Mostrar mensagens com a etiqueta BBC. Mostrar todas as mensagens
Mostrar mensagens com a etiqueta BBC. Mostrar todas as mensagens

Top doctor backs 'garden gym' idea



Royal College of Physicians president Sir Richard Thompson said plants helped reduce stress, anger and depression.
He added the fourth biggest cause of death in the UK was a lack of activity, making it important to provide green spaces in which people could exercise.
He made the comments at a green cities conference in central London.
'Very impressive'
Although a growing number of scientific studies have produced evidence supporting the idea that urban green spaces are good for human wellbeing, the issue still remains on the margins of healthcare strategies.
Formal garden and Caucasian elm, Hyde Park (Image: BBC)
Looking at a diverse array of flowering plants can help reduce stress, studies suggest
But Sir Richard observed: "When we look into the science of the beneficial effects of plants and gardening, there is quite a decent set of papers to read."
Referring to a series of "very impressive" controlled studies in the US, Sir Richard said they showed that gardens improved the mood within hospitals, reducing stress levels among patients, families and staff.
"What was very important was that the gardens had to have biodiversity - a variation of plants," he told delegates.
Among heart patients, the gardens were also shown to reduce post-operative anxiety, resulting in a reduction of medication.
But, he added: "Evidence showed that concrete gardens had no effect at all, so you had to have green gardens."
Sir Richard, a patron of Thrive - a charity that champions the benefits of gardening among people with disabilities or mental ill health - went on to explain how scientific studies had documented the health benefits of gardening.
"It improves your mood, increases flexibility, improves your balance and reduces the number of falls, which is a great problem for older people living at home by themselves."
He added that just getting outdoors had health benefits.
"We now know - from a recent study - that sunlight reduces blood pressure and a small reduction of blood pressure in the population produces a significant reduction of cardiovascular disease.
He concluded that urban green spaces could help ease the strain on health budgets.
"At a population scale, it can offer huge savings to the NHS by reducing the burden of preventable diseases, such as diabetes and heart disease.
"Some people say there is a gym outside your window, and it is much cheaper than a gym subscription."
Opening the International Green City Conference, International Association of Horticultural Producers (AIPH) secretary general Tim Briercliffe said urban dwellers were being cheated.
"Too often, we settle for second-rate landscapes because we do not know what it could be like," he told delegates.
He added that the AIPH event would "expose the foolishness of using the landscape as the place that savings can be made"."

Fonte e imagem: http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-26871970

Thrive: http://www.thrive.org.uk/

Car-free in cities where driving is king

Brian Poole, in Vancouver, ditched his car for a monthly bus pass and his bicycle. (Michelle Ty)

By Alina Dizik
"As hourly car rentals, taxi-hailing apps and car-sharing services become more popular, some drivers are finding ownership unnecessary.

Robust public transportation and easy access to necessities, coupled with the high costs of everything from tolls to parking have long led to car-free living in places like New York, Singapore and many European capitals. But, emerging transport options — think Uber, Halo, RelayRides and Zipcar — are spreading to cities where having a car had been a near-necessity. At the same time, the cost of car ownership is rising. In the last year, maintenance costs in the United States for a vehicle rose 11.3%, while insurance premiums rose 2.7%, according to the American Automobile Association’s 2013 Your Driving Costs. The average cost to operate a vehicle in the US was $8,946 in 2012 and that figure is even in higher outside the US in expanding metropolises such as Shanghai and Sao Paolo.
All told, these developments have made the decision to ditch four wheels an easier one, even in cities where being car-free was nearly unthinkable in the past. And in the US, many people are driving far less than they have in the last six decades, according to a study released in May by the United States Public Interest Research Group, a liberal-leaning public policy research and advocacy non-profit. The study found that people age 16 to 36 drove 23% fewer miles on average in 2009 than they did eight years earlier, and the group expects that trend to continue.
Of course, living without a car can mean dealing with unexpected public transport problems and can require more route-planning. But there is a financial upside beyond ditching a car payment and other costs, said Manisha Thakor, a personal finance expert and founder of MoneyZen Wealth Management in Santa Fe, New Mexico. Since most car-free people pay out-of-pocket each time they need to get somewhere, it makes the transportation spending process a more conscious decision, Thakor explains.
Here former car owners share how they manage being car-free and save money in four cities:

