Talk:Aging in dogs/Archive 1

Archive 1

merge

merge with Dog years ?

Agreed and merged. Actually Dog years changed to a redirect since all material is already in this article. No objections noted. FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 10:42, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

The graph's labels

The graph's labeling scheme seems a bit wonky to me. If anything the X and Y axes should be switched, because a "dog year" is traditionally understood to be the term for the imaginary unit used to describe a dog's physiological age, whereas a "human year" is an actual year. Perhaps "Real time" and "Dog's equivalent age" would be better. Octan (talk) 20:41, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

AIUI, what you state is merely a popular misunderstanding. By those definitions, the term "human year" is really nonsense - it's an earth year. OTOH if we go by the sources I've seen that seem to know what they're talking about, then the axis labels are correct.

Here's my understanding of the correct terminology. We need to differentiate between units of time and units of age. A year is a unit of time. A human year is a unit of age, defined as the amount by which a human ages in a year. Similarly, a dog year is the amount by which a dog ages in a year.

To change the labels to "Real time" and "Dog's equivalent age" would beg the question "equivalent age relative to what?" If you really want to be unambiguous, you should use the labels "Dog's age (years)" and "Human's age (years)". You could go one stage further and write "earth years" instead of just "years"; then nobody can complain. -- Smjg (talk) 17:53, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Regardless of how philosophical you want to get with this discussion of "what is a year," the fact still remains that when looking at this graph, the axes are mislabeled. Reading it the way it is written now, one would find that after approximately 120 years, a dog weighing 90+ lbs would be approximately 16 "years" of ("dog") age, while what is meant to be shown is that a dog of the size is approximately 120 "dog years old" after 16 years. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Casual Karma (talk • contribs) 16:00, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't understand your comment at all. -- Smjg (talk) 23:50, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Irish Setters

Everything I've ever read about Irish Setters states that they live betwixt twelve and fifteen years; why is it that they are listed under the category for dogs with an average lifespan of eleven years? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.157.10.208 (talk) 22:16, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Dog years

I saw this article and wanted to make those working on this article aware of it if they weren't already [1]. Cheerios. ChildofMidnight (talk) 03:12, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

It's not clear from that part of the article whether the term "dog years" has any legitimacy in the veterinary/scientific community. I always assumed it was nonsense, popularised by ignorant dog enthusiasts, but I don't know whether this really is the case. (Huey45 (talk) 07:52, 20 April 2010 (UTC))

The opening section of this article states "The idea of a human year being equivalent to seven dog years is a misconception". Shouldn't it be the other way around? Misconception or not, I believe the claim is "One dog year being equivalent to seven human years". JimboB (talk) 16:02, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Anti-Semitic, and incorrect reference

I don't know how to edit references. But the reference to the supposed Dogs for Jews book, purportedly by Gina Spadafori (a legitimate dog writer), is incorrect and obvious anti-semitic vandalism. I checked Google and Amazon, and could track down no such book, and then I checked the ISBN, which refers to Gina Spadafori's book Dogs for Dummies. Here is a reference proving this: http://www.amazon.com/Dogs-Dummies-Gina-Spadafori/dp/1568848617 . Will someone who understands how to make this change please do so? Thank you very much. Songflower (talk) 21:52, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

The intro

"Aging in dogs covers the impact of aging in the domestic dog (Canis lupus familiaris), common medical and clinical issues arising, and life expectancy."

In what way does the phenomenon of ageing "cover" its impact? I think this sentence needs to be rewritten. Anyone fancy a stab at it? — Smjg (talk) 22:02, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Colorblindness, protanopia

The chart showing how dog age correlates to human age cannot be deciphered by a reader with a type of red green colorblindness called "protanopia". Please consult a simulations of how the spectrum looks to protanopes. This can be found on the wikipedia page for colirblindness. Keywords: colorblindness, dichromacy, dichromats, protanopia, (variant) protanomalous. See also, "How do things look to the colorblind?" Byrne and Hilbert. 2010. See also, "color vision" Leo Hurvich, 1981.

Please correct the color coding to meet a more universal human audience. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.111.239.170 (talk) 05:13, 12 February 2014 (UTC)