Service Dog Assault

[BoSoxGal]

Here’s a terrible story out of Kitchener, Ontario, where four overgrown bullies physically assault a man with a service dog in their zeal to toss him out of a restaurant required by Canadian law to accommodate service dogs. I recommend watching the video to get the full picture of what tremendous assholes the bullies are.

Scooter please keep us updated on this story, I hope to hear the victim gets a big fat payout and the bullies get prosecuted for assault.

Waterloo cops investigating after man with service dog booted from restaurant

[MGMcAnick]

Perhaps if the establishment's owner had identified himself better, up front, the situation would not have escalated to the extent it did. Apparently the dog owner didn't understand.
He made it worse by not leaving. While he said he had a license for the dog, did he ever show it? I don't know Canadian service dog law, but I suppose he had right to have the dog there, if indeed it was licensed. Bogus licenses can be purchased online, as can a vest identifying the dog as a service dog. It is a big problem in this country. May be there as well.
Does a business owner have the right to refuse to serve anyone, with or without a licensed service dog?
Should the other "bullies" have popped up? No, of course not.
Maybe he should get a pit bull for his next service dog. That one didn't serve very well.

[Scooter]

So it is a certified service dog; someone interviewed the person who trained and certified it. Leckie, who has Asperger's and is a violinist with a local symphony orchestra, claims he had the papers in his hand when he was being thrown out. Restaurant owner claims that if Leckie had shown the papers, he would have been left alone. Meanwhile the restaurant has become a focus for protests which have been met with violence from those exiting. We'll see what the police have to say, but it seems like some misunderstanding on both sides that spiraled out of control because of the aggressive response by the restaurant owner and his "buddies".

[Big RR]

Does a business owner have the right to refuse to serve anyone, with or without a licensed service dog?

In the US my understanding is, no; the ADA specifically requires businesses to permit people with service animals (which are different from emotional support animals) to be admitted and use the services (there may be some exceptions but they are fairly limited). Indeed, there are some pretty crazy rules--e.g. hotels must permit service animals to use any room, not just a reserved subset of animal permitted rooms. This causes an extreme problem for people with severe animal allergies, as the dander remains when the animal leaves (and the deep cleaning needed to remove it is not practical), but the law has decreed that the disability requiring the service animal must supersede the disability of the extremely allergic person; the decision has been made.

Emotional support animals are different, and online credentials are plentiful. Indeed, many people purchased the credntials to permit them to bring their pets on airplanes for free; this has been curtailed by the airlines, but is still fairly prevalent. But emotional support animals and their owners do not generally have the same rights as legitimate service animals.

ETA: I checked one other thing online; the ADA provides that a restaurant may not inquire as to the nature of any disability requiring the service animal or require any credentials for the animal; the restaurant owner can only inquire as to what tasks the animal is expected to perform and whether the animal has been trained to perform them; the answer of the patron must be accepted unless it makes no sense. Also, a restaurant may refuse or expel an animal which poses a "danger" to others, whether snapping or biting or defecating/urinating on the floor.

[Long Run]

ETA: I checked one other thing online; the ADA provides that a restaurant may not inquire as to the nature of any disability requiring the service animal or require any credentials for the animal;

Yes, but in Canada, they can ask for a license/permit where the disability is not obvious (blind, deaf, physically disabled). That appears to be where this scenario got off track.

[Big RR]

It actually does make sense; we have special permits to use handicapped spaces, why not the saem for service animals. No need to disclose the nature of disability, only to show that the need is genuine and the service animal is trained to help.

[BoSoxGal]

ETA: I checked one other thing online; the ADA provides that a restaurant may not inquire as to the nature of any disability requiring the service animal or require any credentials for the animal;

Yes, but in Canada, they can ask for a license/permit where the disability is not obvious (blind, deaf, physically disabled). That appears to be where this scenario got off track.

Yes, but only because he was approached by someone who didn’t identify themselves as in any role of authority (i.e., business owner) and given the evidence of the video I’m well sure he was obnoxious and rude in doing so, so I do not fault the victim for failing to immediately comply.

Nevertheless he had the papers in hand for most of the altercation while the bullies manhandled and assaulted him while telling him the dog can stay but he needs to leave - revealing them to be near imbeciles in their lack of understanding of the law - or maybe they’re just in total contempt for it.

