Erny

If it is not a correction, then why let the dog fail in the first place? It's not just the outward behaviour that we should be looking at, but also the inward 'emotion' - which would be affected by the dog's own perception of the stim. When I saw that video - which was an example of some excellent work - I also thought the dog is a high prey drive dog and breed and I wonder if his method of stimming as a punishment would work to such exemplary standards on non-working line/low prey drive dogs. And what about for those who don't use 'drive' so much as the main motivation to train their dogs? But if you're only guiding the dog and if the dog is not perceiving the stim as a correction, why teach it that non-compliance might be worthwhile trying? That's the part I don't 'get' in the method that you describe in your use.

.... I saw the photo's in the OP and before I even read the other comments, thought "baby wombat" How absolutely cute! Congratulations on his arrival .

Yeah - that's fair enough, GB. I'll speak to the Vet tomorrow . Thanks for your input though.

Thanks for the explanation. In Mandela's case, pancreas function gets the tick of approval, subject to a confirmatory blood test, bloods for which are being drawn tomorrow. Until then, for the time being, I would need to discard the pancreas as being the culprit for any (hypothesised) "Lack of Intrinsic Factor". So that leaves me with the stomach and maybe the salivary glands. Ok (remembering that we're working on hypothesis and assumptions here), so what is done to improve the IF if the stomach is the culprit organ? Would you happen to know, GB? I guess that if the pancreas were to be the culprit, enzymes added to the diet would assist. But would this also apply if it were not the pancreas that was, shall we say, malfunctioning, but the stomach? I read that to check the stomach for this, a biopsy of the stomach needs to be taken . Bummer. I prefer blood tests as the most invasive form of investigation, especially when we're just making (albeit 'educated') guesses. My head is spinning and thoughts are racing around my head right now, that I'm not so sure I can make sense of them anymore .

Wow! That was fast, Gillbear. Thank you . Does this part of your posted answer "Lack of Intrinsic Factor from the stomach?" mean that it is the stomach that does the processing so that the rest of the system can absorb the Vitamins etc. etc.? That would come back to what we refer to as "malabsorption", wouldn't it? IE If the stomach is not processing the Vitamins efficiently, the other parts of the body cannot absorb it?

More new symptoms have been developing over the last couple of days (and they are the same as I have recognised in one of Mandela's litter brothers). As a result, I have a train of thought which I won't go into now for two reasons. One being that I haven't formulated in my mind a succinct way of explaining it in writing. The other being that I may be completely off the mark so it might prove to be a bit silly to go into it and confuse the information flow in this thread. But so that I can follow through with my thinking, I need a question answered, if anyone can (please ). Is there any one main organ that is responsible for the synthesis of vitamins (especially the Vitamin B groups and perhaps in particular Vitamin B6) in the body? And if there is, which organ or organs would that be?

Ahhh .... thank you. Then in the absence of anything else being used to 'wipe' it with, I don't think the Colloidal Silver would do any harm. I also gave my boy a capful of it to swallow each day. Apparently it is quite therapeutic and also acts as a mild disinfectant, from what I can gather, without ill effects to the dog's skin.

I'm a Victorian but I'm reasonably sure my answers below are correct or at least very close to being correct. But I would recommend you get a couple more opinions from the knowledgeable NSW DOL people to confirm : From the law's point of view, legal - in NSW and everywhere else in Australia other than Victoria. But prohibited from use depending on the policies of certain training groups (eg. ANKC affiliated clubs). I think there are some groups (eg. RSPCA) that say it's illegal for use in NSW but I don't believe they are right. I don't think they are able to be used legally in NSW.

Godspeed.

I don't know anything about "bitter drops" nor about whatever it is that could be causing this to be a continued problem for you, but my boy had excessive discharge (don't think it was puss but holistic practitioner did think he was licking too much causing an irritation ... kind of like a catch 22 situation) and I was advised (by the holistic practitioner) to use some colloidal silver on a tissue - squeeze the sheath to open it and wipe just inside and around the outer area of it. Don't know if "bitter drops" would be the better, or colloidal silver, but the latter helped us. I acknowledge that my boy's issue sounds considerably more mild than what your boy is going through though.

