Much attention has been paid to this bit of weird science from the hallowed halls of none other than my alma mater, the University of Pennsylvania. Out of thirty-three breeds of dogs, this study concludes that Dachshunds were the likeliest to grace a human hand with an unwanted nibble.

The study talks a good game about the 6,000 thorough surveys conducted but let me state now for the record that no dog bite study has ever managed to convince me of its validity—at least no study that reports on the breed of dog doing the biting.

Just ask Terrierman for an entertaining explanation as to why most dog bite studies deserve a round of debunking.

Here’s the short version: Any study relying on owner/bitee recall/opinion is necessarily riddled with bias. Bias means there’s not likely to be much significance in the data obtained.

Sure, sounds like fun, hearing that none other than this Napoleonic hotdog pooch is responsible for more bites than 29 other breeds of dogs. The study made me smile, not least because its findings attempt to debunk the myth of the big breed bully.

The mighty Rottweiler divested of his crown, the notorious pit bull yanked off his throne and the German Shepherd turned pussycat in the face of…the nasty little sausage-dog.

And that’s the best thing I can say about this study: It beats hearing another round of pit bull bashing in the news media.