Slashdot Mirror
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..."
Obviously, they died of furball before they were old enough to have a heart attack.
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
I'm in ur aortas, reducing your stress
K thnx bai
Pussy is actually good for you, while having a bitch in your life makes no noticible improvements.
They obviously have never seen our cats. Stress reducers? I don't think so.
Yet Another Web Site
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.
Clearly this proves that people with heart problems choose not to buy cats.
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
Dogs are dumb, slobbering beasts that make you take them outside to take a shit.
Rather than shitting in (hopefully) a single location and forcing you to clean it up on a near daily basis lest it offend their senses and they decide the clean, but unfolded, laundry would be a better target?
I do have cats, and I tend to think I would rather have cats than dogs. Besides, that is what I have a human spawn for.
Puppies/Human Larvae are cute.
One must be ever vigilant to protect your property from puppies/spawn
One must clean up the little.... treats left behind.
Neither listen well to verbal commands
Neither will shovel the drive or mow the lawn
Clearly children are nothing more than hairless dogs that have developed the ability to walk upright.
tinfoilmedia
"The story is about a common kind of mistake that shows how important it is to understand the scientific method. Someone does a study and finds that there is a statistical correlation between one phenomenon and another. Then there is a claim that one of the phenomena is the cause of the other. Actually, however, they can both be related to something else that is not understood."
It's not a mistake at all, and your example is terrible.
First, what you're talking about is called a Confounding Variable http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confounding_variable
Second, you're making the typical mistake of assuming that because confounding variables are sometimes present that they are ALWAYS present, or not controlled for. Do you know what confounding variables were controlled for in this study before you make the assumptions you have? No you do not.
Third, that ridiculous "correlation does not equal causation" mantra that is so often tossed about is designed like so many other easily remembered but relatively useless memes. It's not a scientific principle, it's a caution, nothing more.
The fact is, most of the time, correlation has some effect on causation. If nothing else, it indicates a relationship worth examining.
"Apparently those who have no strong ties to another person..."
This makes me ask, why denounce his study then do exactly what you denounced it for?
I can't tell you how tired I am of people getting modded insightful for misunderstanding then regurgitating something that most people who discuss this subject should understand at a base level.
There's nothing remotely insightful about restating "correlation does not equal causation".
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.
Sure, I am known to purr on occasion.
--Rob
Towards the Singularity.