Studies Reveal Health Benefits of Vacations, Parks

Getty Images/Blend Images

 

By Karen Goodwin November 2, 2015

 

Take that vacation to lower risk of heart attack and depression, or move near a park for better mental health.

 

If you want to be healthier, take more vacations and live near a large park, according to two separate studies. Vacations are linked to decreased risks of heart attack and depression and even promote brain health, says a study from the Transamerica Center for Retirement Studies with the Global Commission on Aging and U.S. Travel Association. Moving closer to green space improves mental health immediately and is sustained over long periods of time, according to a University of Exeter Medical School study in Britain. “These findings are important for urban planners thinking about introducing new green spaces to towns and cities, suggesting they could provide long-term and sustained benefits for local communities,” the study said.

 

This story originally appeared on Fortune

 

http://www.travelandleisure.com/articles/studies-health-benefits-vacations-parks

 

 

 

The (Pretty Much Totally) Complete Health Case for Urban Nature (Part 2 of 2)

An annotated, chart-filled look at the scientific evidence.

• Eric Jaffe
• @e_jaffe
• Oct 20, 2015

 

m01229 / Flickr

 

I’m not a doctor, but I do sit near one in The Atlantic’s New York office. So you can trust me to know that MD-in-residence James Hamblin is on to something when he writes in the magazine’s October issue about the rising appreciation among physicians for the health benefits of parks and green space. Hamblin writes of “a small but growing group of health-care professionals who are essentially medicalizing nature”:

At his office in Washington, D.C., Robert Zarr, a pediatrician, writes prescriptions for parks. He pulls out a prescription pad and scribbles instructions—which park his obese or diabetic or anxious or depressed patient should visit, on which days, and for how long—just as though he were prescribing medication.

 

PART 2

Attention

In more recent years, a lot of research has focused on how urban nature helps people … focus.

A highly cited study by Marc Berman, John Jonides, and Stephen Kaplan gave some test participants a tough attention-related task that involved remembering numbers. Thus cognitively spent, some participants then took a walk through the famed Nichols Arboretum in Ann Arbor, Michigan, while others walked through the downtown area. When the participants returned to the lab and took the test again, the refreshed nature group scored significantly higher, the researchers reported in a 2008 issue of Psychological Science.

Other work is mixed on just how ensconced in leaves you need to be to get the cognitive boost. A study from 2012 found that the denser a park’s vegetation—meaning, less sight of the city through the trees—the better. But other work has found attention benefits from a mere 40-second micro-glimpse of a green roof, or even looking up from your screen to see a desk plant.

A walk through Nichols Arboretum in Ann Arbor, Michigan (above), gave a boost to attention compared with a walk downtown, according to a 2008 study. (Sean Munson / Flickr)

Child attention

Even tots get a mental bump from grass and bark. In a 2009 study, kids aged 7 to 12 with diagnosed attention-deficit disorder showed better concentration after a 20-minute walk in the park, compared with children who walked downtown or in a neighborhood. “‘Doses of nature’ might serve as a safe, inexpensive, widely accessible new tool in the tool kit for managing ADHD symptoms,” the researchers concluded in a 2009 issue of the Journal of Attention Disorders. More recent work extended the cognitive benefits of urban nature to children without ADHD, too.

Kids 7-12 who walked in a park showed better concentration than those who took a stroll in a more urban environment. (Journal of Attention Disorders, 2009)

Aggression and restraint

The power of nature seems capable at times of transcending particular vulnerable environments. In a 2001 study, Illinois scholars Frances Kuo and William Sullivan found reduced levels of aggression in Chicago public housing residents whose view overlooked some trees, compared with others in the same complex who looked onto an empty common area. Kuo and Sullivan report in the journal Environment and Behavior that the additional mental fatigue that comes with not having visual access to nature might play a role in the diverging outcomes.

A study by Kuo and Sullivan as well as Andrea Faber Taylor, published the following year in the Journal of Environmental Psychology, extended that research to discipline among girls in the same housing complex. Young women with tree views performed better on tests of concentration, delayed gratification, and inhibited impulsivity compared to those with barren views. “Perhaps when housing managers and city officials decide to cut budgets for landscaping in inner city areas, they deprive children of more than just an attractive view,” the researchers concluded.

Other work has found reduced levels of road rage among test participants who watched videos of a drive along roads lined with and without nature. In a 2003 study, some participants watched the car cruise along a normal asphalt highway, others saw a little bit of greenery in a garden highway, and a third group saw dense vegetation in a scenic parkway. Afterward they all tried their hand at an anagram that, unbeknownst to them, was impossible (e.g. DATGI—eyes back on the road, please!); those who’d observed the scenic drive showed less impatience, working on the puzzle for 90 more seconds before giving up.

Participants who watched a drive along a scenic parkway showed more patience when tackling an unsolvable anagram than did those with other views. (Environment and Behavior, 2003)

Post-operative recovery

If you’re in a hospital, the last thing you’re really worried about is the view. But having a window that looks onto trees has been shown to have a measurable difference in patient outcomes. In a classic study published in Science in 1984, Roger Ulrich found that gallbladder surgery patients whose hospital rooms overlooked nature had “shorter postoperative hospital stays, received fewer negative evaluative comments in nurses' notes, and took fewer potent analgesics” than those whose windows faced a brick wall.

