 |
| What's not soothing about the presence of this little guy? |
The health benefits of
pets are somewhat contested. One month a pro-pet group publishes on the
benefits of pet ownership, the next month a bunch of killjoys publish a paper
finding an absence of health benefits or even a detrimental effect. It pains me
to say it but rarely is a field of scientific research so overtly biased.
The truth is, it’s
complicated. I suspect people relate to their pets differently, integrating
them into their respective lifestyles in very different ways, some of which are
positive and others not so. Example: I’ve met clients who prefer not to leave
their home because of their pet or pets. On the surface that seems terrible,
but it depends on the individual circumstances. If your pet is your only
companion and you won’t leave because of an unhealthy attachment, then I would
suspect this could be detrimental to your health. But if your passion in life
is to tend to your pet or menagerie, if that is where you draw your happiness,
then you’re likely oodles better off than someone who doesn’t have that.
I also know from
experience that our attachment and behaviour around companion animals changes
over the lifespan of that animal and depends on the circumstances. For example,
had a team of scientists arrived on my doorstep the week leading up to the
removal of Phil’s retained tooth root, my blood pressure would have been
sky-high (especially any time I cast my eyes on poor little Phil and the
monster-boogers emerging from his right nostril) and they might well have
concluded that it really was a detrimental attachment. Come the next week their
findings would have been different. So I think we need to be careful about
drawing blanket conclusions either way when it comes to these studies. The
context has a huge impact which is very hard for scientists to factor in.
It’s also highly probable
that writing about the health benefits of pets on this site is preaching to the
converted. And as a veterinarian I have already laid my cards on the table – I
believe that the relationship between humans and animals is important, is
valuable, and is good for us and them.
All this by way of
introduction to a study just published in Anthrozoos which found that dog
ownership is associated with lower blood pressure. So why does that matter?
Untreated hypertension is
associated with cardiovascular and kidney disease, and we’re going to see much
more of that in an aging population with a sedentary lifestyle and questionable
dietary choices.
It is documented that
ambulatory blood pressure is a better predictor of hypertension related
morbidity (sickness) and mortality (death) than office blood pressure. [On a
related note, a colleague of mine diagnosed himself with raging hypertension
when he measured his blood pressure at work, only to find it was normal at the
doctor. Apparently, the doc said, everyone is hypertensive at work!!!]
But seriously. If dog ownership is found to reduce morbidity and mortality, its a good argument for designing more pet-friendly retirement village and nursing homes. And another great reason (for those who needed one) to get a dog.
 |
| Bosca: do people really need a reason? |
The latest study examined
pet-owners aged 50 or older who lived independently and had mildly elevated
blood pressure, for which most of them were taking medication. Participants
wore a device which measured and reported on their blood pressure every 20
minutes – i.e. as they were going about their daily tasks – over there separate
days across the three month study period.
The presence of a dog was
associated with significantly lower systolic blood pressure (systole = when the
heart muscle contracts) and diastolic blood pressure (diastole = when the heart
muscle relaxes).
All good. Except when it
came to cats. Cat owners had lower diastolic BP, but higher systolic BP when
their cat was present. What does THAT mean? Well, it confused everyone as
previous studies suggest that cat owners have lower stress and lower systolic
and diastolic blood pressure.
 |
| The effect of cats on blood pressure is a little confusing. |
According to spokesperson
Jeanette Fielding, “We know changes in systolic blood pressure can be
influenced by physical activity or arousal and further work on the nature of
the interaction would be required to determine if this explained our current
findings”.
The study, conducted at
the University of Maryland, was partly funded by the Waltham Centre for Pet
Nutrition, the scientific arm of Mars Petcare.
 |
| This is Hero, whom I caught lounging on top of the guinea pig enclosure. (He was removed just after this photo was taken). Its just one way he increases my blood pressure (probably also that of the guinea pigs). Look at that "I'm so busted" expression. |
