Submitted via IRC for Runaway1956
Dogs supposedly trained to detect and respond to potentially life-threatening blood sugar levels in people with diabetes were, in reality, often untrained, un-housebroken puppies with hefty pricetags—currently set at $25,000. At least, that's according to a lawsuit filed this week by Attorney General Mark Herring on behalf of the Commonwealth of Virginia.
According to the lawsuit, the non-profit company Service Dogs by Warren Retrievers and its owner Charles Warren Jr. made extraordinary claims about their "diabetic alert dogs." The company and Warren said that the dogs were highly trained and that their performance was "backed by science."
[...] Virginia has a bone to pick about almost all of that. Though the prices were real, the dogs' abilities were not, according to the lawsuit. Customers said they received "ready" dogs that were not at all trained to detect and respond to blood sugar levels.
[...] Moreover, SDWR's dogs lacked even basic pet training, according to the lawsuit. Some dogs were merely puppies that were not housebroken, struggled to walk on a leash, chewed on things, and didn't respond to their names. They also displayed behaviors incompatible for service animal work, including frequent barking, jumping on people, and being terrified of loud noises.
[...] "[T]hese hopeful and vulnerable consumers receive poorly trained, ill-behaved dogs that are not equipped to help them manage a life-threatening disability and are little more than very expensive pets," the lawsuit concludes.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by frojack on Friday May 11 2018, @05:09PM (5 children)
No proof that they smell blood sugar, but there might be a breath give away, IDK.
Most likely the REAL blood sugar dogs are reacting to behavior, especially of children or elderly who might not understand their own symptoms.
This is just another example of fake service dogs epidemic in this country.
For the last two decades, with the help of the ADA, people who just wanted their pets to be with them 24/7 bought a vest and fake certificate on line and insisted they had PTSD. Restaurants, airports were suddenly filled with mis-behaving dogs, cats, and lizards and bitchy (mostly women) threatening to law suits if Rover had to wait out side or travel as baggage.
The airlines are finally starting to push back, demanding medical certificates from doctors, training certificates for the dogs.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by NewNic on Friday May 11 2018, @05:32PM
Good luck with that. There is no certification system for dogs. Also, the ADA doesn't allow you to demand a medical certificate from a disabled person.
There are legitimate training schools, for such things as guide dogs (to aid the blind), diabetics (yes, dogs can and do save the lives of diabetic people) and assistance dogs (typically for wheelchair-bound people). But there are many untrained dogs, typically "emotional support animals" who should not get the access that properly trained dogs get.
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 4, Informative) by takyon on Friday May 11 2018, @05:36PM (1 child)
They apparently can detect a chemical change associated with low/high blood sugar: https://beyondtype1.org/diabetic-alert-dogs-dads/ [beyondtype1.org]
I'd expect them to react to signs of dizziness, remind forgetful owners to check their reading on schedule, and generally help the fat/weak/old owners to move around.
These are two distinct problems. People claiming the need for emotional support animals are being disruptive to businesses. They can forge a doctor's letter or obtain one with a cheap online mental health consultation. They can demand to have their animals let in anywhere, and business owners and employees will probably comply out of ignorance of the exact legal requirements, a fear of being sued or fired, etc. And when people take poorly trained and loud dogs onto airplanes, into restaurants, etc., it gives the legit service dogs a bad rep, causing harm to their owners.
(This is the best article about it: Pets Allowed [newyorker.com] (archive [archive.is]). A quick search finds that people were definitely triggered by it.)
This business on the other hand, allegedly committed fraud and supplied animals that were supposed to be the seriously trained kind. Worse case scenario, someone dies because of it.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 4, Informative) by NewNic on Friday May 11 2018, @05:51PM
It's worth noting this paragraph from that article (my emphasis):
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Friday May 11 2018, @06:48PM
My coworker has a teen daughter who went to college and subsequently decided to get a kitten.
She wasn't allowed pets in the apartment, so she paid $50 for an "emotional support" animal card for the kitten.
He finds it funny. That drives me nuts.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday May 11 2018, @06:48PM
Oh, the injustice of it all!
https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/airplane-mode/emotional-support-peacock-denied-flight-united-airlines-n842971 [nbcnews.com]
🌻🌻 [google.com]