The Dangerous Consequences of Getting Medical Information Wrong Regarding Stray Dogs
In animal rescue, words matter. What we type, share, or imply online can directly affect the lives of the animals we are trying to protect. Yet, too often, complex medical issues are oversimplified, misrepresented, or sensationalised on social media sometimes with devastating consequences.
Recently, a friend of mine who is deeply involved in dog rescue was alarmed by a social media post suggesting that transmissible venereal tumours (TVTs) in dogs were highly infectious to humans. She genuinely wondered whether she had somehow missed an important medical development. She hadn’t. But the damage didn’t stop there.
A dog owner, having read similar content, went on to tell others that foreign dogs have tumours that can be transmitted to humans. That single misunderstanding transformed a treatable canine condition into a frightening public health myth. This is how fear spreads. And when fear spreads, animals suffer.
When Misinformation Fuels Harm
TVT is a well-documented condition in dogs. It is transmissible between dogs through specific forms of contact and is not a zoonotic disease. It does not pose a risk to humans. Yet when information is poorly worded or stripped of essential context, it can quickly morph into something far more dangerous than ignorance: perceived threat.
For stray and community dogs already battling stigma, neglect, and hostile policies this kind of misinformation can be lethal. False beliefs about disease transmission reinforce narratives that portray street dogs as dirty, dangerous, or a risk to public health. These narratives are then used to justify exclusion, abuse, abandonment, and even mass killing.
The Responsibility That Comes With a Platform
Animal welfare organisations and rescue groups often have large, loyal followings. With that reach comes responsibility. Posting medical information is not the same as sharing a rescue update or a fundraising appeal. It requires precision, clarity, and crucially an understanding of how the public may interpret what is being said.
Even technically correct information can become harmful if it is poorly framed. Alarmist language, missing disclaimers, or vague phrasing can lead readers to draw conclusions that were never intended. Once those conclusions are shared and reshared, they take on a life of their own.
Accuracy Is an Ethical Obligation
Getting medical information wrong is not a harmless mistake. In the context of stray dogs, it can:
Increase fear and hostility toward already vulnerable animals
Discourage adoption and foster care
Fuel misinformation across borders and cultures
Undermine trust in legitimate rescue and veterinary work
Rescue is not just about saving individual animals it is also about changing public perception. Every post contributes either to understanding or to stigma.
A Call for Greater Care
Before publishing medical claims, organisations should ask:
Is this information sourced from qualified veterinary professionals?
Could this wording be misinterpreted by someone without medical knowledge?
Are we clearly stating what is and is not a risk?
Are we educating, or are we unintentionally frightening?
Silence is sometimes safer than speculation. And clarity is always better than urgency when lives are at stake.
Stray dogs already face enough threats. They do not need to be endangered further by careless words. If we truly advocate for them, we must ensure that the information we share protects them not puts them in greater danger.