How in the world can this be true? A Spanish study showed that it's more dangerous to have a dog than it is to go work in an office. It also showed it's more dangerous to get groceries delivered than to go to the store.
Is it simply a result of a small sample size? Or perhaps it's just an example of correlation doesn't equal causation?
The Daily Mail wrote:
Researchers did a survey of 2,086 people in Spain, some 41 per cent of whom were middle-aged between 40 and 54 years old.
People were asked what they had done during the pandemic and whether they had caught coronavirus, then the scientists compared the result to work out which activities were riskiest.
They found 4.7 per cent of the group caught Covid at some point – approximately 98 people.
Activities that were linked to an increased risk of testing positive included accepting supermarket deliveries at home, which raised the risk by 94 per cent and was found to be more dangerous than actually going to the shop...
Working at the office, instead of from home, caused the risk to rise by 76 per cent, the research found....
And living with a dog which they took for walks outside raised someone's risk by 78 per cent, the team said.