DEAR READERS: If you have a cat and want to follow my advice to keep him/her indoors for health and safety reasons and to protect wildlife, you will also want to provide an enriching, physically and mentally stimulating environment. Consider the following elements: A tall and sturdy scratch post is a must, along with a cat tower or elevated platform in the home and a bird feeder by the window.

Adopt an easygoing second cat (see how to introduce them on my website: drfoxonehealth.com/post/introducing-a-new-cat). If you do not yet have a cat and are wanting to get one, consider adopting two, such as littermates or a mother and kitten. Do some research and get creative setting up an outdoor enclosure or "catio." For ideas, visit these websites: catiospaces.com, catioworld.com and adventurecats.org.

DEAR DR. FOX: I enjoyed your article about our fate and the fate of the insects. Check out the website geoengineeringwatch.org, because I think that is also one of the big harms to insects and other creatures.

I have a garden and pond, and I see very few bees. I have almost no frogs, dragonflies or other insects, and there used to be plenty. -- M.G., Anderson, California

DEAR M.G.: Thanks for sending me the information about atmospheric geoengineering in response to my column about the plight of insects.

Humans have been "geoengineering" since the beginning of agriculture with irrigation, plowing the grasslands and felling forests with ever increasing expansion and harm.

I have mentioned this issue of atmospheric geoengineering in earlier columns. I share the concerns of many over the lack of transparency by the agencies spreading various particulate materials, including aluminum, in the upper atmosphere to "shade" the Earth and slow global warming. This could reduce our exposure to beneficial sun rays that boost our immune systems with vitamin D and also kill viruses and other potentially harmful microorganisms on exposed surfaces. Ultraviolet light is recognized as an excellent sterilant. This practice may also reduce crop yields.

Some aerial spraying at much lower altitudes is used to spread pesticides over various crops, and the documented "drift" onto private property and organic farms is a continuing concern.

I am also concerned that this atmospheric geoengineering, which some technophiles like Bill Gates are advocating and funding, could harm the atmospheric microbiome of bacteria and viruses that encircles the Earth, about which we know little. This microbiome could have ecological and potentially life-sustaining and renewing properties.

ANIMAL-ASSISTED THERAPY HAS DEEP ROOTS

Both Sigmund Freud and child psychologist Boris Levinson saw the benefits of bringing their dogs to psychotherapy sessions to calm and build rapport with patients. Samuel and Elizabeth Corson published research on how dogs can enhance psychiatric care. Even Hippocrates promoted horseback riding for mental health. The benefits of therapy assisted by dogs, horses and other animals are now widely accepted. "It is interesting to note that (animal-assisted therapy) can be used multiculturally without the need to adjust how it is applied to different ethnic groups," writes counselor Cody Zaiontz. (Full story: Psychiatric Times, Oct. 12)

I knew the Corsons and consulted with them many years ago, publishing Levinson's review "Interpersonal Relationships Between Pets and Human Beings" in my 1968 book "Abnormal Behavior in Animals." This collection of articles by several experts helped establish recognition and treatment of emotional/behavioral problems in animals and documented their benefits to us along with the ethical obligation of humane treatment and duty to care.

(Send all mail to animaldocfox@gmail.com or to Dr. Michael Fox in care of Andrews McMeel Syndication, 1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO 64106. The volume of mail received prohibits personal replies, but questions and comments of general interest will be discussed in future columns.

Visit Dr. Fox’s website at DrFoxOneHealth.com.)

DEAR READERS: Some animal protection organizations are seeking to establish the legal "personhood" of animals such as elephants, orcas, dolphins and beluga whales -- partly on the basis that they show self-recognition when given a mirror -- in order to get them released from impoverished environments of captivity.

In 1970, psychologist Gordon Gallup Jr. developed a test that he claimed was the cardinal indicator of self-awareness in animals. The experiment involved chimpanzees responding to a mark on their faces when they saw their images in a mirror. It has since been widely cited as indicative of self-awareness in animals. The test has had similar positive results on other species, including the great apes, elephants, rays, dolphins, orcas, Eurasian magpies and ants. But a wide range of species has been reported to fail the test, including several species of monkeys, giant pandas and sea lions. From an ethological perspective, these "failures" reveal the fallacy of psychologizing animals' behavior. In many species, especially humans, positive responses to changes in a self-image seen in a mirror may be no more than an indicator of narcissism.

The Gallup mirror test, now being embraced in legal terms of animal "personhood," is an example of psychologism. It is wrong to assume that those species who fail this test have no sense of self and, therefore, no personhood to warrant equal consideration and protection.

Dogs will often bark or growl when they first see their image in a mirror; they will not respond when a mark is put on their heads, and they will ignore subsequent mirror encounters. Such ignoring surely indicates that they know it is not another dog. Other studies have shown dogs have body awareness and self-awareness in recognition of their own versus other dogs' scents.

A better gauge of the sense of self in relation to objects is the demonstrated ability to count, which is evident in many animal species. Numerical abilities have been identified in gorillas; rhesus, capuchin and squirrel monkeys; lemurs, dolphins, elephants, black bears, birds, salamanders, certain fish, ants and spiders.

And without some sense of self, how could animals, including insects, groom and preen themselves and each other?

In assessing animals' self-awareness, we need to avoid psychologizing and consider each species and its adaptive, cognitive abilities and related environmental, physical, social and emotional needs to make informed, science-based decisions as to their optimal care and protection. For references, go to drfoxonehealth.com/post/animal-sentience.

