↩ Alco_Rs11 I'm rather familiar with toxoplasmosis. It kills around 750 people per year, all of which seem to have an immunosuppressive condition or some sort, and 50% of the deaths are caused by people eating contaminated meat - which is the main way people are infected by the parasite.
It's actually estimated that there could be anywhere between 30-50% of the human population currently living with this parasite. Unless you have an underlying health condition, it can present no symptoms in most cases or very weak flu-like ones.
Like yeah, sure, the problem lies more with cats than with dogs, but you've been misleading in how you've presented it. You could realistically be dealing with that parasite as we speak as its main source of infection is from improperly prepared food (not cats) - but as I've said, it's relatively asymptomatic so most don't know they have it.
I could take a cheap jab at something back, but to be honest I've never really understood this debate. Both dogs and cats are lovely animals who deserve all of our love and affection. As someone who grew up around cats, I'm going to be more used to them. When I've been around other family members dogs, they're cute and loveable but I dislike the smell, and I personally dislike the way they can be a little overbearing at times.
Edit: you know what, here's my cheap dig.
Since we're talking about diseases which come from the animal (which usually isn't the animals fault anyway), let's talk about a much more well known case. 30 million people receive post bite rabies vaccines a year, infects (and kills, with a 100% fatality rate) 60,000 annually, and 99% of these cases in humans come from dog bites. While it's very much preventable, the post bite vaccinations cost $8.6 billion annually.
I'm not using that as an argument in favour of dogs, I'm just explaining why using the logic of a disease the animal can accidentally give you is poor and misguided. Console wars and OS wars are bad enough, let's not have petty pet wars.