While the quantity and quality of evidence varies across outcomes, living in greener urban areas is associated with lower probabilities of cardiovascular disease 2, obesity 3, diabetes 4, asthma hospitalisation 5, mental distress 6, and ultimately mortality 7, among adults and lower risks of obesity 8 and myopia 9 in children. Prospective longitudinal and intervention studies are a critical next step in developing possible weekly nature exposure guidelines comparable to those for physical activity.Ī growing body of epidemiological evidence indicates that greater exposure to, or ‘contact with’, natural environments (such as parks, woodlands and beaches) is associated with better health and well-being, at least among populations in high income, largely urbanised, societies 1. It did not matter how 120 mins of contact a week was achieved (e.g.
The pattern was consistent across key groups including older adults and those with long-term health issues. Positive associations peaked between 200–300 mins per week with no further gain. Compared to no nature contact last week, the likelihood of reporting good health or high well-being became significantly greater with contact ≥120 mins (e.g. Analyses controlled for residential greenspace and other neighbourhood and individual factors. Weekly contact was categorised using 60 min blocks. Participants (n = 19,806) were drawn from the Monitor of Engagement with the Natural Environment Survey (2014/15–2015/16) weighted to be nationally representative. We examined associations between recreational nature contact in the last seven days and self-reported health and well-being.
Spending time in natural environments can benefit health and well-being, but exposure-response relationships are under-researched.
0 kommentar(er)