Los Angeles
There are few cities more associated with car-driving than Los Angeles, with its 527 miles of freeways. The city’s 3.9 million residents drive almost 2.5 million vehicles, according to the Los Angeles Department of Transportation. But earlier this year John Kisha, 65, president of Dandy Lion Hosting, a webhosting company, went car-free.
Why he did it: After four years of owning an ultra-compact Smart Car, Kisha realized his maintenance costs were rising, to an estimated $800 this year. Including insurance, gas and car payments, Kisha spent about $700 per month. When a Zipcar lot opened up nearby, he decided to switch gears. Los Angeles has a bus and subway system that works efficiently in some areas, said Kisha, who lives in West Hollywood. “My office and where I live is on the same bus line,” he said, adding that his commute time has not grown.
What he spends now: When Kisha has doctor’s appointments, he uses a city-sponsored medical transportation company for free. For taxis, he buys a booklet of coupons for $8 good for $40 worth of rides each month. If he travels overnight, Kisha rents from a traditional car rental company. He uses Zipcar to rent hourly for work appointments. Since ditching his car, he has not spent more than $350 on transportation each month, even though he rents a car two to four times per week.
Biggest hassle: The amount of planning ahead required. “It can be a bit harder to be spontaneous,” Kisha said.
Annual savings: $10,000, most of which goes toward long-term investment or travel.

Cabrils, Spain
Cabrils, a municipality of 7,000 people about 30 km from Barcelona, does not seem a likely place to live without a car. But, Jacobo Pedrosa, 30, a children’s app developer at LilyMedia, is one of a small but growing number of people living in smaller towns outside of Barcelona who are giving it a go.
Why he did it: In 2011, when Pedrosa’s five-year-old Renault needed heavy maintenance and required hours of work at about 40 euros ($51) per hour, he decided to sell. “I didn’t need to drive,” he said. Taxes for car ownership were already costly and he was spending about 2,000 euros ($2,587) on maintenance and 3,000 euros ($3,881) for gas each year. As a web developer he could work from home and didn’t need to drive to an office each day, and could walk most places around the seaside town.
What he spends now: Getting to Barcelona now requires a bus and train ride that costs 6 euros ($8). It takes an hour longer than driving and Pedrosa makes the trip at least once a week. Twice a month, Pedrosa rents a car for weekend outings and spends about 40 euros ($51), plus the cost of gas. Friends sometimes give him a lift to social gatherings, he said.
Biggest hassle: The time it takes to get to Barcelona to meet with clients.
Annual savings: 4,100 euros ($5,255), which he spends on other experiences, such as dining out and activities with friends.

Vancouver, Canada
Car ownership costs CAD$7,500 (approximately equivalent to USD) on average in Canadian cities such as Vancouver. Even so, most people still depend on their cars as the main form of transport in Canada’s cities. But for Brian Poole, 28, a nonprofit project manager and personal finance blogger, simple math led him to ditch his car.
Why he did it: After graduating from college in 2008 and landing his first job, Poole bought a used car for CAD$4,000. A year later he decided to do the math on alternate transport options. He realized he could cut his costs — more than CAD$400 per month on maintenance, gas and insurance -- in half by renting cars by the day. Poole sold his car in 2010. “It took me a while to come around to the idea that I didn’t need to have a car,” he said.
What he spends now: Poole now uses Modo Car Co-op, a Vancouver-based car share service that allows members to rent vehicles by the hour from other members. Poole also started using Car2Go, which allows customers to return rental cars in a different place than the pick-up location. For daily transit, he depends on a CAD$42 monthly bus pass and his bicycle. Poole’s total monthly transport budget is CAD$200, with about CAD$150 going toward car-sharing services. For groceries, he walks to local supermarkets, but doesn’t buy in bulk.
Biggest hassle: Booking a car on short notice. “If there’s not a car around, there’s not much alternative,” he said.
Annual savings: CAD$2,400, which now goes into retirement savings and other investment accounts.

