Those of you who already have dogs probably don’t need to be told this, but the science speaks for itself. Having a dog might unknowingly prompt you to get out and walk more!

Thanks to Carri Westgarth and coauthors who published their study in the journal Nature, we can see the numbers for ourselves. With a respectable sample size of 646 people (191 dog owners and 455 non-dog owners), and some good old statistics, their study is hard to argue with.

The most noteworthy factor they found was that a desire for recreational walking was much stronger in the dog-owners

Sounds like a no-brainer, but that had nothing to do with the obligation from owning a dog. The dog owners were just also more likely to seek it out, with or without the need to walk a dog.

In fact, the recommended amount of physical activity, in contrast with non-dog owners, was significantly higher in the dog owners.

With the subjects they needed already there, they just needed a confident way to measure physical activity. For this, they used accelerometers that they provided to the people they were observing. You may know these as the devices that measure all the steps you take in a day.

The scientists made objectivity a priority : They accounted for all the variables they could think of

“This study is superior to those previously conducted on dog walking in a number of ways. It uses both self-report and objective measures of physical activity, as people have a tendency to over-report physical activity on surveys. “

Dog owners took up to 2000 more steps a day than non-dog owners

This really puts things into perspective! It was consistent across age groups too. Another control group was children, and the median value of dog-walking time they spent was 105 minutes a week. This wasn’t even counting time spent jogging or playing with their dogs.

Being good scientists, the authors were careful to list all the factors they wanted people to keep in mind. Are their results only for people in the UK? Is the relationship between having dogs and physical activity a direct one? Did the size of the community they investigated have anything to do with it?

You shouldn’t get a dog expecting instant results though

Due to knowing how easily people misread things, the scientists went out of their way to highlight a really important point :

“However, this should not be interpreted as a recommendation for people to go out and get a dog purely for their own benefit; dog welfare needs must be carefully considered. Our findings should instead be used to justify the provision of dog-supportive environments for walking and pet-friendly housing; failure of planning and policy makers to provide these may significantly damage population levels of physical activity.”

One other thing they emphasized was that their findings didn’t imply that having a dog directly creates better physical health. Rather, they just found a strong correlation, which itself is still noteworthy

In fact, the difference between a direct link and a simple correlation is something many people don’t know. It’s unfortunate, but unsurprising. As a result, misinformation spreads quickly before anyone actually gets the facts straight.

Consequently, the saying “Correlation doesn’t imply causation” came about as a direct result of that. Although in this case, there might be some actual causation going on!

So it’s a good thing these scientists cleared things up in their own paper

While far from a direct cause and effect relationship, the correlation does appear very compelling indeed!

Many dog breeds do require regular walking and exercise to begin with. Above everything else, it’s always a great idea to get exercise just because it’s good for you. No need to wait around for a scientific study to list all the reasons you should exercise.

Please SHARE this with your friends and family.

Source: [Nature Research]