Cat Ownership Correlated With Heart Health

Ant tips us to a story making the rounds lately, based on reporting a couple of weeks old, that owning a cat could cut your heart attack risk by one third. No such effect was seen from dog ownership, but the researchers say that could be because there weren't enough dog owners in the study population to provide meaningful statistics. The study: "...analyzed data on 4,435 Americans, aged 30 to 75, who took part in the federal government's second National Health and Nutrition Examination Study, which ran from 1976-1980. According to the data in the survey, 2,435 of the participants either owned a cat or had owned a cat in the past, while the remaining 2,000 had never done so. [The] team then tracked rates of death from all causes, including heart and stroke. Cat owners 'appeared to have a lower rate of dying from heart attacks' over 10 years of follow-up compared to feline-free folk..."

Comments

Re:Global Warming Correlated with Pirate Number

[Mutant321]

The study doesn't make any assertions about a mechanism that might cause cats to have a direct influence on human health. It merely points out that there is a statistically significant correlation. This could be a bizarre coincidence, or it might be something that we had no idea about before. Either way, it's warrants further investigation.

Re:Ownership??

[Corf]

Sure would be swell, wouldn't it? Except that legally, in the US, humans DO own pets... so the terminology becomes more practical. Here's the AKC's take on the subject. They support use of the word "owner." Pets do have financial as well as emotional value, and terminology must reflect that to effectively preserve both. Summed up at the bottom of the page:

The AKC believes that the term guardian may in fact reduce the legal status and value of dogs as property and thereby restrict the rights of owners, veterinarians, and government agencies to protect and care for dogs.

Re:My cats

[QuickFox]

One solution might be to get both a cat and a dog.

Contrary to some people's beliefs, cats and dogs will get along very nicely once they get to know each other. The easiest way to achieve this is to let them grow up together from a very young age.

Not necessarily pseudo-science

[mysticgoat]

Correlation does not mean causation.

Right.

Yet in TFA's case, there were also these statements:

1. The stress-cardiovascular disease link is well-documented in scientific literature, and the affection and pleasure pets give humans is a known stress-buster.

2. "We certainly expected an effect, because we thought that there was a biologically plausible mechanism at work. But the magnitude of the effect was hard to predict."

3. She pointed to multiple studies that have found that animal companions "have a calming effect in regard to mental stressors."

So after RTFA, there is ample cause to believe that the statistics were analyzed within the context of a hypothesis that the reporter did not explicitly state.

Finding a strong correlation that must exist if the hypothesis is true generally increases confidence in the hypothesis.

Why wasn't the hypothesis reported in the story? More than likely, because it was framed as a null hypothesis, and those can be hard to dummy down to the general public's limited understanding of the scientific method— at least within the framework of articles like TFA. These are written to report newsworthy events, not to teach high school science.

Legality

[dreamchaser]

Legally they are owned property. You can spout animal rights rhetoric all you want. They are animals, not people. They are property. Do they have the 'right' to be treated humanely and not be abused? Damn straight. Are they our equals in the eyes of the law? No, nor should they be.

Disclaimer= I *own* and have *owned* numerous pets. They've all been treated very well, loved and cared for and fed. They have also all been my *property*.

Re:Ownership??

[Yosho]

And yet you say "I have three cats", and not "three cats live with me" or something of the sort.

So? Nobody has any issue with somebody who says "I have three children," so I don't see how there's a problem when that phrase is applied to cats as well.

Except you're completely wrong

[keineobachtubersie]

Dogs have similar effects on health.

http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=3035327 [americanheart.org]
http://www.naturalnews.com/021483.html [naturalnews.com]
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/33677.php [medicalnewstoday.com]
http://www.webmd.com/hypertension-high-blood-pressure/features/health-benefits-of-pets [webmd.com]

Please stop using studies like these to reinforce your prejudices.

Re:Cats Purr

[gardyloo]

There are tons of studies to back up that rather obvious claim. Citation?

Every species of cat purrs, both large and small. No other animal on earth purrs. Google "Do lions purr?". First hits say "No." Admittedly, I'm not entirely trustful of those sites, but they give *some* reasoning. Care to back your assertions?

not in China

[peter303]

Cat cleanup before Olympics. Dont click if you love cats.

Re:Toxoplasmosis - kills them before a heart attac

[Moridineas]

Any links showing connection between cat ownership and toxoplasmosis infection?

Additionally, humans are often infected with toxoplasmosis from eating raw or undercooked meat. This is in fact the primary way humans get infected--wikipedia mentions this as the main reason that up to 80% of people in france have come into contact with toxoplasmosis.