Does having a pet make you healthier?

Your heart and lifespan

The American Heart Association reviewed the evidence in 2013 and concluded that owning a pet, especially a dog, is probably linked to lower cardiovascular risk, but advised against getting a pet mainly for that purpose⁵. A pooled analysis of 10 observational studies covering 3.8 million people found that dog owners had a 24% lower risk of death over about 10 years and a 31% lower risk of cardiovascular death¹. Not every analysis agrees: a meta-analysis of 26 studies found lower cardiovascular death among pet owners overall and among cat owners, but no significant survival link for dog owners specifically³.

Why a pet might help

Dogs get people moving. In a UK survey, dog owners had about four times the odds of meeting the 150-minute weekly activity guideline². Pets may also act as non-judging social support: in a small randomized trial of 48 adults with high blood pressure, those given a pet had smaller blood pressure and heart-rate surges under mental stress⁹. For people living with mental health conditions, a systematic review of 17 studies found mixed numbers but many accounts of pets helping them cope, alongside the burden of care and the grief of losing a pet¹⁰.

Children and allergies

Dogs and farm animals in a child's first year were linked to less asthma in a Swedish registry of over a million children¹¹, but a pooled analysis of 11 birth cohorts found no clear effect of early pets on asthma or allergy and advised against getting or avoiding pets for prevention¹². See Too Clean? The Hygiene Hypothesis.

The costs

Pets can pass infections to people, especially when people sleep with them, let them lick faces or wounds, or keep exotic animals, and bites happen⁴. Allergy to pet dander has become more common, and claims that a breed is hypoallergenic are a misconception⁷.

Flea and tick treatments

Treatments applied to a pet can reach people. In 67 Irish pet owners, urinary levels of the insecticide imidacloprid and its breakdown products rose after a pet was treated, were higher in people who handled the pet more, and stayed below the acceptable daily intake⁶. One 2025 analysis linked some flea and tick soaps, shampoos and powders to lower developmental scores in children with autism, but it relied on reported rather than measured exposures and cannot show cause⁸. The aim is careful, label-directed use and a conversation with your vet, not skipping parasite control.

Dog ownership and survival

Kramer and colleagues searched Embase and PubMed through May 2019 for observational studies and pooled 10 of them: 3,837,005 participants, 530,515 events and a mean follow-up of 10.1 years¹. Dog owners had a 24% lower risk of all-cause death (relative risk 0.76, 95% CI 0.67-0.86) and a 31% lower risk of cardiovascular death (0.69, 0.67-0.71)¹. In people with a prior coronary event the relative risk was 0.35 (0.17-0.69)¹. The authors note the analyses were not adjusted for confounders, so healthier, wealthier or more active people may simply be more likely to own dogs.

A meta-analysis that disagrees

El-Qushayri and colleagues pooled 26 studies from nine databases³. Pet owners had lower cardiovascular mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 0.81, 95% CI 0.68-0.97), and cat owners had lower cardiovascular mortality (0.79, 0.63-0.99) but not lower overall mortality (1.04, 0.90-1.21)³. For dog owners specifically, no significant association with overall or cardiovascular mortality was found³. Pet owners had a slightly lower heart rate (mean difference -2.32 beats per minute) and systolic blood pressure (-1.69 mm Hg) but no difference in hypertension prevalence³. The two meta-analyses disagree about dogs, which is a reason for caution.

A small randomized trial

Allen and colleagues randomized 48 people with high blood pressure to receive a pet in addition to the drug lisinopril (20 mg a day) or lisinopril alone⁹. The drug lowered resting blood pressure by about 35/20 mm Hg in both groups, but responses to mental stress were lower in pet owners: systolic pressure 131 versus 141 mm Hg, diastolic 92 versus 100, and heart rate 81 versus 91 beats per minute (P<0.0001)⁹. Limitations: a small, 2001 study of short laboratory stress tests, not heart attacks or deaths.

Activity and mood

In West Cheshire, UK, a survey of 191 dog-owning and 455 non-owning adults, plus 46 children, in 385 households found that dog owners had higher odds of recreational walking (odds ratio 14.35, 95% CI 5.77-35.79) and of meeting the 150-minute guideline (4.10, 2.05-8.19), while other activity did not differ². Only 28 adults wore accelerometers, and the design is cross-sectional, so it cannot show that dogs cause more activity². For people living with mental health conditions, a systematic review of 17 studies found positive, negative and neutral results in the quantitative studies, while qualitative studies described meaningful support alongside practical and emotional burdens and the distress of losing a pet¹⁰.

Children

In a Swedish registry of 1,011,051 children, dog contact in the first year was linked to less asthma at age 6 (odds ratio 0.87, 95% CI 0.81-0.93)¹¹. A pooled analysis of 11 birth cohorts found no association between early pets and asthma at age 6-10: odds ratio 1.00 (0.78-1.28) for cats and 0.77 (0.58-1.03) for dogs¹².

Infection, allergy and bites

A One Health review concluded that pets undoubtedly benefit human health but may raise the risk of zoonotic infection through sleeping with pets, face and wound licking, bite accidents, exotic animals, imported rescue dogs and soil contact⁴. A review of pet-dander allergy describes rapid growth in prevalence over six decades and notes that breed-based hypoallergenic claims persist as a misconception⁷.

Flea and tick products

In a biomonitoring study, 67 participants in Irish households that applied imidacloprid-based treatments to pets gave first-morning urine for five days, 335 samples in all⁶. Detection of the metabolite imidacloprid-olefin rose from 26% before treatment to over 74% after. Levels were markedly higher in people with more physical contact with the treated pet and in those who used larger amounts, all stayed below the acceptable daily intake, and they had not fallen after five days⁶. Limitations: five days of sampling and no health outcomes.

An analysis of the CHARGE study included children aged 24-60 months (810 with autism, 192 with developmental delay, 531 typically developing) with reported insecticide exposures from three months before conception to age two⁸. Flea and tick soaps, shampoos and powders used in year two were associated with lower cognitive and adaptive scores in the autism group after correction for multiple testing; skin treatments in early pregnancy were associated with lower scores in the developmental-delay group but not after correction, and typically developing children showed no association⁸. Limitations: exposure was reported rather than measured, the children already had diagnoses, and confounding is possible, so the result cannot show that these products caused any difference.

Bottom line (confidence 2 of 5)

Dog owners probably walk more, and there are intriguing links with longer life and calmer stress responses. But the large analyses disagree, who gets a pet is not random, and the randomized trial is tiny. The infection, allergy, bite and pesticide risks are manageable but real. Treat a pet as a long commitment worth making for its own sake.