Pet ownership positively influences clinical outcomes in cardiovascular prevention. Additionally, cardiovascular disease (CVD) has been previously linked to microbiota dysbiosis. We evaluated the influence of owning a pet and its relationship with the intestinal microbiota. We analyzed the gut microbiota from 162 coronary patients from the CORDIOPREV study (NCT00924937) according to whether they owned pets (n = 83) or not (n = 79). The pet-owner group was further divided according to whether they owned dogs only (n = 28) or not (n = 55). A 7-item pet-owners test score was used. Patients who owned pets had less risk of metabolic syndrome (MetS) (OR = 0.462) and obesity (OR = 0.519) and were younger (p < 0.001) than patients who did not own pets. Additionally, patients who owned dogs had less risk of MetS (OR = 0.378) and obesity (OR = 0.418) and were younger (p < 0.001) than patients who did not own pets. A preponderance of the genera Serratia and Coprococcus was found in the group of owners, while the genera Ruminococcus, an unknown genus of Enterobacteriaceae and Anaerotruncus were preponderant in the group of non-owners. In patients who owned dogs, Methanobrevibacter and two more genera, Coprococcus and Oscillospira, were more common. Our study suggests that the prevalence of MetS and obesity in CVD patients is lower in pet owners, and that pet ownership could be a protective factor against MetS through the shaping of the gut microbiota. Thus, owning a pet could be considered as a protective factor against cardiometabolic diseases.

Introduction and Objectives: Food insecurity is involved in the most important health problem worldwide: the rise in non-communicable diseases. It affects populations in poor countries and disadvantaged populations in affluent countries. Lifestyle improvement strategies are often costly and only effective in the short term. Our aim is to demonstrate that an educational program on a healthy lifestyle which increases health literacy could improve long-term health and mitigate food insecurity. Methods: This work will conduct a 24-month intervention to improve cardiovascular health, measured by the Life's Simple 7 criteria, in vulnerable families (460 individuals) at risk of food insecurity. It entails initial training through workshops (basic intervention model) followed by randomization into three groups: (1) no further intervention; (2) a traditional advanced intervention model every 3 months; and (3) an e-learning advanced intervention model every 15 days with YouTube videos or WhatsApp/text message. In a next step, we will explore if the lifestyle intervention improve families' food insecurity score according to the criteria established by the Food and Agriculture Organization and measured by the Food Insecurity Experience Scale (FIES). Finally, we will analyze which of the two advanced intervention models, either face to face or virtual, are more effective at improving cardiovascular health and food literacy. Conclusions: If this type of program -not very complex or costly -has favorable effects, it could be proposed as a model for improving these populations' state of vulnerability. The E-DUCASS program aims to use this strategy to improve cardiovascular health in vulnerable populations in a scientific, efficient, safe, and sustainable manner.