I know there are some vids around - one is of finding the dog's working level, the other that's on my mind though relates to a dog who has had the basic on-lead training already done though. I'm sure there are others and if I can remember and then find them I'll hook them up here. The stim is so low it is merely something that is annoying and all you're doing is showing the dog how to remove the annoyance. I can tell you that I do like the results I've seen as it comes in the form of a dog happily and enthusiastically completing its command task with the full-on exuberance and immediacy of a dog in drive. Do you have any footage (or links to footage) of dogs where the stim is used as a punishment? I do understand your reluctance though Cosmolo as I too, back in considerably earlier days, felt a bit the same. I still don't like R- methods such as ear pinches, but with the e-collar, the stimulation is not about pain but merely an annoying sensation. Couple that with the results I have seen using the tool as I and K9 Force (and Superminty ) do, I'm confident the method works well. And as K9 Force has mentioned, the R- low stim use of the e-collar can be used with success even in fearful dogs. Have you used the e-collar in your method with a fearful dog? (Not challenging .... just interested )

I've not long come in and having taken my boy out for a run, am now sitting here and catching up with the discussion in this thread. Apart from what I wrote last night, there is something I believe I have noticed in the use of the R- method of use with the e-collar. And that is that it seems to produce a classical conditioned response to the command given. I may be incorrect there (K9 Force?), but watching the dogs' reactions that seems to me to be what it looks like, at least, once the dog has learnt what the stim is about and how to control it. The response is so smooth, immediate and enthusiastic there is no indication of avoidance (eg. no dropping of the ears etc.). The dog doesn't give any indication of having done something wrong (because he/she hasn't and the stim hasn't been used to indicate that). In fact I have watched them and seen they almost "beat their chests" (so to speak) with the absolute confidence they have in being able to do the right thing. As I alluded (or should that be eluded .... I always get those two words mixed up) to earlier, R- use with low stim encourages the dog to do right whereas P+ use (high or low stim) has told the dog its done wrong. And I also tend to find (once the initial teaching phase of what the stim is about) that even when the dog is in a higher drive than it would be in the absence of distractions, the lower stim has the desired effect and enhances the dog's mental balance (ie clear thinking).

I see the difference as this : Negative Reinforcement method : Stim. Command. Dog thinks : "I know what to do to turn the stim off" (positive attitude). Dog complies with command. Positive Punishment method : Command. Dog doesn't comply. Stim. Dog thinks : "I better not disobey" (negative attitude). Dog complies with command. In the R- example, the stim is not reliant on the dog failing and so the dog doesn't fail and the reliability is stronger as "failing" isn't learnt. In the P+ example, the stim is reliant on the dog failing. Reliability is not as strong given that "failure" has to have occurred first. With R- it's about the dog thinking about what TO do. With P+ it's about the dog thinking about what NOT to do. Ergo, I think R- is more compatible with drive training as well and can therefore be used in combination. Also, as training using the R- progresses, the "nick" button can be brought into use. I'm not sure that's the case in a situation where the stim is delivered as P+ (I don't use the e-collar for general training using that method so I haven't really thought about the "nick" button in that scenario, but I'm thinking its delivery would be too fast to necessarily be adequate.) I might not have explained this well nor as fully as I could and I'm sure K9 Force would be able to fill in a lot of blanks in between my explanation, but I'm about done in and on my way to turning off for the night. Perhaps he'll come in here between now and when I next look, to critique what I've written .

I tend to use the "known commands" to teach the dog about the stim. I find it is easier for the dog as it makes its learning about the stim easier and faster. And I generally like to teach the dog a new skill by conventional methods (eg. positive reward) before I apply any aversive regardless by the method applied. I would have liked to have gone to his workshop but I was unable to at the time. So he only uses the e-collar as a P+ ?

In negative reinforcement the dog learns that it has the power to turn the stim off. It "empowers" them and I tend to find increases confidence. Positive punishment promotes an avoidance behaviour, at least in the early stages of e-collar training. IMO :cool: I know you use it the second way (P+) Cosmolo .... have you ever tried it using the R- method? And if you did, did you notice a difference?

