近日，由美国儿科学会主办的《儿科》（Pediatrics）月刊发表了芬兰研究人员的发现，养宠物家庭的婴儿耳朵、呼吸系统感染的几率比家中没有宠物的婴儿低。研究人员并不清楚这一关联的原因，推测饲养宠物可能有助婴儿增强免疫力。
保护关联
这项研究结果基于397名芬兰婴儿父母的记录。这些父母从孩子出生后第9周至第52周，每天记录孩子的健康状况。结果显示，饲养宠物猫、狗的家庭，婴儿出现呼吸系统感染症状，包括咳嗽、哮喘、鼻炎和发烧的几率低30%，耳朵感染几率低大约一半。
法新社9日援引芬兰库奥皮奥大学医院研究人员的话报道：“如果孩子在家中与狗或猫接触，他们在研究期间的健康状况明显更佳。”
研究人员在论文中写道，那些家中宠物狗、一天最多在室内待６小时的婴儿与家中不养狗或者宠物狗、常在室外的婴儿相比，这种保护关联更加明显。研究人员说，宠物猫虽然也有保护作用，但不如宠物狗。
论文说：“我们提供初步证据显示，饲养宠物狗可能有助人们在生命第一年抵御呼吸系统感染。”
或增免疫
不过，研究人员并不清楚这种关联的原因。
研究人员说：“我们推测，接触动物可能有助免疫系统成熟，使免疫系统能够更好地发挥作用，缩短感染周期。”
研究人员发现，即便考虑其他可能加重感染的风险，譬如不吃早饭、进保育院、由吸烟者抚养、父母患哮喘、家中有兄、姐等，饲养宠物与感染减少这种关联依然明显。
除耳部和呼吸系统感染减少外，与那些在不养宠物的家庭中长大的婴儿相比，经常与宠物狗接触的婴儿接受治疗时使用抗生素的时间更短。
仍需注意
对有小孩的家庭而言，饲养宠物的利弊素有争议。一些研究结果显示，低龄儿童与毛茸茸的宠物生活在同一屋檐下毫无益处；另外一些研究则认定，与动物接触有助降低感冒和胃病几率。
芬兰研究人员说，他们的研究有别于先前一些研究，因为它只关注婴儿，不涉及年龄稍长的儿童。
不管如何，饲养宠物最好有所注意。德国巴特博克莱特微生物学和感染性流行病学家安德烈亚斯·施瓦茨科普夫建议，饲养宠物的家庭必须给孩子立下几条特殊规矩，以确保孩子和宠物的健康，包括吃饭前必须洗手，切勿亲吻宠物鼻子，尽量不要把宠物放在卧室内饲养等。
他还建议，宠物必须接种动物疾病疫苗，饲养者每年应为宠物驱虫4次。家长还需确保宠物不受虱子侵扰，定期为毛发长的猫和狗梳毛。（生物谷Bioon.com ）
doi:10.1542/peds.2011-2825
PMC:
PMID:
Respiratory Tract Illnesses During the First Year of Life: Effect of Dog and Cat Contacts
Eija Bergroth, MDa, Sami Remes, MD, PhDa, Juha Pekkanen, MD, PhDb,c, Timo Kauppila, MScb, Gisela Büchele, PhDd, and Leea Keski-Nisula, MD, PhDb,e
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effect of dog and cat contacts on the frequency of respiratory symptoms and infections during the first year of life. METHODS: In this birth cohort study, 397 children were followed up from pregnancy onward, and the frequency of respiratory symptoms and infections together with information about dog and cat contacts during the first year of life were reported by using weekly diaries and a questionnaire at the age of 1 year. All the children were born in eastern or middle Finland between September 2002 and May 2005. RESULTS: In multivariate analysis, children having dogs at home were healthier (ie, had fewer respiratory tract symptoms or infections) than children with no dog contacts (adjusted odds ratio, [aOR]: 1.31; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.13–1.52). Furthermore, children having dog contacts at home had less frequent otitis (aOR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.38–0.81) and tended to need fewer courses of antibiotics (aOR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.52–0.96) than children without such contacts. In univariate analysis, both the weekly amount of contact with dogs and cats and the average yearly amount of contact were associated with decreased respiratory infectious disease morbidity. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that dog contacts may have a protective effect on respiratory tract infections during the first year of life. Our findings support the theory that during the first year of life, animal contacts are important, possibly leading to better resistance to infectious respiratory illnesses during childhood.
