James O'LoghlinHostI think one of the things goes back to your comment about the downside, perhaps how alienated we are from nature or even I would say our own physiology in the modern world and the downside of that.

Is being in nature, whether it be total immersion for a number of days like you or the more accessible thing for people... who live in cities or even towns, just spending a bit of time walking along a river or a park.

We went to the theatre last night and we walked, we got a ferry across the harbour, Sydney Harbour, and then walked around from Milsons Point to the Ensemble Theatre in Kirribilli, just walked around this beautiful bit of harbour through lots of parks.

So is just being in nature good for you? And my understanding is that the evidence suggests it is.

And if that's right, then we get to the more complex question of, well, it sounds kind of intuitive, but what's actually going on? Does the evidence stack up that nature is generally a positive thing for mental health?
So the anecdotal side of things and people's experiential side, people who do it, people who are feeling low and non-energetic, alienated, who do it report very positive personal benefits.
But in a more systematic way- it's far less clear-cut because, you know, although geographical things are studied a lot, like urban settings versus rural settings versus regional settings, they're not really about being in nature.
They turn out to be much more about socioeconomics and access to education, healthcare, and they turn out to be about a whole lot of other issues.
And a lot of them in those situations, people in rural and regional settings do worse.
But if you take the other way around and say, okay, if you could control for all those other factors.

And I guess the other factor, sorry, is that it'll be hard to control for is generally when you're in nature, you're exercising.

So I was thinking you could do an experiment where, you know, 10 people sit in their homes and 10 people go and walk around the park, but you'd have to control for the exercise too.
So the two bits that I think we have much stronger evidence about are the degrees of physical activity and the degrees of physical activity during daylight, not to dismiss your walk around the harbour at night, which is a beautiful thing, but the sort of daylight exposure bit plus the physical activity, how you spend your day.
And my favorite topic, what's its relationship with your circadian system or your body clock? How does that actually change? So I think there are two aspects of this which have very strong evidence.
I think one of the things goes back to your comment about the downside, perhaps how alienated we are from nature or even I would say our own physiology in the modern world and the downside of that.

Is being in nature, whether it be total immersion for a number of days like you or the more accessible thing for people... who live in cities or even towns, just spending a bit of time walking along a river or a park.

We went to the theatre last night and we walked, we got a ferry across the harbour, Sydney Harbour, and then walked around from Milsons Point to the Ensemble Theatre in Kirribilli, just walked around this beautiful bit of harbour through lots of parks.

So is just being in nature good for you? And my understanding is that the evidence suggests it is.

And if that's right, then we get to the more complex question of, well, it sounds kind of intuitive, but what's actually going on? Does the evidence stack up that nature is generally a positive thing for mental health?
So the anecdotal side of things and people's experiential side, people who do it, people who are feeling low and non-energetic, alienated, who do it report very positive personal benefits.
But in a more systematic way- it's far less clear-cut because, you know, although geographical things are studied a lot, like urban settings versus rural settings versus regional settings, they're not really about being in nature.
They turn out to be much more about socioeconomics and access to education, healthcare, and they turn out to be about a whole lot of other issues.
And a lot of them in those situations, people in rural and regional settings do worse.
But if you take the other way around and say, okay, if you could control for all those other factors.

And I guess the other factor, sorry, is that it'll be hard to control for is generally when you're in nature, you're exercising.

So I was thinking you could do an experiment where, you know, 10 people sit in their homes and 10 people go and walk around the park, but you'd have to control for the exercise too.
So the two bits that I think we have much stronger evidence about are the degrees of physical activity and the degrees of physical activity during daylight, not to dismiss your walk around the harbour at night, which is a beautiful thing, but the sort of daylight exposure bit plus the physical activity, how you spend your day.
And my favorite topic, what's its relationship with your circadian system or your body clock? How does that actually change? So I think there are two aspects of this which have very strong evidence.
The rest of this transcript — segmented and speaker-labeled, so you land on the exact moment something was said
Search every transcript — by keyword, by phrase, or by meaning, across every show Radar indexes
Trends — what is surging across podcasts, measured against its own baseline
Alerts — when a name you follow appears in a newly indexed episode
No account is needed to search Radar.