Live data from Hacker News

More green spaces linked to slower biological aging

news.northwestern.edu

41–50 of 68 posts

Re: More green spaces linked to slower biological aging

#41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By this logic we must conclude that only a tiny portion of people actually want to live in beachfront properties and take a few months off to travel every year. Everyone else seeks out cheaper apartments and 9-5 jobs with two weeks vacation.

You could. There's plenty of beachfront places in other countries American families could easily afford and retire and yet chose to work to live in dumpy apartments in Manhattan instead. It only works if it's within your financial means. We can't all assume everyone doesn't want a $200M house in the hills with a megayacht and a full staff because they don't have it. They don't have the means. But if you have the mean…

The actions people take are generally not a product of careful deliberation and certainly not always genuine reflections of their deepest desires.

Most of the time, people just do things without thinking too much about it and they do the things that are the "default mode" operations in the context in which they are operating.

It is not wise to look at actions people take and conclude that's what they really wanted to do. At the very least you'd need to ask them about it.

There may be 100 reasons why they feel tied to a spot where they actually don't want so much to live in. So let's try to really and truly improve the cities, make them walkable with green and blue spaces, easy public transport out to larger parks and reserves, etc.

Re: More green spaces linked to slower biological aging

#42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But we already know green spaces are nice. And this study does not prove anything about them being good for people. Maybe instead of X USD on this study we should have spent that money on an actual green space somewhere...

It does in fact increase our evidence that they’re actually good for people beyond being mere perks that some people enjoy.

No, It doesn't. Because it does not show causation. We either prove causation or it's worthless.

Re: More green spaces linked to slower biological aging

#44
post #36
post #15

So if you live in a good part of town you live longer. Not really surprising?

All sorts of good outcomes are highly correlated with being well off financially.

And you don't think they bothered to adjust for that even though they said they did?

Re: More green spaces linked to slower biological aging

#45
post #10

Farmers look famously young for their age ... put a 30 year old farmer and a 40 year old lawyer in a room together and you might mistake one for the others father.

Farmers look famously young for their age

Where does this idea come from? Farmers can end up outside all day which can age someone heavily.

Re: More green spaces linked to slower biological aging

#46

We need to stop doing these pointless studies. Everything is linked to everything, showing it is is a waste of money because (1) we already know and (2) we can't use this info because we don't know what causes what. But people would rather click on these pieces and feel good having their assumptions confirmed that learn and actually improve our society.

I've been repeating this in my work with statewide health data. The answer to, "Is there a difference in X between group Y and group Z?" is always "Yes." No data collection or significance test needed. If you want to know if being Y or Z affects X, you need a properly controlled experiment.

Studies using observational and non-comprehensive data collection have their place. They show reality. If people in one city have an incredibly high rate of dying from heart disease, that means we could reduce premature deaths there. And we'd do that by looking at the results of controlled studies into the causes of heart disease, then see which ones are prevalent and changeable.

Re: More green spaces linked to slower biological aging

#47
post #44
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All sorts of good outcomes are highly correlated with being well off financially.

And you don't think they bothered to adjust for that even though they said they did?

Statistics isn't my strong suit but as I understand adjustment for covariates then it's a linear remapping of the sample data. If that's right then strongly nonlinear confounding factors (as, for instance, I'd expect wealth to be) would still affect the outcomes even after being "adjusted for".

Happy to be set straight on this if I've misunderstood!

Re: More green spaces linked to slower biological aging

#48
post #10

Farmers look famously young for their age ... put a 30 year old farmer and a 40 year old lawyer in a room together and you might mistake one for the others father.

> Farmers look famously young for their age I come from a family of farmers. I would not agree with this statement.

I assumed they were being sarcastic, especially as the farmer in the example is 10 years younger.

Re: More green spaces linked to slower biological aging

#49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By this logic we must conclude that only a tiny portion of people actually want to live in beachfront properties and take a few months off to travel every year. Everyone else seeks out cheaper apartments and 9-5 jobs with two weeks vacation.

You could. There's plenty of beachfront places in other countries American families could easily afford and retire and yet chose to work to live in dumpy apartments in Manhattan instead. It only works if it's within your financial means. We can't all assume everyone doesn't want a $200M house in the hills with a megayacht and a full staff because they don't have it. They don't have the means. But if you have the mean…

Yeah just retire somewhere where you don't speak the language, have minimal-to-zero connection to local culture, and will be thousands of miles from children, family, and friends. Simple!
Post reply on HN