Living near green space makes you 2.5 years younger: study

I have heard this kind of thing before. They seem to get by with the odd tree or shrub in urban Japan. Living on a lifeless moon would probably make no difference. Therefore, is this applicable to all humanity?

Is this another of those stories that looks at a statistical correlation with a vast number of unknowns and magically spins the piece of propaganda from it that they were looking for from day 1?

Living near green space makes you 2.5 years younger: study

I so very strongly agree and believe it.

I hrew up in God's country surrounded by flora and fauna. Outside my door was my personal playground provided by Mother Nature herself. I could go into detail but it would make you jealous.

In saying that, here I am living in the world's largest agglomeration.

Go figure.

An odd hypothesis. Consider humans are animals and we've spent the past 100,000 years surrounded by nature. The test ought to be: Living away from green space makes you ___ years older.

Yea, if you like all the insects, mosquitoes etc

My home is next to a large park, and there is a great sense of space, and we get plenty of light.

Birds, butterflies, mushrooms are our neighbours. They do have parties, but they manage to keep it quiet and they finish up around dusk.

My job makes me 2.5 years older, so I break even.

:-) surrounded by green fields and seaside and 360º sky.

Living near green space makes you 2.5 years younger: study

Japanese city planners who insist on removing every shred of green from the city environment, please pay attention.

@GBR48,

Your point about correlation is important.

They found that people whose homes were surrounded by 30 percent green cover within a five kilometer (three mile) radius were on average 2.5 years younger biologically

I'd take a guess that homes in urban areas closer to green areas are on average larger and more expensive and lived in by wealthier people.

And the exceptions...

For example, parks in deprived neighborhoods used for illicit activities might be less frequented, 

Or the homes nearby are smaller, less expensive, and lived in by poorer people.

Is this another of those stories that looks at a statistical correlation with a vast number of unknowns and magically spins the piece of propaganda from it that they were looking for from day 1?

No. Academics are aware of such problems, so they have to factor in other variables in their analysis to determine if something other than what they are looking at is the actual cause of a seeming correlation. This line in the article says they did that:

The team constructed statistical models to evaluate the results, and control for other variables, such as education, income, and behavioral factors like smoking, that might have affected the results.

"Green is the way forward" is the first mantra of the residents living, working, and moving at Anandwan and its satellite communes in Maharashtra. "Each drop more crop" is their second mantra. Armed with those two mantras, those incredible guys have revitalized their ecosystem and added life to their lifespan.

I strongly believe in these research results.

I can't explicitly explain why but when I live near mother nature - the beach, the river, parks and green hillsides - I feel much better. There's just something about it.

I've lived in many places but the three places I lived where I was completely removed from mother nature had me moving away usually within a year or two.

Yes, humans were created to dwell in a natural ("green") environment.

It's no surprise that living in a concrete jungle has decidedly negative impacts on health.

I'm thankful that my tiny home is surrounded by trees, several of which are fruit-bearing.

This world is full of beauty, if we will allow ourselves to see it.

quote: No. Academics are aware of such problems, so they have to factor in other variables in their analysis to determine if something other than what they are looking at is the actual cause of a seeming correlation.

I object. They could do that for bees or ants, but not for people. We are far too complex. Your life and your next door neighbour's life may be completely different, even though you live next door to each other. There are just too many variables. The complexity of humans makes it impossible to weed out the unknowns. They are connecting cause and effect before they even start and then looking for a way to justify it. That is not how you do statistics.

I'm a huge advocate of gardening and having more parks. But articles like this are an insult to science.

I have high hopes for the lone cactus sitting on my windowsill.

餓死鬼

I have high hopes for the lone cactus sitting on my windowsill.

Peyote?

Peyote?

No, mine has long red spines.

To be fair, Senbon Matsubara and Tsuruga Bay are pretty much behind my apartment building so I shouldn't put all the pressure for my doubtful longevity on my cactus.

I object. They could do that for bees or ants, but not for people. We are far too complex. Your life and your next door neighbour's life may be completely different, even though you live next door to each other. There are just too many variables. The complexity of humans makes it impossible to weed out the unknowns.

Well by that standard I guess we can't do research anything related to humans at all because we are "far too complex" then, eh?

Thankfully there is so much more valuable and important work to be done studying bees and ants, though I suspect that if you were to ask the bees and ants they would raise similar objections about their own complexities.

They are connecting cause and effect before they even start and then looking for a way to justify it. That is not how you do statistics.

No, that's actually what you are doing, which is ironic. You want to draw this conclusion about them, so you are working backwards to lead yourself towards that conclusion without actually looking for any evidence, other than your own assumptions, that would justify it.

Did you actually read their paper? Here is a link to it:

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adf8140

After reading it and actually understanding what analysis they have done, please come back and explain where they went wrong. Doing that before you've read the paper is putting the cart before the horse.

I believe this study. I wish I had more green around me.

Heard my first Cicada yesterday. Walked out my door this morning and found a King Namikuji near my front door. Amazing! Couldn't see the top of the hills cuz of the fog. No surprise humans are trashing the planet when concrete, convince stores and a 24/7 karaoke box is valued higher than nature.

Living near more greenness can help you be younger than your actual age.........................Oh goody!! I am a 23yr female but look like a 15 yr schoolgirl, mainly because I am very small. 5ft. and weigh just over 100lbs. But I have lived in the country side all my life, except for my yrs at Uni. I have never used any make up either, not because I am too pretty, but because it would not make any difference....LOL!!