'Campus Dogs' Illustrate How 'the Science™' Ends
Weekend read: the U of Fribourg, Switzerland, introduced two canines to better enable faculty and students to 'cope with stress'; I wonder if they do any research and/or teaching, too?
So, last week I greatly enjoyed a call with one of my friends from Switzerland who told me, ‘oh, by the way, the new university president has now spent money on two dogs to reduce stress levels’.
At first, I was like: ‘you’re joking, right? Right? This has to be some kind of sick joke.’
To which my friend replied: ‘I kid you not.’
I did some internet searches (I’m not using Google typically, but as of late, DuckDuckGo’s results appear similarly…‘curated’) and, lo and behold, I actually found some news media items.
As a proud dog owner, I’m petrified.
I do think that dogs are nice and all the stuff etc, and I’m also convinced that guard dogs, guidance dogs, and animal therapy in general are a nice add-on opportunity, depending on circumstances.
But for faculty and students to ‘cope with stress’ at university?
(All quotes, bits, and pieces below are coming your way in my translation, with emphases added.)
Meet the “Campus Dogs”
‘Since early March, the first Swiss “Campus Dogs” are deployed at the University of Fribourg’, 20 Minuten reported (sic) on 8 March 2024.
The University of Fribourg has launched a new project: Switzerland's first ‘campus dogs’ have been in use there since the beginning of March. The two dogs, named Guccy and Yoma, are intended to reduce stress among students, lecturers, and staff. They are also intended to promote dialogue and interaction between those present.
Dogs can take the pressure off students
‘The feedback is simply great’, says the new Rector of the University of Fribourg, Katharina Fromm, to 20 Minuten. The idea for the cuddling project was born in the aftermath of the pandemic. ‘Surveys of students revealed that they were having difficulties with stress and coping with the pandemic, so we thought about what measures we could implement’, says Fromm.
It get’s ‘even’ better from there on, for this isn’t merely about ‘measures we could implement’—and setting aside the real impact of ‘Pandemic™’ mandates and consequences for a moment—this is a classic trap.
Instead of launching an investigation into the causes of said ‘post-pandemic stress’, the powers-that-be are offering a band-aid, and on top of it, this reeks of animal abuse.
Back in October 2021, I wrote a long essay about protests in Switzerland in 2020, and I shall cite from it here before continuing with the ‘Campus Dogs’ below:
In early May 2020, a few hundred protestors took to the streets of Bern. As assemblies of more than five people were forbidden, police soon moved in to dispel the unauthorised protest, as reported by Swissinfo:
The police nevertheless limited themselves to checking people and issuing warnings. ‘There will also be reprimands’, announced Reto Nause, director of security for the city of Berne.
In an interview with the Keystone-SDA news agency, he was ‘irritated’ by the behaviour of the demonstrators: ‘From an epidemiological point of view, my heart bleeds’ [said Nause, director of security; it is unclear whether he has had epidemiologcal training]. People had hugged each other and disregarded the regulations. He assumed that there had been new infections.
About a month later, Swiss state broadcaster SRF showed many images of ‘Black Lives Matters’ demonstrations, such as this one from Bern on 12 June 2020.
Citing ‘more than 10,000 participants’ in Zurich alone, it was reported that ‘police kept a conspicuously low profile’. A bit further down in the report, one may then learn that the demonstration had also been unauthorised:
‘The police asked those present several times in a friendly manner to “refrain from the event”, as it was forbidden according to the Covid regulations of the Federal Council. Shortly after 2 p.m., the police in Zurich then relented and declared that the demonstration would be tolerated as long as it remained peaceful.’
Read the rest be clicking on the link below.
Of ‘Campus Dogs’ and ‘The Science™’
This entire scheme is as hare-brained as it is evil and despicable.
‘We offer half an hour with the dogs. Their calming presence helps to minimise exam stress and boost self-confidence’, president Fromm is cited.
