Have you ever attended a meeting, a function, or an organized work gathering where business ideas where shared? Business practices were scrutinized? Or work processes were evaluated to find a more efficient business model? And while select people are sharing their experiences so others can have similar success, there is always that one individual who stands up…
That has no working knowledge about the subject matter.
Only what they’ve read and internalized.
Yet they present their ideas on what they believe would be best for everyone anyway.
How do you feel about that?
Most working professionals feel a similar way that you just imagined.
The bad part.
Is they go home. Create a well crafted video and share it with the world. And for all those followers who are in the same boat of having zero working experience and no success in that field to make any type of comparison, those same followers applaud that persons zero experience idea.
That’s the same feeling e-collar trainers have when a treat trainer tells large unknowledgeable audiences that e-collars are bad. Where they share e-collars destroy dogs. Or e-collars make dogs unhappy.
The worst part.
Is they have single handedly misguided people and removed any real help a dog owner could have had. They took away any real chance a dog may have had, before getting dumped at the shelter.
Or worse. Re-dumped at the shelter.
If treat training was so effective, dog shelters would not be full all the time.
Yes, there are bad e-collar trainers that have destroyed dogs. There are e-collar trainers who have left a dog in a worse mental state then when they started. If you happen to live in a realistic world, you understand that there is small percentage of bad actors in any industry.
The Best Part!
The many years of treat trainers slinging false accusations to help keep what’s left of their cliental, has only made e-collar trainers better. Today’s industry of working e-collar trainers are more effective and they are always searching for improved e-collar methods to make their programs more dog sensitive focused.
That’s why the e-collar field is growing in a positive direction.
The Fiction…
Is that treat training is the only science based method that is proven to effectively work and is backed by the association of professional dog trainers.
The Fact…
There has not been a single, stand alone, honest study that evaluates the effectiveness of e-collars. There have been plenty of “science based” studies that compare the effectiveness of treat training to a “hand cuffed” version of e-collar training. Which is designed to limit the ability and usage of e-collars. And since most people don’t understand how e-collars work, they follow the narrative provided. Additionally, the association of professional dog trainers is comprised of only treat trainers. So the endorsement is biased at best and has no real value. It’s like saying bean counters are the supreme mathematicians in this world because they can count.
The Reality.
It is a hard spot to be in for any endorsing committee to place a stamp of approval towards e-collar trainers. There is always a concern of blow back from the small percentage of poor e-collar trainers that would draw a very negative reaction from their lack of abilities to make a dog better. Which would cause a possible black eye towards any endorsing committee. I get that…
They would also be acknowledging that e-collars are more effective and require far less time to train a dog causing a large disruption in their long standing monetized business.
Also dog training is not backed by science.
The “science” that all these dog trainers refer to so often is an applied science. Similar to psychology or sociology. Which simply means in laymen’s terms, running the same tests by different people in different situations while having similar outcomes. Something that can easily be proven on any popular social media site. This applied science study has already been done multiple times over with outstanding results. A neutral well known organization just hasn’t labeled it like that yet.
If you want results backed by science, look into Chemistry, Physics, Biology and Mathematics. Those results are definitive. Sounding smart and being smart are two very different things.
