive the correction. But WHY does this work in changing the dog's overall "carriage," (as the study proved)? I know we can't read the mind of the dog, just curious your thoughts on this? Is it just that the dog no longer has the option for flight/fight, so it no longer stresses about that? What makes the dog so much more relaxed, overall? I mean, my example of the dog that was EXTREMELY fearful, and your example of the SAR trainers dog, why does the dog's entire demeanor seem to change(The SAR woman's dog now running up to people nuzzling them, and the dog I saw who was seeking people out for attention as well, when before he urinated and growled at the site of anyone approaching), just by the fact that the dog no longer chooses/has the option of flight/fight?

Hope my questions make sense, sometimes I can't articulate all my thoughts well lol.


----------



## DaniFani (Jan 24, 2013)

llombardo said:


> Question out of curiosity...some say that my dog might have been possibly trained the wrong way with the e collar, which is possible. Is it possible for the e collar to cause more anxiety or stress in a dog? This might sound silly, but I put one on my dog, didn't even use it and he got very bad poop within the same day. I have also noticed that if he is over excited this happens. Another instance would be if kids are over and they leave to even take the garbage out, he runs back and forth to the doors, I take him out and he has loose stool. Back to the e collar...he actually got his off, wants nothing to do with it, but once its off everything goes back to normal after a day or so...is any of this possible?


Hopefully Lou will chime in, but I am wondering if you could give a little background on how the dog was initially trained on it?


----------



## DaniFani (Jan 24, 2013)

Merciel said:


> Yes.
> 
> The e-collar, like any other tool that relies on positive punishment, is easy to misuse out of ignorance and/or anger. Many people do. If your dog has learned to associate the collar with fear or pain, he might well have a stress response that could cause loose stool.


I agree, any and all training methods can be done wrong.

Merciel, I have a question for you. I watched your video of you trying to do the AKC trial with your dog that has fear issues. If you knew, without a doubt (obviously perfect world), that a week of training that dog with an experienced ecollar trainer would help your dog to overcome his fear, that the dog would be a completely different, relaxed, "happier" dog, would you consider it?

In that thread you talked about how you left the dog outside and a flap of a flag and car door (can't remember the exact harmless thing) caused the dog to cower in fear, hiding and shaking....if there were possibly other options to relieve your dog of that fear/anxiety/stress...would you consider it? You don't have to answer, I know these are personal questions. I only ask because you adamently answered llombardo, stating that absolutely ecollars can cause negative things to happen (I agree wholeheartedly, btw, if they are used inappropriately). But it leaves me wondering, if a dog, like your boy, is tortured by everyday, mundane things, and a study comes along, showing that there may be another option to completely cure your dog of this(only if he was an appropriate candidate), would you consider it? And the idea that you (general you) would not consider it...is that not "just as bad", as someone who misuses a tool? I mean, by the owner not choosing to even CONSIDER any other option, the dog is living in a constant state of fear, anxiety, and stress...scared of everything, fight/flight a constant thought in it's mind...I don't mean this directed at you, you have not said whether you would consider it...I only pose the question because it fits into my initial reason for posting this thread. So that people with FA/DA/HA dogs, see that there ARE other options, that have been proven to work, in this case-study, 100%.


----------



## Merciel (Apr 25, 2013)

What makes you think I haven't tried? 

edit: I really don't want to get into this discussion because it's going to end up getting long and emotional and I genuinely don't have time for that right now; I need to be working on other projects.

In my very early days with Pongu, I started out using positive punishment. It didn't work. It didn't work for him and it didn't work for me. It caused us some serious setbacks and badly damaged our relationship. That's why I ended up going another way.

Different approaches will work for different dogs and handlers. This isn't one that works for me or my dog. I am not arguing that it can't be useful for other teams, but it's not right for us.


----------



## DaniFani (Jan 24, 2013)

Merciel said:


> What makes you think I haven't tried?


Haha, To answer your question, I thought you hadn't, only because of our previous thread/posts back and forth. In that thread you said, *"I won't rule out as a theoretical possibility that there exists a dog somewhere in the world that I would have to use a prong collar to reach. But I haven't encountered that dog yet, and I've trained a fair number of them -- more than some people on this board, fewer than others -- all across the spectrum of temperaments, from ultrasoft spaniels who'd wilt at a glance to pitties who wouldn't bat an eyelash at having a ton of bricks dropped on their heads."* I guess I assumed if you said this about a prong you probably haven't used an ecollar. 

