The cultural aspect is 90% of it. If you look at the statistics over longer periods of time (eg several decades), you can tell when a specific dog breed becomes the “fashion choice” for irresponsible owners. Those dog breeds suddenly become “more dangerous” than other breeds.
Great Danes, Labradors, many breeds were considered the most dangerous in the past before Pitbulls were. In some countries you also get different “most dangerous” dog breeds than other countries.
And there’s quite a bit of research suggesting that although some bites are obviously more physically dangerous than others (a Chihuahua doesn’t cause injuries as severe as a Pitbull could cause), the dog’s aggressiveness or personality is actually not that genetically predetermined. Sure, there’s a bit that is, but it’s nowhere near enough to explain the dog bite statistics with purely the dog breed as the cause.
The cultural aspect is 90% of it. If you look at the statistics over longer periods of time (eg several decades), you can tell when a specific dog breed becomes the “fashion choice” for irresponsible owners. Those dog breeds suddenly become “more dangerous” than other breeds.
Great Danes, Labradors, many breeds were considered the most dangerous in the past before Pitbulls were. In some countries you also get different “most dangerous” dog breeds than other countries.
And there’s quite a bit of research suggesting that although some bites are obviously more physically dangerous than others (a Chihuahua doesn’t cause injuries as severe as a Pitbull could cause), the dog’s aggressiveness or personality is actually not that genetically predetermined. Sure, there’s a bit that is, but it’s nowhere near enough to explain the dog bite statistics with purely the dog breed as the cause.