And what criteria have they based the information on. ??
Statistics can be misused to represent false conclusions.
For example.
Lets assume that in a certain area say of the United States.
That there are 100 Labradors in a populated area, and in the same area there are
2 Huskies.
Now if there are 2 incidents the first bitten by 1 of the Labradors and the second by 1 of the Huskies.
According to statistics you now have a 1 in 100 chance of being bitten by a Labrador in that area.
(In other words not very likley)
and a 1 in 2 chance of being bitten by a husky.
(guaranteed to be bitten by a husky)
But these numbers ONLY work if there are equivilent numbers of each dog.
The fact that there are 50 times more Labradors in that area than Huskies is ignored, except when factoring the bite by
number of population.
However they don't publish that they simply say that you have a 1 in 100 chance of being bitten by a Labrador
and a 50%, 1 in 2 chance of of being bitten by a Husky.
And so Labradors don't end up on the dangerous dogs list and Huskies do.