20 Minuten then cites ‘a study by the Czech University of Life Sciences Prague' [that] investigated how the interaction of students with therapeutic dogs affects their well-being before an exam’.
That study bears the title ‘Effect of Dog Presence on Stress Levels in Students under Psychological Strain: A Pilot Study’ and you may read it by clicking on that link.
What is extremely misleading about the entire project is this little snippet of information omitted from the 20 Minuten piece as well as from two other news items I consulted, which you can find here and here:
Ninety-three students were recruited for this study. The participants in the experimental groups were aged between 19 and 44 years…Only women were included in the study, as the presence of male students in the given year was rather rare at this institution. Our sample of female students was recruited through the given year’s Facebook page, where they were informed about the possibility of participation in the research. Handlers with dogs and the people providing other options of relaxation participated in 16 announced exam dates. Each day, the students were once again approached directly with the opportunity to participate in this study. At that time, the students chose the tested alternative that they considered most beneficial for them. All of the participants were awaiting an exam in genetics, which is generally considered to be one of the most difficult exams at this institution. The exam took place in the second year of bachelor’s degree studies and all of the students attempted to pass the exam for the first time. The criteria under which the students were excluded from the study were no reported stress over exams and/or not being fond of animals. Animal ownership was not an exclusion criterion.
I’m coming out strongly in favour of calling this ‘bullcrap’. This is a study that doesn’t include men (which, last time I checked, constitute approx. 49% of the resident population in Switzerland), and while certain amends might be made due to the fact that Swiss universities now have an average of approx. 60% of female undergraduate students, this isn’t how science is done.
But it is how ‘The Science™’ is done, which isn’t scientific but a kind of cult-like scientism. It comes with all the accoutrements of the real thing (e.g., university presidents citing one or more studies) while these and other crucial facts—that would, arguably, undermine the point-of-view—are omitted.
Such as the section about ‘limitations’, which reads as follows:
The main limitation of this study was the environment in which the measurements took place, as they were not laboratory conditions. The measurements were carried out directly on the premises where students waited for the exam. Providing a separate room for the relaxation activities and the interaction with the dog to ensure a calm and more intimate atmosphere could produce different results. However, this study aimed to evaluate results from real practice and from the environment and situation where [animal-assisted activities] may take place. Another limitation could be that the students were assigned to groups that were not selected randomly. In this instance, the authors assumed that students would best evaluate what kind of distraction would be best for them. It should be noted that the use of caffeine and nicotine might have influenced the results. However, we could not instruct the students not to use these substances as they might serve as the students’ coping strategy. The presence of three different dogs with three different handlers could affect the results obtained. We are aware that the personality of the handler and the nature of the dog can affect the measurement. For this reason, we chose professional handlers with equally professional dogs who were given clear instructions to alleviate this potential bias as much as possible.
This is ‘The Science™’ with its laundry list of confounding variables that render it, I’d arguably, impossible to draw solid and evidence-based conclusions from the study. On top of it, the authors themselves label their paper ‘an experiment’ (and, of course, call for ‘further study’).
Conclusions
This study highlights the potential benefits of student interaction with therapeutic dogs at a university before the final examination. The premise of the study was to improve mood and reduce stress that was not only subjectively perceived, but also objectively measured by a pressure gauge. Compared to the control group and the group with other activities, brief interventions with a dog had a significant effect on subjective mood improvement [of the exclusively female study population]. When comparing the baseline and post-treatment values in the three groups, a reduction in subjectively perceived stress and mood improvement was observed in the [animal-assisted activities] group. No effects on objectively measured parameters such as heart rate and blood pressure were observed when interacting with a dog [so, judging by the authors’ premise, they failed to accomplish their ‘objective’ aim]. In the remaining two groups, a decrease in blood pressure was observed, with all levels of blood pressure and heart rate being physiological at all times. Although it was a short 10-min interaction, the results clearly indicated a possible positive impact on university students. Therefore, we recommend considering this low-cost and readily available method to universities to relieve students in stressful periods; however, the students should be allowed to choose the most appropriate coping strategy for them.
