12 replies to this topic

[sub7]

I do not know what other section to put this post under, so here it goes...

A lot of resources report increased health and longevity as a result of owning pets. However, we also know that a lot of viruses capable of infecting humans can be harbored by animals (almost 75% if I remember the figure correctly). So does it make sense to share your space with animals who may be the source of bacteria/viruses and will not be able to tell you about their ilnesses until visible symptoms develop? I know you can vaccinate your pets, but we have identified only a small fraction of bacteria and viruses on the planet and the vaccines are not perfect even for the micro-organisms that heve been identified and catalogued.

What is your view on the health effects of pets such as dogs, cats, birds and the like?

Sub7

[icyT]

Lots of things can harbour bacteria, I honestly wouldn't give up a pet under the paranoia that it might carry germs. Honestly, going by that logic you shouldn't live with or be around anyone because they might infect you.

It's not about avoiding infection, it's about fighting it. Hell, I'd like to get the point where I know I can avoid every disease so I can perfectly infect myself with every one in existance.

[sub7]

any other ideas on this topic???

[ajnast4r]

i would say this topic probably isnt even worth thinking about unless you have some sort of alergyto pets.

pets dont cause illness

[purerealm]

Does owning a non-interactive pet such as a fish offer health benefits? I would expect that the more interactive the pet, the more health benefits, just like having another really good friend.

[purerealm]

haha dave chappelle had this act where he was talking about how monkeys could have possibly transferred AIDS to humans

[purerealm]

HIV*

[icyT]

Purerealm, could you please condense those three posts into one (the first) and delete the last two?

I think the benefit in having pets is similar to the longer lifespans in people who have jobs and hobbies, because they have a more active mind and feel a responsibility to continue living.

There is also the fact that they bring friendship and love, but yeah, this would be lessened in instances of fish as opposed to dogs and cats.

[sub7]

Indeed I agree that pets have many benefits. However, when I look at all the dirt the dogs are exposed to I just wonder how good an idea it can be to hug them. If I told you I was rolling around on the streets naked, you probably would consider that an unhealthy practice. Yet, this is what dogs do -especially in dog parks- and their owners hug them. Besides, this is a creature whose fur absorbs a lot from the environment.

On the other hand, I look at all the dog owners that I know and none of them appear unhealthy -even the ones who let the dogs get into their beds. So I think a healthy human immune system can deal with all this...

[rfarris]

... none of them appear unhealthy -even the ones who let the dogs get into their beds...

Heck, I've seen dogs lick their bollacks, and then french-kiss their owners. How gross is that?

[hyoomen]

No more gross than the pathetic mental states of individuals who choose to contort other species into empathetically-imagined friends?

[mitkat]

... none of them appear unhealthy -even the ones who let the dogs get into their beds...

Heck, I've seen dogs lick their bollacks, and then french-kiss their owners. How gross is that?

I'm with Rick. Toxoplasmosis is a possibility if you've got a cat, although rather unlikely. For those with immunosuppressive problems, for sure.

purerealm, chappelle's the man.

[Shepard]

No more gross than the pathetic mental states of individuals who choose to contort other species into empathetically-imagined friends?

Anyone who says my goldfish doesn't love me is a liar.