Can Dogs, Cats and Other Pets Truly Improve Your Health?

Can dogs, cats and other pets really improve your health?

By Lydia Denworth Edited by Josh Fischman

This article was made possible by the support of Yakult and produced independently by American scientistBOARD OF EDITORS.

We had our first dog when my eldest son was 10 years old. A friend who was a teacher told me that it was a perfect age for a child to have a pet. “Jake can throw his arms around the dog when he no longer feels comfortable hugging you,” he said.

It took me a little to overcome his recall that my child grew up, but I immediately recognized the insight of my friend. A beloved animal can make everything seem better. And most of us firmly believe that our pets make us healthier.

On the support of scientific journalism

If you appreciate this article, plan to support our award -winning journalism by subscription. By buying a subscription, you help to ensure the future of striking stories about discoveries and ideas that shape our world today.

However, the science of human-animal interaction has found mixed results with regard to the physical and psychological advantages of pets. According to the study, for example, people with pets are less likely or more likely to be depressed. Experts say it probably happens because, for some owners, pets serve as soothing influence and emotional support. But in other cases, the study may include more people who already have mental difficulties and bring pets to try to feel better; So these participants are counted as depressed.

The possession of a dog has always been associated with higher physical activity levels, without a doubt because of this whole march, which also has social benefits. One of the very first studies in the field, published in 1980, revealed that people who had been hospitalized for a heart attack or a coronary disease were more likely to survive the following year if they had a pet, and researchers suspected that the physical activity of walking dogs was partly responsible, although the results also detected for other types of pets. An analysis of several studies in 2019, published in Circulation: cardiovascular quality and results, showed a dramatic result: the possession of dogs was associated with a risk of death of 24% of death. But when other researchers release the same numbers with more adjustments for confusing variables, this benefit has almost disappeared.

“Pets are not a medical intervention; They are a relationship. ” —Jessica Bibbo, gerontologist

A story of physical activity is a potential factor of confusion. “You are more likely to have a dog if you are already someone who is active or who wants to be active,” explains development psychologist Megan Mueller from Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine at TUFTS University. “And then once you have this dog, they probably help motivate you to be more active.”

This is why a large part of the latest research aims to go beyond these problems by digging in the nuances of human-animal interactions. “Pets are not a medical intervention; They are a relationship, ”explains Jessica Bibbo, gerontologist at the Benjamin Rose Institute on aging in Cleveland who studies human-animal interactions. And the quality of this relationship, like the level of attachment and the sense of social support, looks like a much better predictor of positive results than simply if there is a pet at home, “said Mueller:” We are trying to isolate the factors that can help promote these positive relationships [with pets] So we can help people.

Carefully randomized controlled trials with therapy animals and laboratory experiences offer clues. A study in 2025 had 43 dog owners performing stressful tasks (such as public speaking) with or without their pets present. Those whose dogs accompanied them showed weaker cortisol spikes, a hormone that rises under stress. Another study on approximately 90 elderly people participating in a community center has randomly assigned half of the people to take care of five crickets (yes, crickets!) In cages for eight weeks. All people have received the same advice on maintaining their own health. Those who took care of insects showed an improvement in mental and cognitive health compared to those who did not do so.

For the elderly, having a pet to take care to add a meaning to the objective, says Bibbo, especially when health is declining. As part of their work, Bibbo tries to take pet care in decisions concerning health care. People often take care of themselves so that they can also take care of a beloved animal, says Bibbo.

Some of the positive effects observed in controlled contexts – as reduced by cortisol levels and heart rate – are probably having a pet in real life, says Mueller, even if real life is more unpleasant. As with human relationships, strong and positive links with an animal seem to be some of the things that give health benefits (although even here, there are mixed results). Domestic animals certainly provide social and emotional support for many people. There is also a physical component to have a cat or a dog sit on your knees. As a bonus, pets are considered to be without judgment. “Pets do not give you any hard love,” says Mueller.

For adolescents, this can be particularly useful (my friend was right). Pets serve as “bridge helping young people to their transition to autonomy”, explains Mueller, whose work focuses on this age group.

However, we should not ask too much. Even therapy animals are there to facilitate, not to repair, says Bibbo. And we cannot expect pets treating serious mental health problems, says Mueller. “But can having a dog or a pet help us to develop positive adaptation skills to manage anxiety?” she asked. Mueller thinks that it is very possible.

People categorically believe pets improve our quality of life, and this belief can indirectly affect health. In 2025, economists used a large set of British data with controlled variables to assess how much money owners thought they should earn to get the same life satisfaction as pets have given them. Conclusion: up to $ 90,000 per year. This is enough to buy dozens of treadmills or start from many relaxing tropical holidays. The co-author Adelina Gschwandtner of the University of Kent in England says: “Are pets good for us? We were able to answer with a resounding yes.”

It’s time to defend science

If you enjoyed this article, I would like to ask for your support. American scientist has been a defender of science and industry for 180 years, and at the moment can be the most critical moment of this two -centuries story.

I was a American scientist The subscriber since the age of 12, and that helped shape my way of looking at the world. Sciam Educates me and always delights me, and inspires a feeling of fear for our vast and magnificent universe. I hope that does this for you too.

If you subscribe to American scientistYou help make sure that our cover is focused on significant research and discoveries; that we have the resources necessary to report the decisions that threaten laboratories in the United States; And that we support the budding scientists who work at a time when the value of science itself does not become often again.

In return, you get essential news, Captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, Maybe not miss newsletters, videos to watch, Difficult games and the best writings and reports in the scientific world. You can even Give someone a subscription.

There has never been more time for us to get up and show why science counts. I hope you will support us in this mission.