Discuss: A Walk in the Woods

Without minimizing the importance of spiritual connections with the wilderness (which I agree with), spending too much time indoors contributes to vitamin D deficiency, since we get most of our vitamin D from sunlight. So, considering only simple physical health, according to Dr. John Cannell, MD, this is what too much time indoors will bring you unless you supplement with vitamin D:
http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/
“Current research has implicated vitamin D deficiency as a major factor in the pathology of at least 17 varieties of cancer as well as heart disease, stroke, hypertension, autoimmune diseases, diabetes, depression, chronic pain, osteoarthritis, osteoporosis, muscle weakness, muscle wasting, birth defects, periodontal disease, and more.”
There are studies linked to from that web site about all those disease relationships, some with stronger evidence, some with weaker evidence. Vitamin D deficiency may also help explain rising autism rates according to Dr. Cannell and others (even at Harvard Medical School).

Living in the NY Adirondack Park, I agree that access to nature should be a human right, but the remaining wilderness would be destroyed if everyone went there all the time. Thankfully, seriously, we know how to make more land in sea and space, we just don’t have the will yet. We can and should be building space habitats and seasteads to make enough “nature” for everyone. I think that is the one thing wrong with some pitches for nature, like the Nature Conservancy. People are all too willing to say the scale and power of modern technology is so huge that it is destroying nature, but then when someone points out that we also know enough to make enough nature for quadrillions of humans in the solar system, they think that is silly or too expensive. Do we have powerful technologies or not? Granted, it’s generally a lot easier to destroy than to create… But with tens of millions of people out of work, why not create some more terrestrial nature in the oceans and in space?

Expanding on my previous point on creating more “nature” to walk in, another way to create more “nature” is for more people to start enjoying vegetarian cuisine (or, alternatively, lab grown meat) and to then return agricultural lands to wilderness preserves:
http://www.westernwatersheds.org/watmess/watmess_2002/2002html_summer/article6.htm
“By far the greatest impact on the American landscape comes not from urbanization but rather from agriculture. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, farming and ranching are responsible for 68 percent of all species endangerment in the United States. Agriculture is the largest consumer of water, particularly in the West. Most water developments would not exist were it not for the demand created by irrigated agriculture. If ultimate causes and not proximate causes for species extinction are considered, agricultural impacts would even be higher. Yet scant attention is paid by academicians, environmentalists, recreationists and the general public to agriculture’s role in habitat fragmentation, species endangerment and declining water quality. The ironic aspect of this head-in-the sand approach to land use is that most agriculture is completely unnecessary to feed the nation. The great bulk of agricultural production goes toward forage production used primarily by livestock. A small shift in our diet away from meat could have a tremendous impact on the ground in terms of freeing up lands for restoration and wildlife habitat. It would also reduce the poisoning of our streams and groundwater with pesticides and other residue of modern agricultural practices.”

People may be interested in the success of Albert Lea, MN as a “Bluezone” makeover. Links:
http://www.bluezones.com/makeover-about
http://www.albertleatribune.com/news/2009/oct/14/vitality-project-leader-youve-pulled-it/

By putting in more sidewalks and walking trails to get people walking outdoors in the sunshine, by rethinking menus at local restaurants, and by promoting other initiatives, the town had greatly reduced medical expenses and the overall rate of depression.

Of course, predictably, with all those benefits, people are now asking who will pay for the sidewalks and their upkeep.

It’s not a completely misguided question in our society, even as it misses the big picture of the cost savings and increased overall productivity of a less depressed populace. It’s usually sensible to ask, who pays the costs and who gets the benefits? One of the problems with our current approach to health in the USA, involving essentially “sick care” and “sick care insurance” is that there are no incentives for wellness. Even though you might think insurance companies have an incentive to keep people well, since their profits are a percentage of their total revenues, if people got sick half as much, premiums would be force lower, and so insurance companies would get the same percentage of a smaller revenue stream.

So, that’s one reason why insurance companies have enough money in insurance premiums to build parks and sidewalks in towns, to do medical research, and to to help communities be less depressed through social networking, insurance companies never will beyond a token amount because it does not increase profits under the current system. Also, since not everyone in one town has the same health insurance (or any insurance), how would insurance companies work out the cost-effectiveness of such investments?

Single payer health care has no such conflict. With single payer, it would make sense for the US Government to invest public moneys in parks and walking trails to reduce overall costs, same as it invests a lot now in medical research.

Defining access to nature or health as a human right can often cut through these situations where people focus more on the upfront costs than the long-term benefits, or where maximizing short-term profits is in conflict with maximizing human health an happiness. As it is now, it is logical for companies to create crazy inhuman systems of cost-accounting that make perfect sense when you are just counting beans and not counting happiness or lives well lived, such as by having a healthy and poetical relationship to nature.

This story is so true. And I believe that young lady poet will keep the fire burning for the privilege of enjoying the outdoors. I was born and raised in Northern Quebec, where the major past-time was camping and hiking with Boy Scouts, then growing up and retaining my love of the outdoors, a place for sanctuary and peace. Until I was 58 I tented, canoed and hiked winter and summer. Too many children today are captured by technology where the main exercise is twitching fingers and gasping aloud when the figures on their games are wiped out. Thank goodness for the few who return to outside soccer and swings and wrestling on the grass, where grass stains remind us older folks, the circle does go around. My wife and I have written many stories, I also do poetry, and they are outdoor based to remind our grandchildren of how wonderful the outdoors can be.

THe fifth grade “poet” reminded me of taking a picnic and three friends to the “park” that was the divider on Little Neck Pkway.  A short walk to the parkway, cross over, “carefully” and we were in a far away place.  We were away from mothers, siblings, and reality. We were under the trees, in a land of our own.  Too much traffic and 4 lanes changed all that.