Edit: Just read your edit...I understand, just thought it was pertinent to the original topic, because the whole point of posting was to show options to people who may/may not consider or know about them. That's all. Have a nice night.


----------



## Merciel (Apr 25, 2013)

In that discussion I was talking about obedience/competition training, not behavioral rehab, anyway. I honestly wasn't even thinking of rehab in the furthest corner of that mind during that exchange.

Like I said, I recognize that this can be a useful tool for some dogs and some owners. For a variety of reasons (which I posted in another thread somewhere, but they boil down to me being a bad person), it would not be appropriate FOR ME as a tool to train a competition dog. I recognize that other people can use it successfully. I'm not one of them.

And it absolutely would not work for me as a rehab tool. After Pongu, I would never even try.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

Merciel said:


> Yes.
> 
> The e-collar, like any other tool that relies on positive punishment, is easy to misuse out of ignorance and/or anger. Many people do. If your dog has learned to associate the collar with fear or pain, he might well have a stress response that could cause loose stool.


The trainer thought he was trained wrong by the way he acts. I have talked to Lou about that. I am positive the collar caused his loose stool. Tested my theory twice, but never really said anything because I wasn't sure something like that could cause it, but now I am convinced.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

DaniFani said:


> Hopefully Lou will chime in, but I am wondering if you could give a little background on how the dog was initially trained on it?


I got him at the shelter, so no background. I just have what the trainer is thinking and I have talked to Lou about it and it was decided that its training and not genetic. But if I can't put the collar on him for any reconditioning because it stresses him out, then that is completely out and back to positive with toy/food reward..he is both food and toy driven. He had loose stools for a long time and now I'm wondering if that had to do with the prong to. He is completely fine when I use a flat or a harness. He had to be really young when the prong or e collar was used...maybe 4-6 months old at best?


----------



## DaniFani (Jan 24, 2013)

Merciel said:


> In that discussion I was talking about obedience/competition training, not behavioral rehab, anyway. I honestly wasn't even thinking of rehab in the furthest corner of that mind during that exchange.
> 
> Like I said, I recognize that this can be a useful tool for some dogs and some owners. For a variety of reasons (which I posted in another thread somewhere, but they boil down to me being a bad person), it would not be appropriate FOR ME as a tool to train a competition dog. I recognize that other people can use it successfully. I'm not one of them.
> 
> And it absolutely would not work for me as a rehab tool. After Pongu, I would never even try.


What's the difference between rehab and obedience? This whole experiment is teaching obedience to FA/DA/HA, and through the obedience comes rehabilitation. I just don't see a difference in "rehabing" vs teaching basic obedience(all the sports require basic obedience). Imo they are 100% intertwined...this study was simply teaching obedience using these methods/theories. The reactive dogs cannot perform their basic obedience when faced with fear, whatever the particular dog's fear is, fight/flight/defense etc...kicks in and it overwhelms their desire to perform obedience. So they were taught basic obedience through these methods, and from that comes rehab.

Everyone has different methods. If someone(general someone) can't trust themselves or isn't comfortable to use a tool properly or be trained properly in using it (because the tool certainly isn't going to abuse a dog all on it's lonesome), then I, of course, would encourage them to find something they can trust themselves and be comfortable with. 

Like I said before, I posted this study to show an example of a highly-negatively-stigmatized-tool, being used very successfully in training SEVERAL reactive dogs. And maybe bringing the tool into a different light than some viewed it. Then several others chimed in with their anecdotal stories of it "saving" their reactive dogs. Which is wonderful for them, and further supporting the experiment, anecdotally. 

A handler(general) not being comfortable with themselves handling a tool is very different than someone who fears it, but doesn't understand why they fear it or how it works.

And I'm only replying because you replied


----------



## DaniFani (Jan 24, 2013)

llombardo said:


> I got him at the shelter, so no background. I just have what the trainer is thinking and I have talked to Lou about it and it was decided that its training and not genetic. But if I can't put the collar on him for any reconditioning because it stresses him out, then that is completely out and back to positive with toy/food reward..he is both food and toy driven. He had loose stools for a long time and now I'm wondering if that had to do with the prong to. He is completely fine when I use a flat or a harness. He had to be really young when the prong or e collar was used...maybe 4-6 months old at best?


