Classic case of science “journalism” mixing up correlation and causation. The study only controlled for income in the broadest possible strokes, so in all likelihood, this is just one more study confirming that rich people live longer.
It’s possible that the green space lowers cortisol levels, thereby lessening the negative effective of aging, which would also account for the differences in Black vs. white participants (as Black people in America almost uniformly have higher cortisol levels simply because of the higher stress levels experienced by minorities in the US). More study (and rigor) is required to say for certain.
However, this headline is simply not supported by the study.
So it’s like the study that showed that having a horse increase your life expectancy by several years ?
Exactly.
It looks like they adjusted for the common cofactors. There could be more they missed, but this study is also backed by a large body of research that found similar effects. You can see some of these other papers in the references.
Probably the effect is driven by several factors including mental well-being, increased social cohesion, reduced air pollution, increased opportunity for exercise, and other things. Frankly, it would be surprising if these things did not have an effect on lifespan.
They did adjust for socioeconomic class very, very broadly, basically by classifying entire neighborhoods as the same SEC. I know that it is incredibly difficult to get really granular, but there are huge gradients of wealth even within the same neighborhood, so it seems presumptive to say “living near green space could add 2.5 years to your life” based on a study that makes generalizations that are that broad.
Probably the effect is driven by several factors including mental well-being, increased social cohesion, reduced air pollution, increased opportunity for exercise, and other things. Frankly, it would be surprising if these things did not have an effect on lifespan.
Exactly. But to say that it’s the green space causing these benefits is the thing with which I take issue. And wealth also increases access to all of these resources/benefits.
Surely they mean: not living near Green spaces will decrease it by 2.5 years
This is the best summary I could come up with:
A study published Wednesday in the peer-reviewed journal Science Advances suggests that if you have long-term exposure to more greenery where you live, on average you may be adding 2.5 years to your life.
To explore the association between long-term exposure to greenery and aging, the researchers compared age-related biological changes in the study’s participants over a 20-year period against data on green spaces near where those people live.
While that helped identify the location and quantity of plant life, the approach does not provide details about the type — for example, whether the area is a golf course or a forested nature trail — or quality of green space.
Knowing more details about the green spaces studied and what people might be doing in them is critical, said Karen Seto, director of the Hixon Center for Urban Ecology at the Yale School of the Environment.
In the meantime, the research should encourage people to think more about their surroundings when making healthy living decisions, in addition to diet, sleep and exercise, Hou said.
“We need to start changing our perspective on green space and really viewing it as an essential piece of infrastructure, just the same as sewer systems and garbage collection,” he said.
The original article contains 797 words, the summary contains 205 words. Saved 74%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
I like green spaces and all but you can miss me with that extended life stuff.
Well unlike a lot of modern medical interventions, this likely works by improving your level of health–the life extension is more of a side-effect of being healthier. I think that’s a good thing. There is a lot of pain and suffering associated with early death in most cases.
