Dogs provide the ‘right kind’ of dirt for kids
By Gina Spadafori
April 30, 2008
Hat tip to several folks for this noticing this piece from the Times of London on how getting a kid a dog can help keep allergies from developing:
Children run less risk of being sensitive to allergens if there is a dog in the house in the early years of their lives, scientists have found.
The conclusion, based on a six-year study of 9,000 children, adds weight to the theory that growing up with a pet trains the immune system to be less sensitive to potential triggers for allergies such as asthma, eczema and hay fever.
The “hygiene theory” of allergy holds that modern life has simply become too clean, meaning that babies’ immune systems are not exposed to enough germs to develop normally.
Having a dog provides enough dirt of the right kind, the new German study suggests. … Previous studies have suggested that exposure to pets may have a protective effect against allergies but many of these studies were based on retrospective questioning of subjects about their exposure.
The new study did not require anybody to remember anything. The children were followed from birth to the age of six. This is likely to make for more reliable results.
Ahahahaha. We told ya so.
And now … all you pet-haters who fill the PetConnection mailbox with snotty notes like, “Dogs are filthy” and “Cats are disgusting” and “Pet freaks are nuts” … well … eat dirt. It’s good for you, proven. If you’d had a pet growing up you’d be healthier … and likely happier, too (or at least less inclined to whine at pet-care columnists, anyway).
Of course, there certainly are pet-lovers who go too far … check out Pet Connection BFF Dr. Patty Khuly’s write-up on people who insist on turning their tiny dogs into pseudo-children, with health consequences for their pets.
Do people really spam ya’ll up with anti-animal email?
Proof that animal-haters need to get lives, I guess.
Yesterday I was working a client’s sedate and low-key Doberman on the sidewalk in the small town where I’m soon moving. A man walking towards us took the opportunity to scream at me “I hate those kind of dogs!”
And I think your choice of beard style is ridiculous, sir, but I didn’t stop you on the street to mention it.
Comment by H. Houlahan — April 30, 2008 @ 2:17 pm
Maybe you should have. :)
Yeah, we get tons of hate mail. Including lots of regulars. Lives, they ain’t got.
Comment by Gina Spadafori — April 30, 2008 @ 2:47 pm
Personally, I hope they come out with a similar study on cats (loved my Persians as a child, teenager and young adult) and it would be great if people made sure their children had cats as well as dogs.
Meanwhile, what does this mean in the rescue community where so many rescues are refusing to allow dogs to be adopted to families with children within the age range mentioned in the studies? How do we get the appropiate dogs to these families so that they don’t patronize puppy mills?
Comment by Dorene — April 30, 2008 @ 4:14 pm
Wow, people who hate pets bother to read/send mail to pet websites? That’s really kind of pathetic.
I just couldn’t be friends with someone who ‘hated animals’. There’s gotta be something ‘off’ with a person like that.
Comment by Pai — April 30, 2008 @ 4:24 pm
A couple months ago I heard an interview with a guy who wrote a book on The Healing Power of Dogs. It covered this and much much more including the fact that dogs have a form of penicillin in their saliva and can actually heal your wounds by licking them!
As for Scout, with the spring rains he gets so filthy at the farm I have to give him a bath twice every weekend. He still hats it but he now knows the drill and as soon as I turn on the bath water, he hops in the tub!
Smart puppy! But I think he just likes the rub down afterward.
Comment by Bernard J. (Bernie) Starzewski — April 30, 2008 @ 7:35 pm
I am a strong proponant of the hygeine theory. That said the underlying data (as described by the researchers themselves) is a correlation. It may be that families with few heritable allergy problems are more likely to get dogs—or some other factor causes both dogs owning and resistence to allergy development.
Comment by emily — May 1, 2008 @ 6:27 am
I wonder what happens when we leave this planet and all the pets behind? I think we are more symbiotic than we realize. Immune system benefits, psychological benefits of having pets around, there are more studies coming out showing how truly dependent we are on our pets. Sort of ‘rubs off on you’.
Comment by Lost for Words — May 1, 2008 @ 6:31 am
The whole mechanism of allergy development and expression (including asthma) is so complex - the field of immunology is just starting to get some deeper understanding of these kinds of mechanisms. But I’m glad to see researchers trying to look at this seriously instead of just saying “If you’re allergic or asthmatic, get rid of the pets!”
In my own family, there are a LOT of allergies. We had a cat for a brief while during my childhood until my mother had an allergic reaction and almost died. So no more cats. But a few years later we got a puppy, and she stayed with us throughout all of her long life with no problems (along with a parrot and several rats in succession).
One of my brothers had a lot of asthma growing up which subsided as he approached adulthood. But then both of my brothers and one of my sisters developed strong sensitivities to cats, and sometimes to dogs. Yet both brothers have married women who own cats, and have found that they were able to be around THAT PARTICULAR CAT even though others continued to set them off. The one sister who’s sensitive to cats remains so, but the other sister has a cat, as do I (two of them, actually).
I sometimes suspect I have some low-grade reactions (such as getting a bit more stuffed up and headache-y in the spring, etc.) but I’ve never looked into it as it hasn’t been significant enough to get in the way of my love of my animals, and unless and until it does, I guess I just really don’t want to know.