And these days, if the medical trend noted by James Hamblin catches on, you just might be prescribed a walk in the park on your way out.

For whole article:  http://www.citylab.com/weather/2015/10/the-pretty-much-totally-complete-health-case-for-urban-nature/411331/

 

 

 

The (Pretty Much Totally) Complete Health Case for Urban Nature (Part 1 of 2)

An annotated, chart-filled look at the scientific evidence.

• Eric Jaffe
• @e_jaffe
• Oct 20, 2015

m01229 / Flickr

 

I’m not a doctor, but I do sit near one in The Atlantic’s New York office. So you can trust me to know that MD-in-residence James Hamblin is on to something when he writes in the magazine’s October issue about the rising appreciation among physicians for the health benefits of parks and green space. Hamblin writes of “a small but growing group of health-care professionals who are essentially medicalizing nature”:

At his office in Washington, D.C., Robert Zarr, a pediatrician, writes prescriptions for parks. He pulls out a prescription pad and scribbles instructions—which park his obese or diabetic or anxious or depressed patient should visit, on which days, and for how long—just as though he were prescribing medication.

Seems the medical community has finally caught up with insights made by the urban landscape community 150 years ago. In 1865, Frederick Law Olmsted of Central Park design fame called it “a scientific fact” that natural “is favorable to the health and vigor of men.” (And women!) Olmsted jumped the gun on the whole “fact” thing, but time and a whole bunch of modern behavioral research on the nature-health link has proved him wise.

Exactly what makes parks and trees so healthy for people remains a matter of ongoing discussion. One credible theory, pioneered by Michigan psychologist Stephen Kaplan, holds that nature restores and refreshes our brains, much like sleep, because it doesn’t require direct attention. Harvard biologist E.O. Wilson has attributed the effects to “biophilia”—essentially, that humans are more comfortable in nature because that’s where they evolved.

Here’s Wilson chatting with The Washington Post a few weeks back:

“Instinctively, without understanding what’s happening, they know that in certain wild environments, they have come home,” Wilson said.

Connecting with nature is especially important for the world’s “increasingly urbanized population,” says Wilson. To that end, CityLab has compiled a nearly complete health case for more city green space. The lit review’s purpose is to show that urban nature is (as Olmsted might say) favorable to public health and psychological well-being, and also why it’s so critical for people who live in the high-stress city to occasionally (as Wilson might say) go home again.

Depression

There’s some pretty clear evidence that walking through nature puts people in a better mood than does walking through a city setting. That’s not a huge surprise given the stressful confines of crowded sidewalks. But the findings are especially significant considering the link between urbanization and mental illness, including depression.

A 2009 study found that a 15-minute stroll through the woods led participants to have more positive emotions—and to reflect on a life problem more constructively—than their counterparts who walked in an urban setting. A 2012 study even found nature-related mood gains in major depressive cases. Research published earlier this year found that Londoners living near street trees were prescribed fewer antidepressants.

New work from Stanford’s Gregory Bratman, published this year in top journal PNAS, suggests that nature’s impact on harmful rumination might hold the key to its anti-depressive power. Participants who took a 90-minute nature walk reported having less rumination and showed decreased neural activity in the subgenual prefrontal cortex—a part of the brain linked with sadness and self-reflection. The findings “suggest that feasible investments in access to natural environments could yield important benefits for the ‘mental capital’ of cities and nations.”

A 90-minute nature walk, but not a city walk, led to a reported decline in rumination. (PNAS, 2015)

Happiness and well-being

On the flipside of the emotional spectrum, other work has linked proximity to urban parks with higher well-being. U.K.-based researchers surveyed about 10,000 Brits on how satisfied they were with their lives, as well as whether they had general signs of mental distress. In the journal Psychological Science, the researchers reported that having more green space nearby led to a clear spike in life satisfaction—“equivalent to 28% of the effect of being married rather than unmarried and 21% of being employed rather than unemployed.” They conclude:

Our analyses suggest that individuals are happier when living in urban areas with greater amounts of green space.

General health and mortality

Generally speaking, people who live near urban green space do an admirable job not dying. Past research has found clear associations between city nature and reduced morality for many different causes of death. A new meta-analysis reviewed a number of previous studies and found “strong evidence” linking the quantity of residential green space with all-cause mortality and “moderate evidence” linking it with perceived general health.

Another 2015 paper, this one published in Scientific Reports, put the health benefits in starker terms. After studying general health and tree density in Toronto (while controlling for other demographic factors), the researchers found that having 10 more trees on a city block improved perceived health on par with being seven years younger or $10,000 a year richer. Money may not grow on trees, but the keys to a healthier life just might.

Stress

Environmental research legend Roger Ulrich and collaborators captured the stress-relieving qualities of nature in a clever study from 1991. They gathered 120 test participants into the lab, stressed them out with clips from a work accident film called “It Didn’t Have to Happen,” then showed them videos of various environments. Some participants saw a video of a city pedestrian shopping mall, others watched urban traffic, and others looked at nature.

