This is what real biosensor looks like.
In the first Bio-Sensor is Bad Science post, I documented how the messenger, Carmen Battaglia, trips numerous red flags for scientific quackery. In this post I’ll introduce you to true biosensor training and establish that there is no solid link between real biosensor and the Battaglia protocol.
Let’s start with the name: Ph.D. Battaglia calls his protocol “Bio-Sensor,” separating the words and perhaps implying that the biosensor name refers to the protocol and sort of reinforcing ‘biology’ and ‘senses’ given that his protocol is to stimulate the senses and improve the biology of the puppies.
Living organisms, which are the best detectors of other life forms, are referred to as biosensors. The dog is the most common and familiar biosensor, although geese, guinea hens, and marine mammals such as the bottle-nosed dolphin are also excellent examples of biosensors. Due to the rapid emergence of technology, the dog’s usefulness in war was due to his detection capabilities. The greatest fear of the famous Soviet Spetsnaz is the enemy’s dogs.
Biosensors are Military Working Dogs that are trained to perform specialized tasks relating to law enforcement or physical security operations including scout, sentry, patrol, tracker, narcotic, contraband, explosives, and tunnel dogs. During World War II, the U.S. military evaluated numerous species of animals as biosensores. The most effective mine detectors were determined to be pigs, coyotes, cats, raccoons, skunks, deer, ferrets, and dogs. The pig clearly out-performed all of the species examined, but the dog was chosen due to more apparent practical utility.
–A Centralized Source of Information for the Military Working Dog Program
Denzil Frost, MAJ, DVM
The word biosensor has nothing to do with the Battaglia protocol or any sort of neurological stimulation.
This is not true biosensor. This is tickling.
The word is a term of art used by the military and others that signifies a biological tool that can identify a chemical signature/obscured object of interest such as an explosive, a landmine, enemy ordinance, enemy equipment, personnel, traces of drugs or other contraband. Examples include: antibodies, enzymes, nucleic acids, bacteria, pigs dogs, dolphins, rats, mice, or even organic reactive molecules. So, if you’re not training your dog to identify chemical signatures, you’re not doing biosensor.
Notice how none of the Battaglia protocols deal with the dog’s sense of smell (their primary asset in biosensor), nor are the dogs at an appropriate age in the Battaglia protocol to hone these skills. There is no evidence that tilting a puppy, tickling its feet, or getting it mildly cold will in any way improve its later performance at scent discrimination and tracking (or anything else). There have been numerous biosensor and military working dog programs and the majority of biosensor applications featuring dogs utilizes their sense of smell and their protection/aggression behaviors, neither of which is stimulated in the Battaglia protocol. All of the exercises focus on the sense of touch, temperature, and balance; not sound, sight, taste, or smell.
The truth is that there were several different biosensor programs run by various branches of the military and private contractors, and there even was one program that was billed as “Super Dog,” and that program did seek to create wunderhunden. But none of the programs used the Battaglia protocol or anything close and the Super Dog program was not successful in creating the amazing dogs they claimed they could in the propoganda they put out.