London
In London, about 60% of people own a car, but Amalia Pacquola, 32, implementation manager at a financial firm, isn’t one of them — despite her slightly unusual transportation requirements.
Why she did it: After driving most her life, Pacquola moved to London from Australia six years ago. But the prospect of owning a car in a city known for its traffic jams was daunting. In a city where car-related expenses can top 20% of annual income -- gas prices are high and commuters pay a £10 ($15) daily congestion fee, for instance -- owning a car costs upward of £8,000 ($12,187) per year. Instead, she became a member of Streetcar, an hourly-rental service acquired by Zipcar in 2010. Pacquaola often makes large cakes for weddings and birthdays as a side hobby, and rents vehicles to transport the desserts.
What she spends now: In a typical month, Pacquaola spends £90 ($137) on public transport and £60 ($304) on hourly car rentals, which average £8 ($12) per hour, she said. Occasional taxis can cost £15 ($23) per trip. In the last three months, she’s rented a car every weekend, but said in a city like London that still makes more financial sense because of parking restrictions. “It’s a lot less stressful,” she said. On weekdays, she takes the Tube to work.
Biggest hassles: Having to adjust mirrors and seat when driving rental cars and not forgetting any personal items when she returns the rental.
Annual savings: £5,720 ($8,732), mostly used to travel outside the country for at least one long weekend per month".

Fonte e imagem: http://www.bbc.com/capital/story/20130523-living-car-free-to-save-money

Is dangerous cycling a problem?


"MPs could introduce a new offence of causing death by dangerous cycling. But how much of a danger do these two-wheeled travellers really pose?