Leaving aside the essential partial failure of the study to accomplish what the authors set out to do, the most insidious omissions here are, once again, the absence of mention that ‘only’ women were studied—and the conclusion sentence, which bears repeating:
Students should be allowed to choose the most appropriate coping strategy for them.
Remember, we’re talking about adults aged 19-44 here.
Moreover, all of these ‘details’ are missing from the news media, which merely holds the following (again, this is from 20 Minuten):
The social dogs spend half an hour a day in a room specially set up for the cuddling sessions. A maximum of eight people are allowed to interact with the four-legged friends at the same time.
‘This is a pilot phase for now, but we would like to continue the project and also carry out a scientific study’, says Fromm. Since the start of the project, several students have already come by to spend 30 minutes with Yoma and Guccy.
Nau.ch at least let a dog therapist/specialist speak, too, who was a wee bit more critical (but didn’t mention the above-cited ‘study’):
Especially with so many people at a university, it is incredibly stressful for dogs. For example, because there are always new odours. Adult dogs also need around 12 to 16 hours of sleep a day.
Dog expert Oliver Weber also has no objections to the acquisition of animal friends in a professional environment. But: ‘The situation and the species-appropriate handling of therapy dogs is not necessarily that trivial.’ With his coaching company, he advises companies on a daily basis that get four-legged friends for similar reasons.
He warns: ‘It is important that the dogs’ stress signals are also recognised early on. They can sense and smell the stress hormones of humans, but also react quickly with symptoms themselves.’ Too much input is indicated, for example, by heavy panting, severe scratching, diarrhoea and hair loss.
Finally, here are the Freiburger Nachrichten reporting on what comes next:
At the end of the pilot project, a survey of the students will show how the introduction of the campus dogs has actually affected their well-being. ‘Depending on how things go in the meantime, we can also adapt and possibly expand the project.’ The University of Fribourg is also interested in conducting a scientific study together with Fondation Barry to measure the effect of the four-legged friends on students and staff. ‘But it's still a test run at the moment. We'll see how it goes.’
Bottom Lines
‘Don’t feed the nerd’, a common (?) quip held when I was younger. ‘Don’t let troubled people run large institutions’ is the present-day equivalent.
There is no talk about the ‘Pandemic™’-induced causes of mental and other stressors here. All they are trying to do is ‘treat’ the symptoms.
Of course, this looks all ‘science-ey’, but in reality the study upon which this pilot project is heavily biased (no men, no standardised setting) and therefore it is nothing but a snap-shot in time.
Sure, dogs are nice, just look at my four-legged friend after a nice, sunny late-afternoon play-and-chase session:
The problem here is, no-one knows the benefits of having these dogs on campus. So far, all universities I’ve known came with ‘no dogs on campus’ policies, and it’ll be extremely hard to keep these up.
Moreover, may I next bring my hamster to class to help my anxiety? I mean, where does this stop?
Again, we observe, in an odd-seeming, whacky instance all the problems with ‘the Science™’ we’ve seen go mainstream in these past 4+ years: shoddy ‘studies’ that are cited seemingly at-will, with neither actors nor journalists bothering to actually read them.
Thus follows serious gaslighting, and while the subject matter—treatment dogs on campus—might sound innocuous and, as a dog-friend myself, even ‘nice’, its implications are enormous:
Should this nonsense pass muster in polite society, much more—worse—BS will come our way before too long.
What about the dogs' stress-levels?
And here's a real bummer:
If/when said universities get moslems students, they have to either tell those moslems to shut up and deal, or they'll have to arrange things the moslems doesn't the risk of becoming "unclean" from being in the vicinity of dogs.
Like bringing dogs and other animals on planes. Can’t believe they are allowing that, but it’s happening. Maybe I should take a pet snake or tarantula with me…