On four different physiological stress measures, including muscle tension, participants in the nature group recovered more quickly and completely than did those shown the urban environments. Ulrich et al conclude in the Journal of Environmental Psychology:

The findings strongly suggest that environments of importance to well-being and stress are not confined to settings having extreme or unusual properties, such as loud noise or extreme temperatures, but also include very common environments that most urbanites in developed nations encounter daily.

A nature video led to less muscle tension, among other stress traits, relative to sights of city environments. (Journal of Environmental Psychology, 1991)

Subsequent research reached similar conclusions outside the lab. A 2003 study, conducted in nine Swedish cities, found that people who visited urban green spaces more often reported less stress-related illnesses.

To be continued…

For whole article:  http://www.citylab.com/weather/2015/10/the-pretty-much-totally-complete-health-case-for-urban-nature/411331/

 

 

 

Think Outside the Tent: Different Ways to Camp

Whichever way you enjoy to camp, the important part is getting out and enjoying the outdoors!  --Gene

 

 

A bull elk is one of the many wildlife species you could see while camping! Photo by Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks

 7/30/2015 // By Abby Barber

 

Spending the night in a tent is a traditional part of many camping experiences, but it’s not the only way to enjoy the great outdoors and spot native wildlife. Whether you’re camping beneath the southern pines to catch a glimpse of a Florida panther or a gopher tortoise, or camping in a National Park like the Grand Canyon to see a condor or elk, camping is a surefire way to find wildlife no matter how you do it.

As more and more campers across the country pledge to join us in the Great American Campout, we want to share some alternative methods of camping that offer a new experience for new and experienced campers alike.

RV

Camping in an RV looks like fun. Photo by David Clow via Flickr Creative Commons

RVs (short for recreational vehicles) are allowed in many campgrounds.

Pros: Save time on packing – just bring your whole home camping. RVs are spacious and equipped with places to cook, sleep, and relax. They are convenient for extended travel; some people even live full-time in RVs and travel regularly.

Cons: Not all campsites allow RV camping due to their size. The cost to own an RV may be high due to low fuel mileage and maintenance costs.

Travel Trailer or Truck Camper

Travel trailers are great for camping. Photo by Bill & Vicki T. via Flickr Creative Commons

Travel trailers are similar to RVs, except they require a separate vehicle like a pickup truck to pull them. Truck campers fit inside the flatbed of a pickup truck.

Pros: Travel trailers have plenty of room for activities. They can be equipped with amenities similar to RVs: running water, electricity, beds, etc. Also, since they require a separate vehicle to move them, you will be able to easily leave to and from the campsite in your pickup truck.

Cons: Driving with a trailer attached to your vehicle can be cumbersome and requires extra care. Some larger travel trailers require heavy-duty trucks to tow properly. Truck campers are also typically small, so only 1-2 campers will fit comfortably.

Glamping

This glamping tent sure looks glamorous. Photo by Alice Crain via Flickr Creative Commons

People can go glamping in a variety of ways: from staying in a treehouse to sleeping in a fancy tent to spending the night in a nice cabin. One thing all glamping types have in common is luxury.

Pros: Camp in style! Glamping gives you the best of both worlds: outdoor adventures with indoor sleeping conditions. For people with allergies or fears, this introduces the great outdoors more gently and provides some peace of mind.

Cons: Because of the luxurious nature of glamping, it is often more expensive than other forms of camping.

Yurt

Yurts can also be equipped with solar panels. Photo by Sarah Joy via Flickr Creative Commons

Yurts are large, round tents that use a specific framework based on tension and compression to hold their form. They range in size from an office to a small family home. Originally used by nomads in central Asia, yurts are becoming a popular way to camp.

Pros: Yurts are portable and can be spacious enough for fireplaces, electricity, plumbing, even doors. They have low ecological footprints, and can provide a stable shelter for long periods of time.

Cons: Yurts can take a day or two to set up properly, especially if you want to include amenities like heating and plumbing, so they should be used for longer trips (unless you’re renting.) Because they are essentially cloth homes, they can be rather expensive.

Cabin or Lodges

Grand Canyon Lodge Cabin on the North Rim. Photo by Al HikesAZ via Flickr Creative Commons

Many campgrounds offer cabins or lodges on site for people to rent.

Pros: You can save time and energy because your main living space is already set up for you. They provide greater shelter from the elements, but can still be set up sparsely to give you the full outdoor experience.

Cons: Cabin and lodging in certain campsites can book up fairly quickly, especially in the summer and fall. Make reservations sooner rather than later.

It doesn’t matter how you camp, so long as you do. Remember to follow Leave No Trace rules wherever you go.

Pledge to camp this summer! For each camper, $1 will be donated to protect the great outdoors for all Americans, up to $100,000. You will also be entered to win the Ultimate Campout Prize Pack.

Share with us your favorite way to camp!

http://blog.nwf.org/2015/07/think-outside-the-tent-different-ways-to-camp/