So anecdotally, my family represents quite a “mixed bag” with respect to this whole notion. But as I said, the whole concept of immunological response and allergic reactions is anything but simple!
Comment by The OTHER Pat — May 1, 2008 @ 6:44 am
Bernie … “The Healing Power of Pets”? That would be our own Dr. Marty Becker!
Comment by Gina Spadafori — May 1, 2008 @ 7:23 am
No way did I get rid of my cat many years ago when my husband’s allergy doc said, “You’ve got to get rid of your cat”.
We have had other cats since then. My husband enjoys them and I really think he was never allergic to them in the first place.
I heard on the TV the other day that since children are playing computer games inside rather than playing games outside, their immunity systems are not being built up as much.
Comment by Colorado Transplant — May 1, 2008 @ 8:01 am
I don’t think allergists recommend dumping the pets as reflexively as they used to. My own son was diagnosed with asthma several years ago; the doctor said he insisted on giving pets away only when the reaction was really severe, since the emotional trauma probably aggravated the asthma worse than the cat would.
Comment by Diane — May 1, 2008 @ 7:07 pm
Proof positive that you’ve hit the big time, Gina. Hate mail is a badge of honor, girl! Wear it proudly!
Comment by Dr. Patty Khuly — May 2, 2008 @ 5:57 am
I’m really delighted to read that some allergists today aren’t starting out with, “First, get rid of the pets.”
Years ago, I “fired” an allergist who was going to fire me anyway after a spectacular (and highly unprofessional) shouting match in his office.
I rebuked him after he told me he COULD NOT, WOULD NOT work with a patient who REFUSED TO DO AS SHE WAS TOLD, and he went ballistic at being challenged. (It was the first appointment after he’d taken over the practice of a retiring allergist I’d used for years, one who would have preferred I dump the pets but understood why I did not.)
Do as I was TOLD? What a jerk! I walked out of the new guy’s exam room with as much dignity as one can have while trying to put one’s shirt back on, leaving him fuming in the hallway of his practice.
I have been without an allergist ever since, because two others also went into the “FIRST, you get rid of …” routines.
Sorry, that’s LAST, and only to save my life.
Fortunately, I found a great asthma doc to address the biggest problem. And I muddle through with the rest. If I can breathe, I don’t mind dealing with (and occasionally suffering from) other allergy symptoms.
Comment by Gina Spadafori — May 2, 2008 @ 6:41 am
The allergist was a well-known Harvard professor who was consulted whenever the newspaper wanted advise on allergies.
He was a know-it-all specialist who did not even bother to do a test first to find out if it was the cat that was the problem. A test later did not show much in the way of a cat allergy.
If my husband had not used DDT to spray his garden, he would be in much better shape today.
Of course, that was before he learned the harmful effects and believed what was sold it the market must be safe or the government would not allow the selling of the product.
We now have what I call an organic garden, but it is not certified.
I was much younger than, but I could not see giving away a cat that I had adopted as an 8 week old kitten and had given love to for five years.
When we moved to Colorado, the primary care physician said my husband had a pulmonary problem instead of an allergy response, and now he is better than ever. He does blow instruments to enlarge his lung capacity, and it is doing wonders for him.
I do understand that some people are allergic to cats. However, it was not my husband.
Comment by Colorado Transplant — May 2, 2008 @ 8:16 am
My allergist, who is also my primary care physician, has never suggested that I get rid of my pets. In fact, since he is also my primary care physician, he commended me for adding a dog to the household.:)
It might be different if my symptoms weren’t being adequately controlled with medications he’s comfortable with me using long-term, but since they are, he looks at the bigger picture.
Comment by Lis — May 2, 2008 @ 8:17 am
This discussion is right up my alley! I would recommend those interested in this subject watch a documentary called “The Dirt Vaccine” (if you can find it). (Through a special arrangement, I was able to get a few copies on DVD, several years after seeing the doc. on television. But it was a total fluke I was able to do this.)
If you’re willing to take the time to read it, you can still access the text version of the piece at: http://tinyurl.com/558zby (It’s the storyboard-style text account of the program, so it’s difficult to follow in the format at that link. Be warned: An hour-long documentary, there’s a lot there.)
Essentially, after noticing that leprosy and TB rates in one particular region were lower than neighbouring areas, a particular type of naturally-occuring bacteria found in that region seemed to help strengthen the immune systems of those exposed to it. More research showed a correlation between exposure to certain types of beneficial bacteria, and a reduction in the rates of various autoimmune disorders, such as allergies, asthma, etc.
Comment by Marjorie — May 2, 2008 @ 4:26 pm
The flip side….often wondered how many kids got allergies if their parents were anti-bacterial soap freaks.
Comment by CathyA — May 3, 2008 @ 5:15 am
Marjorie re: The Dirt Vaccine:
Interesting stuff! Don’t know that this particular mycobacterium is the only one though. I think every yard that hasn’t been chemically altered probably has the right kind of dirt for the person living there.
Comment by CathyA — May 3, 2008 @ 5:31 am