Do pets really make us healthier?

We should be careful with studies. They’re only worth what’s put into them — sample sizes, number of variables, control groups and other factors mean all studies are not created equal. A correlation does not a cause make, but then again, some are more convincing than others.

Especially when you want it to be true.

Among the more convincing are metastudies — research compiling a bunch of other studies, usually over a period of years, resulting in a whole lot more data than one study alone could accomplish.

It’s a dog’s (longer) life. One such meta-analysis published Tuesday by Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes, a peer-reviewed journal of the American Heart Association, concluded dog owners are more likely to live longer.

Nearly 64 percent of American households include a dog (38.4 percent) or cat (25.4 percent), according to the American Veterinary Medical Association’s 2018 report.

Using 10 studies published from 1950 to 2019 with more than 3 million participants, the metastudy scientists concluded dog owners are 24 percent less likely to die from any cause. For people with heart problems, the benefit was even stronger.

Is the life extender doggy-love? Companionship? The responsibility of caring for another being, taking the focus away from ourselves?

It could also be the workout. Walking a dog 20 to 30 minutes each day meets the American Heart Association’s recommended 150 minutes of weekly exercise.

Caveat: This analysis didn’t examine risk factors, such as smoking, alcohol, or cholesterol.

Cats do love you. I enjoy the aloofness of cats; like them, I need my space. But as any lifelong cat owner will tell you, they’re just as emotional as dogs. They simply express it differently.

New research from Oregon State University published this month in Current Biology concludes cats form attachments similar not only to dogs, but to babies. Testing more than 100 cats and owners, a two-minute separation resulted in cat stress and attachment behavior that mimicked what babies and dogs often do — needing to “check in” frequently once reunited.

The lead study author told Oregon PBS that attachment is a survival instinct which displays cross-species, in animals as well as humans. We may see cat independence in some ways (using the litter box, not needing to be a shadow), but the researchers said they need security and comfort as much as dogs and children do.

Docs recommend pets. Whatever the species or reasons, multiple studies correlate good health with pet ownership (appropriate to individual medical conditions). An article published Feb. 19 by the renowned Cedars-Sinai institution outlined such benefits, such as:

Reduced cholesterol and lower blood pressure. Too many studies to list support this, according to Harvard Medical School. Put simply, pets calm us and encourage movement.

Reduced stress and increased fitness. According to the Centers for Disease Control, prolonged stress is linked to chronic conditions such as obesity, heart disease, diabetes, and depression. The stress reduction factor is ageless; kids with pets tend to have fewer behavior issues than those without them.

Possible correlation with reduced dementia symptoms. A 2002 University of Nebraska study indicated having dogs around reduced agitation and behavioral issues in some Alzheimer’s patients. Cedars-Sinai also uses dogs with patients generally, citing health benefits.

But again, correlations do not necessarily mean causality. A divisive 2017 statistical analysis by scientists at the nonprofit thinktank RAND Corporation suggested the correlation may work somewhat in reverse: It could be the ability to own pets which makes us healthier, more than the pets themselves.

Maybe it’s not the pets. Decades of pro-pet research led to an implied consensus that pets are good for health. Yet the RAND research on cats and health did something other studies hadn’t: It factored in economics, another big correlator with good health.

Yes, the 5,000 pet households in the RAND study were healthier, said the researchers. But that correlation wasn’t as strong when money was factored in; the healthy pet-owners were also likelier to have a better socioeconomic status than non-owners.

The kids with pets tended to be healthier overall, have fewer mood and behavior problems, and were more likely to be physically active.

That’s what the self-described pet-loving scientists told The Atlantic magazine they expected. What they didn’t expect was once they controlled for other variables such as economics, they found “no evidence for a beneficial effect of pet ownership for child health.”

As you may guess, this is not a popular pet study.

So does it mean pets don’t matter? No, the lead study author told The Atlantic: “I think there are many other positive benefits to owning a pet besides thinking that it will improve your health … Obviously having a pet brings joy and companionship and a multitude of other things.”

There’s another possibility. While having more money certainly makes pets more affordable, that itself could be a correlation — a greater likelihood of owning one. That doesn’t mean dogs and cats don’t still make us healthier, once we have them.

Or maybe I’m just happily cat-biased.

•••

Sholeh Patrick is an obedient cat-servant and columnist for the Hagadone News Network. Contact her at Sholeh@cdapress.com.