DEAR DR. FOX: You have written a lot about how empathic and intelligent wolves are. But they tear apart deer and other prey. Isn't that cruel? I hate such predators. -- T.V., West Palm Beach, Florida

DEAR T.V.: Predators provide many ecological services, which ultimately benefit their prey -- and us. (For details, go to drfoxonehealth.com/post/wolves-and-human-well-being-ecological-public-health-concerns). It is true that wolves do not have a quick-killing bite, while big cats like tigers can sever the spinal cord in the necks of their prey and kill swiftly. However, nature may protect deer and other prey from feeling pain, if not also terror, because the attack may trigger numbing endorphins.

While traveling in Africa in 1857, Scottish explorer David Livingstone observed in his daily journal that when he was attacked by a lion, he became numb. He considered the experience an altered state of consciousness, in which he was able to watch the proceedings without feeling the pain.

Scientists have subsequently revealed the release of endogenous opiates (enkephalins and endorphins) in many species, including earthworms and fish, when subjected to traumatic injury. This does not mean that it is acceptable to hook fish and mutilate sentient animals because they may not experience pain, but rather, we must acknowledge that they do react to injuries and trauma as we do and should not be harmed. Sentience goes everywhere from invertebrates to mammals, from earthworms to humans.

This endogenous opiate neurohumoral system, along with oxytocin and other neurochemicals, plays a role in social bonding and empathically and vicariously experiencing and responding to other's suffering. It is evidenced in the behavior of social animals responding to the plight of peers and protection of their offspring. In their review on this subject, "Toward a cross-species understanding of empathy" (published in Trends Neurosci in 2013), J. Panksepp and J.B. Panksepp state: "Cross-species evolutionary approaches to understanding the neural circuitry of emotional 'contagion' or 'resonance' between nearby animals, together with the underlying neurochemistries, may help to clarify the origins of human empathy." Animals witnessing others being slaughtered, therefore, raises a significant ethical issue when it comes to how most animals destined for human consumption are killed.

While some people wonder what kind of God could create a world where there are predators, we learn that one life gives to another to sustain a greater whole. One lesson from wolves is that they help with the balance of nature, preventing deer overpopulation and destruction of shared habitat. We humans break this "covenant of the wild" when we take more than we need, wanting ever more and destroying the whole in the process.

(Send all mail to animaldocfox@gmail.com or to Dr. Michael Fox in care of Andrews McMeel Syndication, 1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO 64106. The volume of mail received prohibits personal replies, but questions and comments of general interest will be discussed in future columns.

Visit Dr. Fox’s website at DrFoxOneHealth.com.)

DEAR READERS: The human population is now over 8 billion. Planet Earth cannot sustain a species of such size that lives as a predator, raising and killing billions of animals annually for food. The consequential, collective dietary impact on biodiversity, loss of wildlife, farmed animal welfare, public health and climate change are well documented.

This all calls for a transition to vegetarian and vegan diets -- an ethical choice with economic, health and environmental benefits. A UN Environment Programme-backed report highlighted that animal farming has a "disproportionate impact" on biodiversity, with the global food system being the main driver of biodiversity loss. The meat and dairy industries are also major contributors to greenhouse gas emissions. The world's leading climate scientists have called for a reduction in meat-eating and animal farming. For details, go to sentientmedia.org.

Many people making the vegetarian-vegan transition also want to do right by their dogs and cats, knowing they are the ultimate recipients of the recycled byproducts of farmed animals considered unfit for human consumption. These substances, along with byproducts of the manufactured food and beverage industries, go into most manufactured cat and dog foods.

For humans and their canine companions, the transition from omnivore to vegan calls for some nutrition education and sound science. For obligate-carnivore cats, it is more of a challenge and controversy. Advances in nutrient synthesis and substitution could mean that analogous, biologically appropriate diets from non-animal sources for cats are on the horizon. But at this time, making cats vegan would be premature and irresponsible.

For dogs, however, read below for information on the health benefits of this way of eating.

EVALUATION OF VEGAN, VEGETARIAN DIETS FOR DOGS

In April, the journal Plos One published a study entitled "Vegan versus meat-based dog food: Guardian-reported indicators of health" (Andrew Knight et al, doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0265662) which broadly evaluated the health of dogs fed a conventional, raw or vegan diet based on survey results from dog owners.

From the study's abstract: "Significant evidence indicates that raw meat diets are often associated with dietary hazards, including nutritional deficiencies and imbalances and pathogens. Accordingly, the pooled evidence to date indicates that the healthiest and least hazardous dietary choices for dogs are nutritionally sound vegan diets."

From further down in the study's text: "One concern was that the plant-based diet might not be acceptable (palatable) to dogs, especially if they were used to being fed a meat-based ration, which 78% of the dogs were. However, over 82% of the dogs liked the (vegan) food and ate it all when first given it, and a further 10% ate it all after a short break ... Just 8% of dogs needed to have the food introduced gradually."

From the study's conclusion: "Feedback from 100 dog guardians clearly demonstrates several positive statistically significant observations and trends towards improvements in health in some dogs, including in the following areas: fecal consistency, frequency of defecation, flatus frequency, flatus antisocial smell, coat glossiness (shine), scales on the skin (dandruff), redness of the skin (erythema, inflammation), crusting of the external ear canals (otitis externa), itchiness (scratching, pruritus), anxiety, aggressive behavior and coprophagia."

The authors acknowledge that the study relied on data provided by the dogs' owners and/or guardians, and that further study is needed. From the conclusion: "These observations could simply be random coincidence relationships, and prospective, randomized, controlled clinical studies are needed to confirm the clinical significance of these observations. Nevertheless, this study confirms several positive health benefits."

To read the study, go to journals.plos.org and search for "Vegan versus meat-based dog food."

(Send all mail to animaldocfox@gmail.com or to Dr. Michael Fox in care of Andrews McMeel Syndication, 1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO 64106. The volume of mail received prohibits personal replies, but questions and comments of general interest will be discussed in future columns.

Visit Dr. Fox’s website at DrFoxOneHealth.com.)