Jeesh, that's young, glad Lou is helping you out. I am still learning all about everything myself, but I am curious to hear how it all turns out for you. Are you able to get reliable obedience from the drive over food/toy? If so, that's great! I have a softer GSD, and I don't need much more than verbal/body posturing for most things...and as long as I build him up, his toy drive is decent. I can teach new things to him through reward/play drive. Sometimes he needs a prong during the proofing/reliability stage, I needed to use a prong before I got a super reliable down out of him, but the corrections were very very light...same with my corgi, but the corgi is harder and the corrections were a little harder than the GSD...lol, my 35 lb corgi is harder than my 80lb GSD.

I only ask because I am wondering why you want to recondition the ecollar/prong. Do you have a plan? Again, don't mean to put you on the spot, just curious and like to hear what others are doing.


----------



## Merciel (Apr 25, 2013)

DaniFani said:


> What's the difference between rehab and obedience?


My definitions:

Rehab is more about teaching the dog how to cope with the world.

Obedience is about getting specific behaviors on cue.

They reinforce each other, obviously, but (in my view) they're different things.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

DaniFani said:


> Jeesh, that's young, glad Lou is helping you out. I am still learning all about everything myself, but I am curious to hear how it all turns out for you. Are you able to get reliable obedience from the drive over food/toy? If so, that's great! I have a softer GSD, and I don't need much more than verbal/body posturing for most things...and as long as I build him up, his toy drive is decent. I can teach new things to him through reward/play drive. Sometimes he needs a prong during the proofing/reliability stage, I needed to use a prong before I got a super reliable down out of him, but the corrections were very very light...same with my corgi, but the corgi is harder and the corrections were a little harder than the GSD...lol, my 35 lb corgi is harder than my 80lb GSD.
> 
> I only ask because I am wondering why you want to recondition the ecollar/prong. Do you have a plan? Again, don't mean to put you on the spot, just curious and like to hear what others are doing.


Lou thinks that he can be reconditioned with the ecollar, I'm thinking not if it makes him stressed. He has had it hard enough. He was in the shelter locked in a cage for a couple months. He is my "wild child", but I have to consider the fact that he was never able to be a puppy in there. I've had him just over a month and he is just now starting to lay down more. He is constantly moving and just wants to play. I have no idea how I am going to teach him a down/stay or a sit/stay when he can't sit still. I can't even get good pictures of him because he's always moving. He is a puppy in a big body. My best guess is that someone got him and he was way to much to handle and they didn't do anything with him, but thought an ecollar and prong would train him. This is what I'm observing. Since I'm not able to use the prong/e collar at this point, it will have to be his drive, both food and toy. That along with the bond he's forming with me might just work. His only issue other then no training, no manners, not knowing that he has a butt, is reacting to dogs outside of the home. He loves all three of my other dogs, never once a problem, so I am confident that I can train him to ignore and/or greet dogs the right way..right now he would get right in there face and that could be a problem for him. My plan is to keep working with him every day until he is where he needs to be. His temperament(other then this dog thing) is outstanding. He doesn't bark at people in general(he did once and it was a creepy man) and he loves kids. He doesn't have a clue what to do when someone knocks, he follows the other dogs but no barking. And he has gotten a lot better with the cats.


----------



## ugavet2012 (Apr 15, 2010)

Merciel said:


> Yes.
> 
> The e-collar, like any other tool that relies on positive punishment, is easy to misuse out of ignorance and/or anger. Many people do. If your dog has learned to associate the collar with fear or pain, he might well have a stress response that could cause loose stool.


It doesn't have to be used in such a way that relies on positive punishment, I believe Lou's method relies on negative reinforcement (based off the 4 quadrants of operant conditioning), which works well when done correctly. A good dog trainer should be able to use all 4 types of conditioning to get the most out of training, since one method doesn't fit all.


----------



## Merciel (Apr 25, 2013)

ugavet2012 said:


> It doesn't have to be used in such a way that relies on positive punishment


Certainly it _can_ be used in more sophisticated ways. I don't think I've ever argued otherwise. But if the dog's crapping his pants when the collar goes on, even before the owner does anything, then in that dog's individual experience, it probably wasn't.


----------



## Merciel (Apr 25, 2013)

Whoops, I ran out of time to make edits on the previous post, so I guess I'll just put this in a follow-up:

I realized a little more than ten minutes after the fact that I probably misread what you were trying to say.

Yeah, I dunno, in the context of this discussion I think that's almost a distinction without a difference. The purpose of the e-collar is to cause an aversive sensation. The intensity of the aversive sensation may vary, and the timing of its removal may vary (hence the negative reinforcement/positive punishment distinction and my initial failure to grasp what I think you were actually going for), but the fundamental purpose of the tool is to cause an aversive sensation. On some level, you're using the collar to inflict pain. That's what it does. How much you inflict, and when you remove it, will vary based on the training protocol. But basically, that's what it does. And that's very easy to misuse.

