Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

President-Jo t1_j25s2fp wrote

Is this a classic case of “correlation, not causation”?


Zozorrr t1_j2615q5 wrote

It may be a classic case of unidirectional causation not simply bidirectional correlation.

We don’t know yet. If you think there is anything here indicating it’s not causal - go ahead and articulate it


jack_12j t1_j2du7n9 wrote

“While the longitudinal associations in our study are compelling, the design of the study did not allow us to demonstrate a cause-and-effect relationship,” Braley explained. “Additional prospective work that includes information on strength of the human-animal bond and its effect on cognitive trajectories, and incorporates study of biological mechanisms that could mediate this relationship, are still needed.” (Braley is Tiffany J. Braley--one of the authors.)

This can be an interesting finding and a prompt for further research, but I absolutely agree with a caution about turning correlation into causation. The burden of proof should be on the affirmative.

Also, it's difficult to have a well-informed debate because the link is to an article about the paper--not the paper itself.


Garconanokin t1_j27vcqb wrote

There is nothing in the title that suggests causation.


pumaofshadow t1_j27p5gb wrote

Yep, a ton of factors. People keep trying to push dogs on the physically ill where I am but it wouldn't help for me, and neither would a home bound pet coz I can barely look after myself. Its not motivation I lack, its the ability to do it safely.

Also once you have a pet and let it down by not being cognatively capable of ensuring it stays healthy hopefully services, people around you and common sense stop you getting another pet. (Sadly not always the case though).