| Battaglia’s Claims | The Truth |
|---|---|
| The U.S. Military in their canine program developed a method that still serves as a guide to what works. | The U.S. Military’s biosensor did not work, it does not serve as a guide for what works for anyone. |
| In an effort to improve the performance of dogs used for military purposes, a program called “Bio Sensor” was developed. | “Biosensor” is a military term of art, it existed before and after the specific “biosensor” program. The program started as a means to breed hip dysplasia out of German Shepherd Dogs. |
| Later, it became known to the public as the “Super Dog” Program. | One of several biosensor programs was later billed as “Super Dog” as propoganda and mission creep of one scientist. This program failed to produce any super dogs. |
| Based on years of research, the military learned that early neurological stimulation exercises could have important and lasting effects. | No published research was consulted nor produced during the “super dog” program. The military made no findings about “early neurological stimulation exercises” and they found no positive lasting effects. |
| Their studies confirmed that there are specific time periods early in life when neurological stimulation has optimum results. The first period involves a window of time that begins at the third day of life and lasts until the sixteenth day. | The U.S. Military did not investigate nor confirm anything regarding “specific time periods” and they certainly did not find 3-16 days to be optimal or even critical, nor did they find such a specific frame to be in any way effective at all. |
| It is believed that because this interval of time is a period of rapid neurological growth and development, and therefore is of great importance to the individual. | The Military neither investigated nor published nor referenced any study which confirms this. |
| The “Bio Sensor” program was also concerned with early neurological stimulation in order to give the dog a superior advantage. | The words “Early Neurological Stimulation” never appear in any documented account of any of the biosensor programs. |
| Its development utilized six exercises which were designed to stimulate the neurological system. Each workout involved handling puppies once each day. The workouts required handling them one at a time while performing a series of five exercises. Listed in order of preference, the handler starts with one pup and stimulates it using each of the five exercises. The handler completes the series from beginning to end before starting with the next pup. The handling of each pup once per day involves the following exercises:
1. Tactical stimulation (between toes)2. Head held erect 3. Head pointed down 4. Supine position 5. Thermal stimulation. |
The military did not design the protocol to stimulate the neurological system, they were actually copying Russian propaganda from the space race where Russian scientists claimed to have put future muttniks into freezers and centrifuges to acclimatize them to the stresses of space, orbit, and zero gravity.
1. The military never tickled a puppies toes (certainly not for 3-5 seconds with a Qtip) 2. The military never held the puppies in these positions for 3-5 seconds. They placed them in a centrifuge moving at 45 rpm for 3 minutes a day. 3. The military did not place the puppies on cold damp towels, they put them in a freezer. Among other stimulation observations, they also bombarded them with various noises and took them from darkness into bright light, etc. 4. They also failed to find any positive benefit from any of these exercises and never published a single paper on the effort before being shut down with prejudice. |
There doesn’t seem to have been any contact between the actual military personnel who ran the Super Dog program and Battaglia. He certainly doesn’t cite a single one of them in his bibliography nor does he cite any published articles which back up his protocol. None of the heads of the program recall ever talking with him either and not one of them supports his protocol.
What Carmen Battaglia is selling is NOT a biosensor program and his protocol isn’t tested or sanctioned or even informed by any science, certainly not the science done by the US Military.
In the next installment, I’ll introduce you to what is publicly known about the Super Dog program including the original propaganda puff piece on the project, a post-mortem on its failure, and some quotes from the actual people behind the program speaking to Battaglia’s protocol.
All posts in this series:
Bio-Sensor is Bad Science: QuackeryBio-Sensor is Bad Science: True Biosensor
* * *
Comments and disagreements are welcome, but be sure to read the Comment Policy. If this post made you think and you'd like to read more like it, consider a donation to my 4 Border Collies' Treat and Toy Fund. They'll be glad you did. You can subscribe to the feed or enter your e-mail in the field on the left to receive notice of new content. You can also like BorderWars on Facebook for more frequent musings and curiosities.
* * *
Pigs are very smart animals. Bob Bailey names them among the best generalizers (a skill dogs are notably poor at) of species he has trained. It’s kind of a shame we eat them.
Raegan recently posted..Aversive Solutions for the Positively Trained Dog
There are some cultures that raise pet pigs and eat dogs. I think in some cultures it came down to taste really. There’s certainly evidence that we’ve eaten dogs and used them for their pelts historically, and while I suspect that dogs are actually more useful than pigs, and that’s the most important factor… that’s apparently not always the case.
It’s either in Miconesia or Melanesia that there is a culture that treats pigs in exactly the same way we do dogs.
Retrieverman recently posted..Zech has his new horse
Chris: The thing you can not see but it that very special gift of a very special dog. We changed our kennel name from Harbor to Cross Spirts. It is like Einstein debates with professor about belief systems as a Christian. You can not see this energy force but it is there just as heat and cold.
Put a little pig on every passenger plane..no more highjacking
LOL!