DW - all the very best and I hope your journey with Diesel comes back with a successful outcome. There are many here whose hearts and thoughts will be with you all. Regards Erny

Esta explained it pretty well :cool:. I guess I'm just being a bit technical when I say that "punishment" is not exactly the word I'd use when I use it as I do. Firstly, it is at a level where it is an annoying stimulation. The best description using words to describe would be anywhere from a tingle to a flea bite sensation. Secondly, because the stimulation comes first and is taken away when the dog performs, it isn't really "punishment" as punishment is something given because of an unwanted behaviour. For example, if your dog was bitten by a flea, I would doubt you'd see that as the dog receiving punishment. However, when the dog scratches and removes the sensation, he learns that is what he needs to do to remove the discomfort. Swap "flea bite" with "e-collar stim" and swap "scratch" with "recall" and that is pretty much how it works. The big difference is that in the early training, the dog doesn't have to try to guess what behaviour will remove the stimulation (although admittedly 'scratch' is a natural reflex so a bad example in this last instance) as the early work is conducted on lead and the dog is shown what to do to achieve that.

I know what you mean, Oonga. I'm split between being happy the pancreas is ok, but disappointed at still not knowing what the cause of his problem/s is. One of Mandela's litter brothers (that I know of) is having skin issues. I'm trying to get in contact with them. Breeder did mention sometime way back (when the only issues were Mandela's carpal laxity, which has since resolved, and difficulty in getting weight on) that there was a dog in the lines owned by someone else who had trouble with maintaining weight. That's all I know of it though.

Faecal test results have come in showing normal pancreas function. Communicating with Dr. Bruce as we speak, about diet and strategy. I think there's going to be a bit of trial and error time for the next two weeks at least and Dr. Bruce has asked that I stay in touch with him to let him know details of how things are going. So it is still all a puzzlement. ETA: And I was confused earlier. The additive I have is basically just a skin/coat formula (not enzymes). Dr. Bruce has suggested it still might be worthwhile adding enzyme formula but recommends I wait until we can see how things go over the next couple of weeks. Will keep you all informed, although probably won't have anything conclusive to report for a while. ETA: 'Spoke' with Dr. Bruce - I'm having a TLI blood test taken this coming Monday (through my local Vet so another trip to Castlemaine is not necessary). This blood test is to confirm pancreas function is ok (or not). It's a double up, but from what I gather a more accurate investigation and a way of double confirming what the faecal sample test result has shown. Worthwhile doing in my (and Dr. Bruce's) opinion given that all Mandela's symptoms over the last 5 months fitted the theory of a pancreas not functioning properly.

Yes! That's it! Thanks Rijbiz . I knew I could rely on a DOLer to have picked that up and remembered it. I really like that name. Matari. If it wasn't for the fact that it meant "my man" or "my little man" (can't remember which) I would have named my next dog that even if she was a bitch. Wonder what the equivalent of "my little girl" is. I can't even remember what language they were referring to.

Can't help you from any first-hand experience, KL. But perhaps THIS website link will help answer? Good luck. By the sounds of it you have caught this in time to stop it having become Addison's? That's what I'm hoping for though, as I suspect you are too. Stuff like this is always such a worry.

That's a bit mean. I would have thought they'd like as many people as possible to benefit from Mr. Coppinger's knowledge, for the sake of dogs .

The problem's not exactly diagnosed just yet, but I'm hopeful. And I'm not sure, but I might have myself confused. Not sure if what I have ARE actually the enzymes Dr. Bruce was talking about or whether what we have is to help out until Dr Bruce knows more about what's going on. On a poopy note, Mandela had a restless/uncomfortable night and wasn't as 'into' his breakfast this morning. And his poops were sludgy today . But I'm sure he's put on condition since Monday . I've emailed Dr. Bruce to let him know what's happening. Thanks PP . I rather like it too . ;) ..... I call my boy "Nelson" when he's naughty. That's if I'm not calling him other less savory names . I heard another name last night - I think it was on "The Zoo" and the carer called a baby wombat a name that started with "M" and meant "My Man" or "My Little Man" or similar. I called Mandela that a lot when he was just a little pup and I thought I'd like to remember the name for my next dog (although might not be appropriate if I get a bitch), but I can't remember it. Oonga - I really appreciate that you are thinking of us . All going well we'll be at KCC Park this weekend. Not sure if I'll bring my boy with me or not, although I'd really like to do some practical work on the intro to tracking, if Karl will allow. I believe that's on the agenda though. I trust we shall see you there?

Oonga. Dr Bruce indicated it would take approximately 3 days but as the tests are being run by the laboratory and are not 'in house', he can't guarantee that, so it could be longer.

And he's coming to Melbourne ..................... when???