Meanwhile the dog was placid and quiet throughout the whole altercation, all the evidence needed to prove it’s a real trained service dog.

I fucking hate the owner and his friends. I hope he loses his restaurant and every penny in his pockets and accounts. He’s vile.

[Scooter]

And why did it require two people to approach him to ask for it, even if one of them was the owner? Everything about this says that they began with the assumption that this wasn't a legitimate service animal, and weren't likely to retreat from that no matter what.

[Jarlaxle]

Does a business owner have the right to refuse to serve anyone, with or without a licensed service dog?

In the US my understanding is, no; the ADA specifically requires businesses to permit people with service animals (which are different from emotional support animals) to be admitted and use the services (there may be some exceptions but they are fairly limited). Indeed, there are some pretty crazy rules--e.g. hotels must permit service animals to use any room, not just a reserved subset of animal permitted rooms. This causes an extreme problem for people with severe animal allergies, as the dander remains when the animal leaves (and the deep cleaning needed to remove it is not practical), but the law has decreed that the disability requiring the service animal must supersede the disability of the extremely allergic person; the decision has been made.

Emotional support animals are different, and online credentials are plentiful. Indeed, many people purchased the credntials to permit them to bring their pets on airplanes for free; this has been curtailed by the airlines, but is still fairly prevalent. But emotional support animals and their owners do not generally have the same rights as legitimate service animals.

ETA: I checked one other thing online; the ADA provides that a restaurant may not inquire as to the nature of any disability requiring the service animal or require any credentials for the animal; the restaurant owner can only inquire as to what tasks the animal is expected to perform and whether the animal has been trained to perform them; the answer of the patron must be accepted unless it makes no sense. Also, a restaurant may refuse or expel an animal which poses a "danger" to others, whether snapping or biting or defecating/urinating on the floor.

This damn near killed my good friend. Someone brought in a service dog...he is allergic, and asthmatic. He wound up in the hospital after a Code Three ambulance ride, and on oxygen for two days. Thankfully, the fire station was only a couple blocks away, or he'd be dead. Being around ANY dog is instantly life-threatening for him.

He has never visited his brother and sister in law's house, because they have 2 dogs. If they visit him, they have to shower, wear freshly-washed clothes, and run sticky rollers over the seats in their truck before leaving.

[Jarlaxle]

It actually does make sense; we have special permits to use handicapped spaces, why not the saem for service animals. No need to disclose the nature of disability, only to show that the need is genuine and the service animal is trained to help.

This.

[BoSoxGal]

This damn near killed my good friend. Someone brought in a service dog...he is allergic, and asthmatic. He wound up in the hospital after a Code Three ambulance ride, and on oxygen for two days. Thankfully, the fire station was only a couple blocks away, or he'd be dead. Being around ANY dog is instantly life-threatening for him.

He has never visited his brother and sister in law's house, because they have 2 dogs. If they visit him, they have to shower, wear freshly-washed clothes, and run sticky rollers over the seats in their truck before leaving.

This kind of severe reaction to dander is so incredibly rare that many allergists don’t even list pet allergy as potentially deadly, unlike many other potential sources of anaphylactic shock like peanuts, shellfish, insect stings, chemicals or substances like latex.

Even from the common sources I listed, the incidence of anaphylaxis is still very rare overall. The incidence of a severe anaphylactic reaction to dog dander is so exceedingly rare that there is no question the balance should weigh in favor of service dogs assisting the disabled in public places and private businesses open to the public. Those who harbor an exceedingly rare potential for dog dander anaphylaxis need to carry some epi pens and assume the risk.

[Big RR]

This kind of severe reaction to dander is so incredibly rare that many allergists don’t even list pet allergy as potentially deadly, unlike many other potential sources of anaphylactic shock like peanuts, shellfish, insect stings, chemicals or substances like latex.

I would suggest you check with allergists before you make this claim. My wife has a sever allergy to dogs and cats (more to cats) and has carried an epipen for decades, using it several times to stave off anaphylaxis. She also tried to use shot to try and reduce the sensitivity through the allergy department at the medical school she worked in, and wound up in the hospital for several days. And she was not alone. Any allergist who maintains that deadly allergies do not exist is a complete imbecile who should surrender his/her license.

I realize many try to minimize allergies or maintain "it's all in their minds", but I can assure you such is not the case.