The timing for this is astounding for me. I am in the middle of reading “For The Love Of A Dog” by Pat McConnell PhD and in the paperback, pages 84-85, she mentions this Battaglia program and the military in passing, making no attempt to either agree with it or find fault. In a situation like that and given the context of the chapter – the significance of sensory stim to promote the network of neurons and synapses – one would tend to default to the impression that she is enforcing the Battaglia approach as good. Also I cannot find any reference numbers in these paragraphs and as a rule, McConnell is good at referencing her works.
I adore McConnell for promoting an effort on the part of owners to understand their dogs, rather than to just dominate them in the old school style of might-makes-right.
But I do think I may post this link to her blog or FB page and see what comes up.
This should be interesting. I would offer a caution, though.
Many a DoD funded project has been re-directed, strangled or skewered as the tides of war and peace, donkeys and elephants have had their way with the purse strings.
Most of the time, there is some ill-documented remnant left to posterity, occasionaly revived into some new interpretation of the notion that spawned it.
Good points all Eli. I posted this link to Patricia McConnell’s FB page. I have no idea if anyone has read it or if it will amount to anything. I love McConnell though.
Interesting article and position. There are interesting pieces missing in your story: The program you are talking about actually took place in the biosensor division under the US Army. They used RAT pups, not canine. Through the Freedom of Information Act, you can get a copy of it. Or you may be able to get a copy and/or additional information from Stanley Coren (google him).
Here is a link you might find interesting:
http://maltadogtraining.webs.com/The%20Superdog%20Program%20-%20Breeders%20Guide.pdf
I would enjoy seeing you follow up and write more on this topic.
(1) I’ve done several posts on Bio-Sensor, you should read them all.
http://www.border-wars.com/category/dogs/biosensor
(2) The Army used dogs, DOG puppies. I don’t know what you’re talking about regarding “RAT pups, not canine.” They absolutely did use canine puppies.
(3) There is no such thing as “the biosensor division under the US Army.” There was a Military Working Dog PROGRAM that actually moved jurisdictions within the military, but there is not and never was a “biosensor division” nor does is the term biosensor used appropriately by Battaglia or Coren.
(4) I’ve read what Coren had to say in his book “Why Does My Dog Act That Way?: A Complete Guide to Your Dog’s Personality” and all he does is repeat the lies published by Carmen Battaglia. He dies not provide any new references or documentation or facts.
(5) I read the PDF you linked and it’s more of the same nonsense, repeating lies cooked up by Carmen Battaglia (who that author mistakes as a woman!) without any documentation and a repeat of unsupportable statements about how things were “proven” and “documented” and all the amazing results which have NEVER been proven or documented. Snake Oil bullshit.
I remember something about tickling newborn rats. Rats are used in laboratories, and results can be different depending on which rats are used. Rats that haven’t been handled when young, are too frightened to run the maze well.
If you have a 100 rats that all run the maze about the same, and you test a new drug on 50 of the rats, then retest the 100 rats, and find that the 50 rats used in the drug test no longer run the maze well, then you know that the new drug has harmful side effects.
So it is important that all rats are handled as babies, and laboratories hire rat petters. But it is also important that all the baby rats are petted and handled exactly the same way each time.
So labs have a set system (first do this, then do that for x amount of time) and all the baby rats are handled the same, with a system to produce rats that don’t bite people, and have no emotional responses to being picked up, weighed, put in a swim test, and who when set down in a maze, will immediately go run the maze looking for the treat at the end – instead of worrying about the giant hand which picked them up and set them on a cold metal weight tray and made them lay there without moving for 3 seconds.
The results of baby rat training must have been good, as I understand rat wranglers are still used – one made the news a few years ago for murder.
The idea might have been made into programs for dog puppies – I tried parts of it on one litter (just lots of extra gently petting, and light tickling when they were old enough to indicate if they liked it, which they did). The litter did turn out exceptional friendly, but by then I was breeding by choosing for good temperament (this litter was from my friendliest bitch and most responsive male).