There is little that divides UK public opinion more sharply than cyclists.
To their supporters, Britain's bike-riders are clean, green, commuters-with-a-conscience, who relieve congestion on the nation's roads while keeping themselves fit.
But to certain newspapers, and indeed plenty of motorists, they are "lycra louts", jumping red lights, hurtling past pedestrians on pavements and denying the Highway Code applies to them.
Now this debate - regularly articulated, with the aid of Anglo-Saxon dialect, during rush-hour traffic - has found a forum in the House of Commons, where MP Andrea Leadsom has introduced a private members' bill to create new crimes of causing death or serious injury through dangerous or reckless cycling.
She cites the case of Rhiannon Bennett, who was 17 when she was killed by a speeding cyclist in 2007. The cyclist - who, the court heard, had shouted at Rhiannon to "move because I'm not stopping" - was fined £2,200 and avoided jail.
The MP, herself a keen cyclist, insists she does not want to penalise Britons from getting on their bikes. Her intention is to ensure all road users take "equal responsibility" for their actions, as drivers are already subject to analogous legislation. The government has said it will consider supporting the bill.
But the discussion raises the question of how much of a danger bicycles actually pose on the nation's roads.
Cycling campaigners insist the popular perceptions of rampaging cyclists are not supported by statistical evidence. According to the Department for Transport (DfT), in 2009, the most recent year for which figures are available, no pedestrians were killed in Great Britain by cyclists, but 426 died in collisions with motor vehicles out of a total of 2,222 road fatalities.
Indeed, bike riders insist it is they who are vulnerable. Of the 13,272 collisions between cycles and cars in 2008, 52 cyclists died but no drivers were killed.
Alex Bailey of the Cyclists Touring Club (CTC), which lobbies on behalf of bike users, says valuable parliamentary time could and should be used more effectively to improve road safety. He says there is no need to change the law as twice in the past decade an 1861 act has been used to jail cyclists who killed pedestrians while riding on the pavement.
The notion of the marauding, aggressive cyclist causing rampage on the road, he insists, has little grounding in fact.
"It has a lot of currency in the media," he says. "But it's emotionally based, not rationally based. The problem is not about cyclists at all."
Certainly, few would argue that the boom in cycling has led to a transformation in the activity's public image.
Once it might have conjured up images like that of George Orwell's old maids "biking to Holy Communion through the mists of the autumn mornings".
Now, at least in built-up areas, one stereotype, rightly or wrongly, is of well-paid men in expensive leisurewear with a sense of entitlement and a refusal to conform to the same rules as everyone else.
Tony Armstrong, chief executive of Living Streets, which represents pedestrians, says that while most cyclists behave safely, it should not be ignored that "a significant minority cause concern and fear among pedestrians by their reckless and irresponsible behaviour".
He acknowledges deaths and serious injuries caused by cyclists are relatively rare, but adds that the impact of more mundane anti-social behaviour is more difficult to quantify.
"Although fatalities are recorded, there is no way of measuring how many people have been intimidated or left feeling vulnerable by irresponsible cycling," he says. "We know from our supporters that this is a major concern."
Indeed, Professor Stephen Glaister, director of motorists' advocacy group the RAC Foundation, suggests much of the hostility on the roads stems from a lack of understanding and suggests levelling out the legislation would reassure drivers that the rules were being applied fairly.
"In some ways, road users are tribal in their nature; loyal to their fellow drivers or cyclists, and dismissive of - or antagonistic towards - those who choose to travel by another method," he says.
"Subjecting everyone who uses the public highway to the same laws might actually forge better relationships between us all and erode the idea held by many that those who travel by an alternative mode routinely make up rules of the road to suit themselves."
But some bike-users reject the idea that anecdote and mutual suspicion should drive policy.
In particular, Guardian columnist and cycling advocate Zoe Williams says she is exasperated by the references to red light-jumping whenever bikes are discussed.
She insists the practice largely stems from fear, not arrogance, due to the high number of cyclists killed each year by heavy goods vehicles turning left at junctions, and says ministers should concentrate on tackling such deaths if they really want to make the roads safer.
She adds: "Can you imagine if every time we talked about cars people complained about drivers doing 80mph on the motorway?
"Most cyclists are actually pretty timid. You're constantly living on your wits because you're vulnerable. Instead of drawing up laws like this we should be encouraging cycling and making it easier."
The discussion will continue at Westminster. But legislating away the antipathy between cyclists and drivers will surely be a momentous challenge for MPs."

Conservative MP Andrea Leadsom urges MPs to back a change to the law

"The first-ever cycle crime

Kirkpatrick Macmillan's bicycle
  • Kirkpatrick Macmillan, a blacksmith from Keir Mill, Dumfriesshire, is credited by most historians with inventing the pedal bicycle in 1839
  • In 1842, a newspaper report describes "a gentleman from Dumfries-shire bestride a velocipede of ingenious design" who knocked over a little girl in Glasgow's Gorbals area and was fined five shillings
  • Many believe the offender must have been Macmillan himself. He died in 1878 without ever having patented his invention

"Great Britain cycle safety statistics

  • In 2008, pedal bikes made up 1.8% of urban, non-motorway traffic but were involved in just 0.25% of pedestrian deaths and below 1% of serious pedestrian injuries
  • During the same year, there were 13,272 recorded collisions between cars and bicycles, resulting in the deaths of 52 cyclists and no car drivers or passengers
  • A study of collisions between cyclists and other vehicles from 2005-07 found police allocated blame to drivers in 60% of cases, to the cyclist in 30% and to both parties in the remainder
Source: Department for Transport

"Pedestrian casualties 2001-09

  • Killed by cycles: 18
  • Seriously injured by cycles: 434
  • Killed by cars: 3,495
  • Seriously injured by cars: 46,245
Figures apply to Great Britain. Source: Department for Transport"

Fonte e imagens:

