dimanche 10 juin 2018

La zoothérapie en dessin

Pet therapy in a nutshell

A new look at pet-facilitated therapy


The 1984 landmark article that the pet industry doesn't want you to read. Thirty years later, the findings of American scientists Alan M. Beck and Aaron Honori Katcher are more than ever factual. The situation has not changed one bit. Zootherapy is no longer defensible by science. Animals have no therapeutic value. They are in their own special way as bad for you as cigarettes and alcohol.


L'article phare de 1984 que l'industrie des animaux de compagnie ne veut pas que vous lisiez. Trente ans plus tard, les conclusions des scientifiques américains, Alan M. Beck et Aaron Honori Katcher sont plus que jamais d'actualité. La situation n'a pas changé d'un iota. La zoothérapie n'est pas défendable par la science. Les animaux n'ont aucune valeur thérapeutique. Ils sont même dans un certain sens aussi mauvais pour vous que la cigarette et l'alcool.

The Impact of Pets on Human Health and Psychological Well-Being: Fact, Fiction, or Hypothesis?

"Because of extensive media coverage, it is now widely believed that pets enhance their owners’ health, sense of psychological well-being, and longevity. But while some researchers have reported that positive effects accrue from interacting with animals, others have found that the health and happiness of pet owners is no better, and in some cases worse, than that of non–pet owners. I discuss some reasons why studies of the effects of pets on people have produced conflicting results, and I argue that the existence of a generalized “pet effect” on human mental and physical health is at present not a fact but an unsubstantiated hypothesis."

Harold Herzog (2011).  Abstract. Current Directions in Psychological Science 20(4) 236–239 © The Author(s) 2011 Reprints and permission: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0963721411415220 http://cdps.sagepub.com