Pets and Human Health in Germany and Australia: National Longitudinal Results

Abstract

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in NATIONAL LONGITUDINAL RESULTS AbstractThe German and Australian longitudinal surveys analysed here are the first national representative surveys to show that (1) people who continuously own a pet are the healthiest group and (2) people who cease to have a pet or never had one are less healthy. Most previous studies which have claimed that pets confer health benefits were cross-sectional. So they were open to the objection that owners may have been healthier in the first place, rather than becoming healthier due to owning a pet. In both countries the data show that pet owners make about 15% fewer annual doctor visits than non-owners. The relationship remains statistically significant after controlling for gender, age, marital status, income and other variables associated with health.

The Short Attachment to Pets Scale (SAPS) for Children and Young People: Development, Psychometric Qualities and Demographic and Health Associations

“…First, it can provide insight into the impacts of attachment to pets on the daily life of children. Pet ownership is a common phenomenon in many households in England and Scotland, and it is important to measure its impact on quality of life, as it may affect the social, educational and psychological development of children (Headey 2003;Headey and Grabka 2007). Finally, SAPS could also potentially be valuable outcome for evaluating educational programs to implement positive attachment towards animals.…”

“…However, we consider that a positive attachment to pets may have important implications in children's daily lives as this works as a tool to improve social-emotional development in children. In a longitudinal study conducted in Germany and Australia, Headey and Grabka (2007) reported that benefits to young people who grow up with pets could be connected to the fact that they are more socialized to take care of others. Nevertheless, the mechanisms that may explain these benefits have not been properly assessed in children.…”

Research in the use of animals as a treatment for humans

“…A growing body of research does confirm the existence of such positive relationships. For example, owning a pet such as a dog, cat, bird, fish, or horse is associated with fewer visits to the doctor (Headey and Grabka, 2007), being more physically active (Cutt et al, 2007;Christian et al, 2013), feeling less lonely (Black, 2012), having a better survival rate after heart attacks (Friedman et al, 1980), and having reduced blood pressure during stressful tasks (Allen et al, 2001). …”

Factors associated with cessation of smoking among Swiss adults between 1991 and 2011: results from the SAPALDIA cohort

“…New dog ownership as a positive predictor of quitting was another unanticipated finding. Although there is some evidence that having a pet can motivate healthy behaviour changes [29,30], this finding would need to be confirmed by other studies. In contrast, the likelihood of quitting was lower in women and decreased with increasing number of cigarettes smoked per day, an indicator of dependency.…”