Urban planning needs green rethink, por Martha Schwartz

"When it comes to environmental concerns, there has been altogether too much fragmented talk of buildings.
We have consistently failed to recognise that buildings are situated in wider landscapes that desperately need greater attention.
As I go about my work as a landscape architect, I regularly deal with our profession's role within the green agenda.
Unfortunately, I have found that we lag behind architects when it comes to participating in the conversation around sustainability; in fact, we are often relegated to presiding over green roof technology.
This is most ironic, because landscape architecture is, in fact, the profession that deals with the "green" part of the agenda.
The reason for the focus on buildings, as opposed to that of the surrounding landscape, is down to the fact that the uses of resources and energy can be addressed with a degree of simplicity and directness.
Meanwhile, landscape architects are left outside looking in on the discussion because our professional remit rests outside these technologically oriented and building-focused discussions.
This is problematic because the nature of our profession is to focus on pressing environmental issues in a holistic fashion, in what I call the Softer Side of Sustainability.
This approach involves creating a sense of place, identity and belonging, in order to develop sustainable communities and - I hope - improve the environment.

Living landscape
We seem to have forgotten that sustainability itself is a cultural notion, and that a building or a place must have value to people if it is to be used sustainably.


It is therefore vital that landscape architects assert this both in our advocacy and in our actual work; for so long as we trail behind the architects by topping their buildings with green roofs, we are simply fiddling while Rome burns.
The landscape is the canvas upon which we live our lives, join together as communities and build our cities.
Embedded and integral to the landscape are the ecological systems that must be understood and respected, as well as the infrastructural systems connecting us all together.
I am not simply referring to gardens and majestic wildernesses; in fact, the most sustainable form of human habitation is the city.
This is where we collectively need focus our activities, and this is also where landscape architects can be of real use.
Encouraging people to live side by side more closely will help the local ecology to flourish, because the community can utilise superior water stations and sewage treatment plants, as well as improving electricity consumption patterns.
Cities also inspire a collectivisation of wealth, allowing local governments to better build and equip schools, libraries, and performing arts buildings.
So the reward of collectivisation can be true sustainability. City inhabitants, from a variety of backgrounds, can be quickly made aware of environmentally friendly ways to live.

This, in turn, can result in people influencing one another as they incorporate progressive lifestyle changes into the fabric of their diverse daily lives.
Landscape architects ought to help to make cities better places for all who live within them through the establishment of good connectivity and open spaces, the promotion of public transportation and, very importantly, ensuring water is used responsibly, with run-off being managed and put back into the ground.
In addition, landscape architects ought to ensure developers plant as much as possible so that we have an abundance of trees and permeable surfaces.
Careful and inspired design can make all the difference between a place that is viewed as no real significance to anyone, and a place that attracts people, creates vitality, and is cherished by its inhabitants.
The design of Exchange Square in Manchester, UK, is a good example of how careful attention to a community's history and a site's geology can foster the sort of intellectual and emotional investment in a place that leads to real sustainability.
Exchange Square is a wonderful outdoor living room created from a space that was formerly an ignored and ugly traffic intersection, bombed by the IRA in 1996.
The revamped square is now hugely successful; a vibrant and well-used space for everything from watching soap operas during the lunch hour to greeting the Queen.

10-minute rule
Currently, some urban authorities, such as New York, fall short of implementing the issues around the Softer Side of Sustainability, but they are heading in the right direction.

For example, PLAN NYC, the sustainability agenda for the eastern US concrete jungle, includes a proposal to ensure that all New Yorkers live within a 10-minute walk of a park.