So you are correct that it was inaccurate for me to say that it "relies on positive punishment," because you're right, it can also be used with different timing to train via negative reinforcement instead. Probably what I should have said is that it "creates an aversive stimulus."

But regardless of the jargon, the ultimate effect is still something that a clumsy, ignorant, or frustrated person could easily misuse to result in a dog that craps its pants at being put in the collar.


----------



## DaniFani (Jan 24, 2013)

Merciel said:


> Whoops, I ran out of time to make edits on the previous post, so I guess I'll just put this in a follow-up:
> 
> I realized a little more than ten minutes after the fact that I probably misread what you were trying to say.
> 
> ...


I guess to me the bolded part is such a "duh" thing about training. ANY training tool or method can be abused. And in my opinion (not directed at M, just speaking generally), keeping a dog LIVING in a highly stressful, anxiety-ridden, state of mind because the handle "can't handle" or "won't consider" ANY other options than the one that isn't working...WHATEVER it may be....is, imo, just as abusive as abusing an actual tool....just my two cents. An owner who is simply not educated in the different methods/tools and how they work and have been proven to help certain situations, well....that's why I posted the study/article...because everyone with a PROBLEM dog, should know the different point of views for using tools/methods, and hopefully explore them all.

I said "problem" dog, because I think most, if not all here in the discussion, use positive-only training over everything else in the beginning, ESPECIALLY to teach a dog something completely foreign/new. Why wouldn't you?! In a sterile environment, with whatever treat/toy the dog loooves, most dogs can learn (especially if you know how to "pump" a dog up) anything. And sometimes, and every dog is different, that is enough for the dog to learn it. But for a lot of dogs to become super reliable (I can say "platz" while my dog is mid-JUMP/RUN, and my dogs will literally LAND, excitedly, into a "down." And wait for my command, and as soon as I say "break" they excitedly continue what they are doing...the most important safety-command, imo), the dog is harder/fearful/etc...and that emotion/trait overcomes the drive for the food/toy, and they need something else. Otherwise it will never be reliable. 

I also think Lou brings up a good point with the amount of TIME these methods can work in. The stories he posted are perfect examples, fearful/FA dogs that were anxious and stressful, and in ONE or TWO sessions, were completely different dogs. Some people (and dogs for that matter--in Lou's second example the dog was 4-days from euthanasia) don't have the time to use longer/questionable-success, methods. And honestly, why would you keep a dog in such a distressed mental state, for such a long time (his one example the SAR trainer had been trying positive-only training, was applying the method correctly, and she had been doing it for 2 YEARS, with minimal/unreliable, success)if there is another faster/proven-reliablilty, method? But I think maybe that's another discussion? 

Hopefully someone with a FA dog, who's exasperated and at the end of their rope...will find this or hear other success stories and maybe find some hope in a new option ;-)


----------



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

Conditioning a dog to the e collar is easy. Even one that makes negative associations with it. Simply put the collar on every time you go out for a walk, do a training session, play ball etc. Do this over a couple weeks and your dog will quickly pick up collar = fun and get excited when you bring it out. Sure at first thereay be some loose stool, just ignore it and carry on he will adapt. Have personally used the ecollar on a highly reactive dog and she was able to experience the world off leash with it on.


----------



## DaniFani (Jan 24, 2013)

Blitzkrieg1 said:


> Conditioning a dog to the e collar is easy. Even one that makes negative associations with it. Simply put the collar on every time you go out for a walk, do a training session, play ball etc. Do this over a couple weeks and your dog will quickly pick up collar = fun and get excited when you bring it out. Sure at first thereay be some loose stool, just ignore it and carry on he will adapt. Have personally used the ecollar on a highly reactive dog and she was able to experience the world off leash with it on.


Love it when I read/hear advice, and think"...duh...how come I didn't think that!?"  Hope Llombardo sees it, I know it sounds simpler than it is (will probably take quite a few walks/days/weeks to re-condition and get-over the fear), yet it's such a simple solution.

Llombardo, sounds like your guy is going to be a bit of a wild man lol. However, you've only had him for a month. At the shelter I volunteer at we always tell people it can take a while for the dog to truly show you his personality, and even longer to learn to trust each other. I personally think blitz had some good advice. Just have a super fun walk/playtime with the collar on, no corrections, and then take it off. Start associating the collar with super fun times. Then maybe, after all is good, talk with someone experienced(Lou or similar) about introducing the stim into training. Good luck!