ETA:

Those who harbor an exceedingly rare potential for dog dander anaphylaxis need to carry some epi pens and assume the risk.

Leaving out the "rare" qualifier, would it be that difficult in a large restaurant to keep the animals and persons with allergies at opposite sides? And would it be that much of an imposition to those using service dogs to understand that hotels may keep a small number of rooms allergen free? The people with allergies are not asking for their own hotels, restaurants, or planes, just the same access to them as everyone else, including those with service animals.

[BoSoxGal]

I’m not minimizing allergies at all. I researched numerous sites of allergists before posting what I did and I stand by the content. Do a Google search yourself and you will find numerous results of allergists and other medical resources using the word rare to describe the incidence of anaphylaxis generally, and particularly in references to pet dander allergy. Sorry about your wife but nevertheless anaphylaxis as a reaction to pet dander allergy is very rare.

It’s a whole different discussion as to whether the world should shift to accommodate that small percentage of people with allergies (I have a number of allergies myself, I don’t minimize the condition at all) that are prone to anaphylaxis.

[Big RR]

Well you can accept your quick google search; I have lived with it and spent a lot more time investigating it and a variety of therapies, and reading dozens of papers and can tell you that it is not as small as you think it is, let alone something allergists don't even address. Really nothing more to say.

[BoSoxGal]

Leaving out the "rare" qualifier, would it be that difficult in a large restaurant to keep the animals and persons with allergies at opposite sides? And would it be that much of an imposition to those using service dogs to understand that hotels may keep a small number of rooms allergen free? The people with allergies are not asking for their own hotels, restaurants, or planes, just the same access to them as everyone else, including those with service animals.

Pet cats and dogs number in the many millions in the USA alone, and many millions of households have them in residence. What actually causes the allergic reaction isn’t the animal, it’s the dander from the animal, which gets everywhere in a home where animals reside and is essentially ever present, even in a fairly well kept home. In any given public space - including a restaurant or airplane without an animal on board - you will be surrounded by people in clothes that have pet dander on them. So really if a person is so highly sensitive I’m not sure how they can safely exist in public spaces at all. Certainly they would be wise to carry the two epipen doses suggested by medical professionals and if asthmatic they should carry a rescue inhaler and whatever else would be indicated to sustain life while getting to emergency medical care.

[BoSoxGal]

Well you can accept your quick google search; I have lived with it and spent a lot more time investigating it and a variety of therapies, and reading dozens of papers and can tell you that it is not as small as you think it is, let alone something allergists don't even address. Really nothing more to say.

Big RR my niece is living with serious allergies, I know a lot about serious allergies and have read extensively my quick Google search ahead of that post isn’t the extent of my knowledge. Stuff your superiority.

I will now commence to post the links to many medical resources - like the Mayo Clinic, they might know a bit more than you - which reiterate my absolutely true claim of the rarity of deadly anaphylaxis related to pet dander allergy.

Oh wait, no I’m not going to because you know how to work the Google too and I don’t need to waste time arguing with someone who is certain that he is righter than all the medical information available in the public realm.

eta: If everything I’ve found over the years in medical journals and allergist websites etc. is wrong, you are very welcome to provide me with the citations to medical sources that indicate anaphylaxis and anaphylactic shock deaths related to pet dander allergy are in fact common and dogs and cats are killing people in droves.

[Big RR]

Oh wait, no I’m not going to because you know how to work the Google too and I don’t need to waste time arguing with someone who is certain that he is righter than all the medical information available in the public realm.

EAT:

you are very welcome to provide me with the citations to medical sources that indicate anaphylaxis and anaphylactic shock deaths related to pet dander allergy are in fact common and dogs and cats are killing people in droves.

If I even suggested that, I would do so. But, of course, I did not.

[Long Run]

Oh wait, no I’m not going to because you know how to work the Google too and I don’t need to waste time arguing with someone who is certain that he is righter than all the medical information available in the public realm.

Pretty common situation on this board. I too know someone I spend a fair amount of time with who has a severe allergy to dogs and we have to make special arrangements when we are going to hang out with him. So, just on this small board, we have three people who have people close to them with severe allergies, anecdotal as that is. And didn't the Obamas also have severe allergies so they had to go with a special breed that did not carry the allergen. Along with your data, it is counter-factual to describe such allergy as "rare".

