IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v7y2010i6p2452-2459d8484.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Living with Companion Animals, Physical Activity and Mortality in a U.S. National Cohort

Author

Listed:
  • Richard F. Gillum

    (Department of Medicine, College of Medicine, Howard University, 2041 Georgia Avenue, Washington, DC, 20060, USA)

  • Thomas O. Obisesan

    (Department of Medicine, College of Medicine, Howard University, 2041 Georgia Avenue, Washington, DC, 20060, USA)

Abstract

Living with a canine companion is postulated to increase physical activity. We test the hypotheses that adults living with a canine companion have a higher level of physical activity and reduced mortality risk compared to those not living with a companion animal. A U.S. national health survey with longitudinal mortality follow-up studied 11,394 American men and women aged 40 years and over examined in 1988–1994 followed an average 8.5 years. Measurements at baseline included self-reported companion animals in the household, socio-demographics, health status, physical and biochemical measurements. Outcome measures were leisure-time physical activity (LTPA), and death from all causes. Death during follow-up occurred in 3,187 persons. In bivariate cross-sectional analyses living with a dog was associated with more frequent LTPA and higher survival. In proportional hazards regression analysis, no significant interaction of age, gender or ethnicity with animals was found. After adjusting for confounding by baseline socio-demographics and health status at ages 40+, the hazards ratio (95% confidence limits) for living with a canine companion compared to no animals was 1.21(1.04–1.41, p

Suggested Citation

  • Richard F. Gillum & Thomas O. Obisesan, 2010. "Living with Companion Animals, Physical Activity and Mortality in a U.S. National Cohort," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 7(6), pages 1-8, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:7:y:2010:i:6:p:2452-2459:d:8484
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/7/6/2452/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/7/6/2452/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wood, Lisa & Giles-Corti, Billie & Bulsara, Max, 2005. "The pet connection: Pets as a conduit for social capital?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 61(6), pages 1159-1173, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Konstantinos Christopoulos & Vasiliki Benetou & Elena Riza & Nikos Pantazis, 2022. "Pet ownership and survival of European older adults," European Journal of Ageing, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 1549-1560, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Clément Meier & Jürgen Maurer, 2022. "Buddy or burden? Patterns, perceptions, and experiences of pet ownership among older adults in Switzerland," European Journal of Ageing, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 1201-1212, December.
    2. Esther M. C. Bouma & Marsha L. Reijgwart & Arie Dijkstra, 2021. "Family Member, Best Friend, Child or ‘Just’ a Pet, Owners’ Relationship Perceptions and Consequences for Their Cats," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-18, December.
    3. Headey, Bruce & Grabka, Markus M., 2007. "Pets and Human Health in Germany and Australia: National Longitudinal Results," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 80, pages 297-311.
    4. Karynna Okabe-Miyamoto & Dunigan Folk & Sonja Lyubomirsky & Elizabeth W Dunn, 2021. "Changes in social connection during COVID-19 social distancing: It’s not (household) size that matters, it’s who you’re with," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(1), pages 1-16, January.
    5. Eloise C.J. Carr & Jean E. Wallace & Rianne Pater & Douglas P. Gross, 2019. "Evaluating the Relationship between Well-Being and Living with a Dog for People with Chronic Low Back Pain: A Feasibility Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-16, April.
    6. Gregg K. Takashima & Michael J. Day, 2014. "Setting the One Health Agenda and the Human–Companion Animal Bond," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-11, October.
    7. Jaroslav Flegr & Marek Preiss, 2019. "Friends with malefit. The effects of keeping dogs and cats, sustaining animal-related injuries and Toxoplasma infection on health and quality of life," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(11), pages 1-30, November.
    8. Bruce Headey & Fu Na & Richard Zheng, 2008. "Pet Dogs Benefit Owners’ Health: A ‘Natural Experiment’ in China," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 87(3), pages 481-493, July.
    9. Paloma Morales-Flores & Carlos Marmolejo-Duarte, 2021. "Can We Build Walkable Environments to Support Social Capital? Towards a Spatial Understanding of Social Capital; a Scoping Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-15, November.
    10. Ida Marie Henriksen & Aksel Tjora, 2014. "Interaction Pretext: Experiences of Community in the Urban Neighbourhood," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 51(10), pages 2111-2124, August.
    11. Rebecca Utz, 2014. "Walking the Dog: The Effect of Pet Ownership on Human Health and Health Behaviors," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 116(2), pages 327-339, April.
    12. Matsumura, Kenta & Hamazaki, Kei & Tsuchida, Akiko & Inadera, Hidekuni, 2022. "Pet ownership during pregnancy and mothers' mental health conditions up to 1 year postpartum: A nationwide birth cohort—the Japan Environment and Children's Study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 309(C).
    13. Brown, Tim & Bell, Morag, 2007. "Off the couch and on the move: Global public health and the medicalisation of nature," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 64(6), pages 1343-1354, March.
    14. Zhen Guo & Xiaoxing Ren & Jinzhe Zhao & Liying Jiao & Yan Xu, 2021. "Can Pets Replace Children? The Interaction Effect of Pet Attachment and Subjective Socioeconomic Status on Fertility Intention," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-12, August.
    15. Mohammad Javad Koohsari & Akitomo Yasunaga & Ai Shibata & Kaori Ishii & Rina Miyawaki & Kuniko Araki & Tomoki Nakaya & Tomoya Hanibuchi & Gavin R. McCormack & Koichiro Oka, 2021. "Dog ownership, dog walking, and social capital," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-6, December.
    16. Rock, Melanie & Mykhalovskiy, Eric & Schlich, Thomas, 2007. "People, other animals and health knowledges: Towards a research agenda," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 64(9), pages 1970-1976, May.
    17. Kent, Jennifer L. & Mulley, Corinne, 2017. "Riding with dogs in cars: What can it teach us about transport practices and policy?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 278-287.
    18. Ana Junça-Silva, 2022. "Unleashing the Furr-Recovery Method: Interacting with Pets in Teleworking Replenishes the Self’s Regulatory Resources: Evidence from a Daily-Diary Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-14, December.
    19. Eriksson, Malin & Dahlblom, Kjerstin, 2020. "Children's perspectives on health-promoting living environments: The significance of social capital," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 258(C).
    20. Eliška Mičková & Kristýna Machová & Klára Daďová & Ivona Svobodová, 2019. "Does Dog Ownership Affect Physical Activity, Sleep, and Self-Reported Health in Older Adults?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-11, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:7:y:2010:i:6:p:2452-2459:d:8484. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.