But this reference to parks is the only mention of the landscape in the NYC sustainability agenda.
PLAN NYC is certainly a marvellous commitment to improving the lives of citizens by giving them access to fresh, green, open spaces. But it does not push the envelope quite far enough.
It does not advocate the vital commitment to landscapes that reflects the most forward visual thinking, through dynamic, inspirational design, and structured attentiveness to community histories.
The role of landscape architecture is once again one of green embellishment, adding parks here and there, rather than sustainability agenda-setting through thought-provoking design.
Although NYC embraces its image as the centre of the global contemporary art scene, it has supported neither adventurous architecture nor landscape architecture.
For the best examples of this, we have to look to areas like Germany's Duisberg Nord Parc in the Ruhr Valley, or the beautiful green spaces of the Park Andre Citroen in Paris.
So how are we to implement The Softer Side of Sustainability?
First, we should incorporate the expertise of landscape architects into the planning process leading up to the establishment of sustainability agendas such as PLAN NYC.
This planning process should include measures to encourage compaction of the urban landscape, along with more efficient public transportation.
Secondly, we should increase sustainability education for students of landscape architecture, architecture, and urban development.
Finally, American builders should learn from the design overviews used in much European urban planning, but extend their minds to reflect the sophistication of landscape thinking.
Three straightforward steps, but they are key to deciding whether cities can develop effectively for the 21st Century, or remain mired in yesterday's thinking."
Martha Schwartz is a US-based landscape architect specialising in master plans, art commissions, urban renewal, reclamation and redevelopmen.

Fonte:

Green spaces 'improve health'

"The best health benefits come from living less than a kilometre (0.62miles) from a green space

There is more evidence that living near a 'green space' has health benefits.

Research in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health says the impact is particularly noticeable in reducing rates of mental ill health.

The annual rates of 15 out of 24 major physical diseases were also significantly lower among those living closer to green spaces.

One environmental expert said the study confirmed that green spaces create 'oases' of improved health around them.

The researchers from the VU University Medical Centre in Amsterdam looked at the health records of 350,000 people registered with 195 family doctors across the Netherlands.

Only people who had been registered with their GP for longer than 12 months were included because the study assumed this was the minimum amount of time people would have to live in an environment before any effect of it would be noticeable.

Health impact
The percentages of green space within a one and three kilometre (0.62 and 1.86 miles) radius of their home were calculated using their postcode.

On average, green space accounted for 42% of the residential area within one kilometre (0.62 miles) radius and almost 61% within a three kilometre (1.86 miles) radius of people's homes.

And the annual rates for 24 diseases in 7 different categories were calculated.

The health benefits for most of the diseases were only seen when the greenery was within a one kilometre ( 0.62 miles ) radius of the home.

The exceptions to this were anxiety disorders, infectious diseases of the digestive system and medically unexplained physical symptoms which were seen to benefit even when the green spaces were within three kilometres of the home.

The biggest impact was on anxiety disorders and depression.

Anxiety disorders
The annual prevalence of anxiety disorders for those living in a residential area containing 10% of green space within a one kilometre (0.62 miles) radius of their home was 26 per 1000 whereas for those living in an area containing 90% of green space it was 18 per 1000.

For depression the rates were 32 per 1000 for the people in the more built up areas and 24 per 1000 for those in the greener areas.

The researchers also showed that this relation was strongest for children younger than 12.

They were 21% less likely to suffer from depression in the greener areas.

Two unexpected findings were that the greener spaces did not show benefits for high blood pressure and that the relation appeared stronger for people aged 46 to 65 than for the elderly.

The researchers think the green spaces help recovery from stress and offer greater opportunities for social contacts.

They say the free physical exercise and better air quality could also contribute.

Dr Jolanda Maas of the VU University Medical Centre in Amsterdam, said: "It clearly shows that green spaces are not just a luxury but they relate directly to diseases and the way people feel in their living environments."

"Most of the diseases which are related to green spaces are diseases which are highly prevalent and costly to treat so policy makers need to realise that this is something they may be able to diminish with green spaces."

Professor Barbara Maher of the Lancaster Environment Centre said the study confirmed that green spaces create oases of improved health around them especially for children.

She said: "At least part of this 'oasis' effect probably reflects changes in air quality.

"Anything that reduces our exposure to the modern-day 'cocktail' of atmospheric pollutants has got to be a good thing."

DISEASES THAT BENEFIT MOST FROM GREEN SPACES
Coronary heart disease
Neck, shoulder, back, wrist and hand complaints
Depression and anxiety
Diabetes
Respiratory infections and asthma
Migraine and vertigo
Stomach bugs and urinary tract infections
Unexplained physical symptoms"

Fonte:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8307024.stm