According to a study, pets do not make people happy per se

For the study published Wednesday in the scientific journal "Plos One," researchers from the University of Basel, the Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, the University of Lucerne, and the Open University in the Netherlands analyzed data from over 2,300 people in Switzerland, comparing those with and without pets.

The unexpected finding: They were unable to identify any general, measurable benefit to physical health or mental well-being resulting solely from keeping pets. On average, pet owners actually reported a slightly poorer state of health and smoked slightly more cigarettes per day.

There were also hardly any differences compared to people without pets in terms of loneliness, life satisfaction, or doctor visits.

The Relationship and the Species Make a Difference

Does that mean animals aren't good for us? Not necessarily, according to the researchers. The figures may conceal what’s known as a selection effect: It’s possible that people who are already in poor health, under stress, or feeling lonely are more likely to get a pet as a source of comfort or an emotional anchor.

The study makes it clear that pet ownership is a highly individual matter. Whether a pet is perceived as a source of support therefore depends heavily on the time invested and the specific type of animal. According to the study, people who spend a lot of time with their pets experience them as a noticeably stronger source of support in everyday life. Dogs were perceived as providing the greatest emotional support. Women also reported a stronger bond with their pets than men did.