[BoSoxGal]

Sorry but there isn’t any such thing as a hypoallergenic dog, which just shows how many people are pretty ignorant about immunology. The dander that is allergenic comes from proteins in skin and spit and urine, so even hairless dogs and cats are allergenic, the hair has nothing to do with it. People who buy ‘hypoallergenic’ dogs just don’t want to deal with much shedding - or they are painfully misinformed about their own or their children’s allergies.

And again, while the rate of pet dander allergy is fairly common at between 10-30% depending on which medical journal articles you consult, the rate of pet dander induced anaphylaxis is so rare as to fall into the ‘other’ category in lists on all the allergy association websites and many allergist websites and other medical sources I’ve referenced. Then when you get to the next level of anaphylactic shock requiring hospitalization there is no evidence that any substantial number of the ~30,000 ER admissions in the USA yearly are pet dander induced that I could find and I’ve now spent a couple of hours looking. If it happens it is apparently so rare as to be statistically insignificant and many multiples of sources on the web confirm this, both articles geared to the lay person and medical journal articles from the annals of immunology.

Further just to put this into perspective, .3% of anaphylactic shock cases - from all causes, primary being food, insect stings and medication/latex - per year result in death. It’s a very rare thing by itself, never mind that cases arising from pet dander allergy are some smaller percentage of the 10% of cases falling under ‘other’ and/or idiopathic (of unknown origin) in all the allergy journal literature I could find.

Any person deemed to have severe allergies is potentially at risk for anaphylaxis. A doctor having made this finding will issue prescription for epipens as millions have (my niece among them) and caution about anaphylaxis and how to treat. My niece also has asthma so is at greater risk of anaphylaxis. Her primary allergy is to nuts, but she is also allergic to pet dander (as am I, and both her parents). Nevertheless she lives in a reasonably messy home with 3 cats and two dogs and remains alive despite this.

The incidence of serious anaphylaxis leading to anaphylactic shock arising from pet dander is exceedingly rare, just as I have repeatedly asserted. Prove otherwise, not just by anecdata of ‘people I know have dander allergy.’

[BoSoxGal]

RE: the myth of hypoallergenic dogs

Are Hypoallergenic Dog Breeds Better for Pet Allergies?

Over 70% of families in the United States have one or more domesticated animals, such as dogs and cats, inside their home.1 At the same time, up to 20% of the population is allergic to dogs—the most popular household pet in the United States.2

Dogs have certain proteins in their dander (dead skin), urine, and saliva that trigger allergic reactions in people whose immune systems are sensitive to them. This reaction can cause allergic rhinitis, asthma, hives (urticaria), and other allergy symptoms.

Many people with this allergy who wish to have a dog seek out so-called "hypoallergenic" breeds in an attempt to avoid allergic symptoms.3 However, some research suggests that hypoallergenic dogs may not truly be hypoallergenic.

This article discusses the science behind hypoallergenic dogs and whether or not they are actually better for people with dog allergies. It also includes tips to consider if you are thinking about getting a dog but are allergic to them.

The Concept of Hypoallergenic Dogs

The major allergen in dogs that triggers allergies is the protein called Canis familiaris 1 (Can f 1). It is produced in a dog's tongue and the epithelial tissues that line their skin, internal organs, and glands.

The concept of hypoallergenic dogs began when some dog breeders marketed certain breeds that shed less as more easily tolerated by people with dog allergies.2

Popular dog breeds that have been labeled as hypoallergenic include:

Poodles
Malteses
Afghan hounds
Labradoodles
Schnauzers

These dogs are commonly marketed as hypoallergenic because they shed little to no fur compared to other breeds. In theory, this would also mean that they would produce less Can f 1 and would therefore trigger less allergy symptoms.2

What the Science Says

A few studies have been done to determine if non-shedding dog breeds are truly hypoallergenic. Specifically, researchers have tried to answer the following:

Do so-called hypoallergenic dogs produce less Can f 1?

Does less Can f 1 accumulate in homes with non-shedding dogs?

Do hypoallergenic breeds reduce the risk of allergy symptoms?

To answer the first question, researchers in the Netherlands collected fur samples from six hypoallergenic breeds: Labradoodles, Labrador retrievers, poodles, Spanish waterdogs, and Airedale terriers. They also took fur samples from a control group of non-hypoallergenic dogs.2

When Can f 1 levels were tested, researchers found that the hypoallergenic breeds produced significantly higher levels of Can f 1, with the highest levels found in poodles followed by Labradoodles.2 Furthermore, Can f 1 levels also varied significantly within each breed from one individual dog to the next.