----------



## Merciel (Apr 25, 2013)

DaniFani said:


> I guess to me the bolded part is such a "duh" thing about training.


That's a little unkind. Somebody was asking the question earnestly. I thought it deserved an honest answer.


----------



## LouCastle (Sep 25, 2006)

llombardo said:


> Question out of curiosity...some say that my dog might have been possibly trained the wrong way with the e collar, which is possible. Is it possible for the e collar to cause more anxiety or stress in a dog? This might sound silly, but I put one on my dog, didn't even use it and he got very bad poop within the same day. I have also noticed that if he is over excited this happens. Another instance would be if kids are over and they leave to even take the garbage out, he runs back and forth to the doors, I take him out and he has loose stool. Back to the e collar...he actually got his off, wants nothing to do with it, but once its off everything goes back to normal after a day or so...is any of this possible?


We've already spoken on the phone but for the sake of this thread ... I've not heard of this occurring but theory allows for it. Especially if the work was done at high levels of stim and it was just used as a correction without showing the dog what the stim means. In those cases dogs can form the wrong associations. 

Sometimes the associations are not as clear as this and it may appear that the dogs have formed all sorts of what, if they were happening with humans, we'd call "superstitions." The correct response to this, even if you don't plan on training with the Ecollar, is to desensitize the dog to the tool. If you do plan on using it, I'd suggest using my methods to teach the recall and the sit. When this is done, I can pretty much guarantee that the loose stool, if it's due to this, will disappear. If you don't do this desensitization, the fear will remain and anytime that something reminds him of the Ecollar, it will return.


----------



## LouCastle (Sep 25, 2006)

DaniFani said:


> Question: I have read a few of theories as to WHY the ecollar seems to work so well with reactive/fearful dogs. In your link you say that the dog knows that if it holds the sit, or holds the stand, it knows it won't receive the correction. But WHY does this work in changing the dog's overall "carriage," (as the study proved)? I know we can't read the mind of the dog, just curious your thoughts on this? Is it just that the dog no longer has the option for flight/fight, so it no longer stresses about that? What makes the dog so much more relaxed, overall? I mean, my example of the dog that was EXTREMELY fearful, and your example of the SAR trainers dog, why does the dog's entire demeanor seem to change(The SAR woman's dog now running up to people nuzzling them, and the dog I saw who was seeking people out for attention as well, when before he urinated and growled at the site of anyone approaching), just by the fact that the dog no longer chooses/has the option of flight/fight?
> 
> Hope my questions make sense, sometimes I can't articulate all my thoughts well lol.


DaniFani, I don't have a definitive answer, just a theory. I think that F/F (fight or flight), or any of the others things that animals do when under stress (freeze or "fool around") have a major payoff at the most basic of levels. A dog who does one or more of these things (and survives), thinks he survived BECAUSE HE went into F/F. And so it's self−rewarding on a "survival level," probably the highest level payoff that there is. 

My Ecollar training changes this for a couple of reasons. Because the dog is shown how to shut off the stim during the basic work, dogs come to believe that the discomfort of the stim is due to their actions. They are conditioned to think that when it starts, they've done something wrong. When it shuts off, they done something right. They also believe that THEY are in charge of when it starts and when it shuts off. Finally they think that the stim came from the environment, not from the handler. And so, when they're compelled to stay in the sit, as Roma was, they can't go into F/F. After a few trials with things that used to make them go into F/F, they learn that they'll still survive, even if they do nothing more than hold their position. They can't go into F/F and yet, they still survive! Restraining a dog with a leash in these situations does not have this same effect because they see the restraint as coming from outside, from the handler. With the Ecollar, they see it as coming from within, they've done the work of holding their position, themselves. 

A dog that lives in a constant state of fear shows it with his body language. He's always ready to go into F/F. A dog that has gained confidence doesn't show this, because he's discovered that F/F is not the only option. The dog's true nature is free to come out because he's not afraid anymore.


----------



## LouCastle (Sep 25, 2006)

Merciel said:


> What makes you think I haven't tried?
> 
> In my very early days with Pongu, I started out using positive punishment. It didn't work. It didn't work for him and it didn't work for me. It caused us some serious setbacks and badly damaged our relationship. That's why I ended up going another way.