But the baby rat training had 2 goals: tamer rats AND uniform results (hence the “do this for 3 seconds”). You wouldn’t need to time it for puppies, you could just say “you only need to do it for 3 seconds, don’t overdo it”.
I am not for or against what you are saying. I believe in using critical thinking skills as do you and have tried over the years to find good information for or against it but admit it has been quite difficult.
I have read all four posts that you did and found them informative and interesting but also left more questions. Battaglia, Coren, even you – no one yet has laid out a clear argument with supporting facts proving or disproving the studies. There is a lack of information across the board. Which does tend to make the entire program suspicious. I would agree here.
As for the writer of the article i posted to you: English is not his native language. I thought he did a pretty good job considering.
I don’t think you understand the fundamental nature of argumentation and the scientific method. Specifically what the “burden of proof” is and the inability to prove a negative.
Battaglia and Coren are presenting the wild claim that tickling a dog’s toes has AMAZING results. The burden of proof is on THEM to prove these statements.
I have no burden of proof, I win the argument because I have shown that neither Battaglia nor Coren have met THEIR burden of proof. In fact they outright LIE about observable facts in their support of their claims. This means that they lose. There is NO reason to believe what they claim.
There is no “disproving the studies” when the studies didn’t exist as they claim, didn’t document what they claim was documented and the “lack of information” is in all ways a fault of THEIR position.
The program is not suspicious, the program was a failure and NO SCIENTIFIC PAPERS WERE EVER PUBLISHED out of it. This is just a fact. There is NOTHING to impeach in this regard because NOTHING was concluded or documented.
On the other hand, we have the outright fabrications and lies published by Battaglia and repeated word-for-word by Coren and that guy you linked me to, with NO NEW information, and all of that is entirely bullshit for all the reasons I’ve already stated. Just because lies were repeated doesn’t make them facts.
For example, you repeat the grand claims from Battaglia’s work on your website. That doesn’t make it fact. YOU have not in any way run a scientific experiment that documents these effects. So it is not my burden of proof to prove you wrong. I can simply point out that you have not posted any cross-examinable evidence of the efficacy of any of the statements you have repeated.
For example, you published (http://www.connemaraterrier.com/Puppies/Puppies/biosensor.html) this:
“Five benefits have been observed in canines that were exposed to the Bio Sensor stimulation exercises:
Improved cardio performance (heart rate)
Stronger heart beats
Stronger adrenal glands
More tolerance to stress
Greater resistance to disease ”
WHERE IS YOUR DOCUMENTATION FOR ANY OF THIS? What does “stronger adrenal glands” even MEAN?
You claim: “The Bio Sensor method is a well-documented puppy development tool.”
WELL DOCUMENTED? How so? You don’t link to even ONE published paper in a peer-reviewed journal. NOT ONE. So how the heck can you claim that it’s well documented? Perhaps you meant to say that it’s widely repeated nonsense that has been peddled by a big wig in the AKC and many breeders blindly follow it like sheep but none of them have actually questioned the grand claims made by Battaglia.
You have gone to the trouble of conforming to the fad, to the extent that you’ve taken photos of yourself doing this bogus protocol and posting it on the internet to convince people that your puppies are superior because of it! I’d say you’ve drunk the koolaid and are only now coming to the realization that it was just a stupid fad that you followed for no good reason save peer pressure which you contributed to by re-publishing the nonsense and making it part of what you consider to be a necessary and ethical part of breeding dogs. All with no evidence.
The specific claims of benefits scientifically in my opinion is absurd. Specifically when it comes to greater resistance to disease and stronger adrenal glands. Won’t disagree about reducing stress.
I don’t think you have read the mission of Bio-Sensor Research as stated within the military. Its mission was to find the best breed of dog for military use. Once this was determined, it was changed to improve the selected breed in the qualities needed in the military. These qualities are size, aggressiveness, intelligence yet acclimatize to being examined by a veterinarian or assistant for health and wounds. A side project was reducing the occurrence of Hip Dysplasia in the breed. This was done through many tests and handling of the dogs from birth until they were sent for intense training.
I was there.