These differences did not appear to be related to gender, age, spay/neuter status or how frequently the dog bathed or swam—although recent swimming (but not bathing) did significantly reduce the amount of dog allergen collected for all types of dog breeds.2

These same researchers also looked to answer the second question by analyzing dust samples from the homes of hypoallergenic and non-hypoallergenic dogs for Can f 1.2

Homes with Labradoodles did have lower concentrations of Can f 1 in the dust samples. But overall, there was no difference in the amount of Can f 1 in homes with hypoallergenic dogs versus homes with non-hypoallergenic dogs.2

In general, homes with carpet contained more allergens than homes with hard surface floors, regardless of the breed living there. However, no amount of cleaning reduced how much Can f 1 was present in airborne dust around the homes.2

Finally, to answer the third question, a 2018 study analyzed the allergy risk of Swedish families with dogs. The study included 23,425 children who grew up with either a hypoallergenic or non-hypoallergenic dog since their first year of life.4

Not surprisingly, most children with a hypoallergenic dog had one or more parent with a dog allergy. Children who grew up with a hypoallergenic dog were also significantly more likely to have a dog allergy at age 6, compared to children who grew up with a non-hypoallergenic breed.4

Recap

There is no evidence that breeds considered hypoallergenic truly produce less allergens than non-hypoallergenic breeds. Furthermore, children who grow up with a hypoallergenic dog may be more likely to become allergic to dogs than children who grow up with a non-hypoallergenic breed.

Are Hypoallergenic Dogs Worth It?

Despite the evidence, more than 80% of people with dog allergies who own breeds marketed as hypoallergenic claim to have less symptoms around their dogs than they do around non-hypoallergenic breeds.2

Nonetheless, scientific evidence does not support the concept of hypoallergenic dogs, although some individual dogs—hypoallergenic or not—may produce less Can f 1 than others.

Keep in mind that no significant difference in Can f 1 accumulation has been found in dust samples between homes where hypoallergenic or non-hypoallergenic dogs live. No amount of cleaning will change that, but not having carpet might help some.2

Realistically speaking, the only way to prevent dog allergy symptoms entirely is to not live with a dog in your home.

Options for Managing Dog Allergies

If you are convinced that you must have a dog even though you are allergic to them, you are not alone. But before you make a decision, it's important that you talk to your allergist about how living with a dog might impact your health.

Depending on how severe your allergy symptoms are, for example, if you have allergic asthma that interferes with your breathing, your allergist may strongly advise against you getting a dog.

If your allergy symptoms are mild, or you are considering the possibility of a service dog, talk with your allergist about other ways to control your symptoms.

Some patients with significant dog allergy will be able to reduce or eliminate their allergy with allergen immunotherapy (allergy shots). Steroidal and antihistamine nose sprays and antihistamine pills may be helpful as well.

Even though you won't be able to completely ban animal allergens from your home, you may want to consider banning the dog from one "allergy free" space in your home, preferably your bedroom or someplace you like to spend a lot of time.

Summary

Hypoallergenic dogs were initially marketed for people with pet allergies because they shed less and were thought to produce less allergens.

There is no scientific evidence to back up these claims, though. In fact, research shows that so-called hypoallergenic breeds may produce equal amounts of allergens, if not more in some cases.

A Word From Verywell

For many people, dogs are more than just pets. They are family, and for hundreds of thousands of people, they provide physical, emotional, and psychiatric support.

If saying no to getting a dog is simply not an option for you despite your dog allergy, you may need to take extra steps to manage your allergic symptoms. Discuss your decision with an allergist who understands your commitment to getting a dog and will work with you to keep your symptoms under control.

The end of this article circles back to the point I made above; on balance the presence of dogs in private and public spaces is a much greater benefit than risk to the great majority of people, including service dogs for blindness or other disabilities, or ESAs for a range of serious mental health conditions including PTSD. The number of people in our society who suffer from the maladies that service animals treat is a far greater number than the number of people in our society at risk for serious anaphylaxis and anaphylactic shock requiring medical intervention arising from pet dander allergy by a very large factor, I am quite certain from my review of the literature. Doubtless this is why supports in the law for service animals in spaces open to the public are so strong.