Infection: The Differences In Animal Bites

Words: 485
Pages: 2

For years, the old myth that a dog’s mouth is cleaner than a human’s has circulated. But is this really true?

The idea may have originally come from the fact that there were studies showing that human bites have a higher chance of becoming infected than most animal bites, including those caused by dogs. While contemporary scientists are not sure where this information came into contact with the public, they are all in agreement that it is simply untrue. Modern studies about infection rates in animal bites show that it is pretty even across the board as to whether or not a bite from a human or dog will become infected.

Another potential source for the belief that dogs have cleaner mouths is that dogs lick their wounds when they are injured. This may have led people to believe that dog saliva is healthy or has healing properties. While it is not true that dog saliva has any sort of antiseptic or healing qualities, the act of licking the wound does promote healing. When a dog licks an injury, its tongue removes any dead tissue from the site, speeding the healing process along.
…show more content…
Dogs use their tongues to bathe themselves as well as a replacement for toilet paper. You may be asking yourself “how can their mouths possibly be cleaner than ours?” Simple, they can’t.

Dogs and humans use their mouths for very different things and have differences in hygiene. This means that dogs and humans have very different bacteria in their mouths. Comparing the bacteria present in the mouth of a human to that which thrives in the mouths of dogs is like comparing apples to oranges. Humans may have one species of microbes in our mouths that causes gingivitis and dogs may have one that is entirely different.

Dogs, just like humans, can suffer from dental problems and diseases that may result in needed cleanings, surgeries or tooth removal. This would certainly not be the case if there were no bacteria present in the mouth of a