It sounds as if you started out using the Ecollar for giving corrections when the dog did not comply. This is NOT how my methods work. I'm always amazed when people do this and then claim that they've tried to use an Ecollar to fix a problem like this one. There are many ways to use an Ecollar. If you choose the wrong way, in the hopes of improving a fear issue, you're doomed to failure. 



Merciel said:


> Different approaches will work for different dogs and handlers. This isn't one that works for me or my dog. I am not arguing that it can't be useful for other teams, but it's not right for us.


If you haven't tried the correct way of using an Ecollar for this issue, you've haven't really given the tool a chance. You can drive a nail with a screwdriver, but it's not the best way to use the tool and it's not the best way to get the nail into the wood either.


----------



## LouCastle (Sep 25, 2006)

llombardo said:


> I got him at the shelter, so no background. I just have what the trainer is thinking and I have talked to Lou about it and it was decided that its training and not genetic. But if I can't put the collar on him for any reconditioning because it stresses him out, then that is completely out and back to positive with toy/food reward..he is both food and toy driven.


Earlier I likened this to a superstition in a human. UNlike a superstition in a human, it's not all that hard to break, it's just a matter of showing the dog that his beliefs are wrong. The bush, the paper bag, the butterfly ARE NOT something that needs to be feared. But if all you do is put the Ecollar on the dog and hope for the best, it's probable that nothing will change. 

In these cases I just put the Ecollar on and start teaching the recall. When the dog understands that, I move to teaching the sit. This breaks, or at least severely impacts, any superstitions that the Ecollar has given the dog.


----------



## LouCastle (Sep 25, 2006)

Merciel said:


> The purpose of the e-collar is to cause an aversive sensation. The intensity of the aversive sensation may vary, and the timing of its removal may vary (hence the negative reinforcement/positive punishment distinction and my initial failure to grasp what I think you were actually going for), but the fundamental purpose of the tool is to cause an aversive sensation.


It's really important here, that folks know that you are expressing your opinion. And since you're really NOT versed in the modern use of the Ecollar, I think that the readers should take that into account when considering your comments. In the OLD STYLE USE OF THE TOOL, you'd be right. But with low level stim the -R (negative reinforcement) side, the removal of the stim, is far more important to the learning process than the start of it, the +P (positive punishment) side of it. 



Merciel said:


> On some level, you're using the collar to inflict pain. That's what it does. How much you inflict, and when you remove it, will vary based on the training protocol. But basically, that's what it does. And that's very easy to misuse.


If you consider that pain is a continuum that includes MINOR DISCOMFORT you're right. If by pain you mean the common usage of the term, you're not. It's not any easier (or harder) to misuse +P than any other phase of OC (operant conditioning). 



Merciel said:


> But regardless of the jargon, the ultimate effect is still something that a clumsy, ignorant, or frustrated person could easily misuse to result in a dog that craps its pants at being put in the collar.


The most common result of misuse to the Ecollar is that the dog doesn't learn what is desired, and so the user just stops using it. With the dog at hand, the result (the loose stool) is that "it could be from the Ecollar" but there are many other things that will cause this. It could be that the dog has made some other association and that's why his stool becomes loose. Like many who are anti−Ecollar, you'll glom onto anything averse that occurs, and try to blame it on the tool. ANY TOOL can give such a result. It's hardly limited to the Ecollar, if in fact, that's what's going on with this dog. 

And BTW, you're use of the term _"craps its pants"_ is misleading and, I think, intentionally so. The dog in question doesn’t _"crap its pants"_ when the Ecollar is put on, rather, sometime later it has loose stool. Not quite the same thing.


----------



## LouCastle (Sep 25, 2006)

Blitzkrieg1 said:


> Conditioning a dog to the e collar is easy. Even one that makes negative associations with it. Simply put the collar on every time you go out for a walk, do a training session, play ball etc. Do this over a couple weeks and your dog will quickly pick up collar = fun and get excited when you bring it out. Sure at first thereay be some loose stool, just ignore it and carry on he will adapt. Have personally used the ecollar on a highly reactive dog and she was able to experience the world off leash with it on.


Thanks for pointing out what seems to me to be obvious. I think that this if far better than simply not using the Ecollar.


----------



## LouCastle (Sep 25, 2006)

Merciel said:


> That's a little unkind. Somebody was asking the question earnestly. I thought it deserved an honest answer.


There's a big difference between _"an honest answer"_ and a healthy dose of opinion, which is what you really supplied. I'm sure that you were _"honest."_ I'm just as sure that you're wrong in most of what you said.


----------

