新概念

英语听力

听力入门英语演讲VOA慢速英语美文听力?#22363;?/a>英语新闻名校课程听力节目影视听力英语视频

每周在大自然中活动两小时 有益身心健康

kira86 于2019-08-27发布 l 已有人浏览
增大字体 减小字体
置身大自然不仅有益于身体健康,还能帮你减压。科学家称,每周在大自然中活动两小时,效果便会十?#32622;?#26174;。时间可以时一次呆足2小时,也可以是多次活动时长的叠加。
    小E英语?#38431;?#24744;,请点击播放按钮开?#30142;?#25918;……

Mind and Body Benefit from Two Hours in Nature Each Week

每周在大自然中活动两小时 有益身心健康

By now it's almost common knowledge that spending time in nature is good for you. Areas with more trees tend to be less polluted, so spending time there allows you to breathe easier. Spending time outdoors has been linked with reduced blood pressure and stress, and seems to motivate people to exercise more.

置身大自然中对你有好处,现在这几乎已经是常?#35835;恕?#26641;木较多的地区污染较小,所以在树木较多的地方呆上一段时间可以让你呼吸更顺畅。置身户外关系到降低血压和减压,而且似乎能激励人们多运动。

So it'll come as no surprise that there's research showing that spending time in nature is good. I mean, that's been known for millennia. There's dozens of papers showing that.

“所以,有研究表明花时间置身大自然中是有益的,这就毫不令人惊讶了。我的意思是,大家几千年就已经知道这一点了。有几十篇论文证明了这一点。”

University of Exeter Medical School researcher Mathew P. White.

埃克塞特大学医学院研究员马修·怀特表示?#20581;?/p>

We get this idea, patients are coming to us and they're saying, 'doctor, how long should I spend?' and the doctor is saying, 'I don't really know.'

“我们有(要研?#31354;?#20010;主题的)想法是因为,病人来找我们说,‘医生,我应该在大自然中呆多长时间为好?’医生说,‘我真的不知道。’”

So White and his team decided to find out by using data collected from nearly 20,000 people in England through the Monitor of Engagement with the Natural Environment Survey. And their answer? Two hours a week. People who spent at least that much time amid nature - either all at once or totaled over several shorter visits - were more likely to report good health and psychological well-being than those with no nature exposure.

因此,怀特和他的团队决定通过对英国近2万人通过“参与自然环境监测调查”(Monitor of Engagement with the Natural Environment Survey)收集的数据来?#39029;?#31572;案。而他们?#19994;?#30340;答案是?每周两个小时。与那些没有接触自然环境的人相比,那些至少在自然环境中待?#22235;?#20040;长(2小时)时间的人——无论是一周一次在户外呆两小时,还是多次合计两小时的人,所报告的身心健康状况都更良好。

Remarkably, the researchers found that less than two hours offered no significant benefits. So what's so special about two hours?

值得注意的是,研究人员发现,假如置身大自然的时间不足两小时,就没有那么明显的益处。那么两小时有什么特别之处呢?

I have absolutely no idea. Really. We didn't have an a priori guess at what this would be, this threshold. It emerged. And I'd be lying if I said we predicted this, I don't know.

“我完全不知道。真的。我们对这一临界值并没有?#22922;?#30340;猜测。这一临界值(是在研究过程中)显露出来的。如果我说我们预测到了这一点,那我就是撒谎,?#20063;?#19981;知道。”

Even more noteworthy, the two-hour benchmark applied to men and women, to older and younger folks, to people from different ethnic backgrounds, occupational groups, socioeconomic levels, and so on. Even people with long term illnesses or disabilities benefited from time spent in nature - as long as it was at least 120 minutes per week. The study is in the journal Scientific Reports.

更值得注意的是,两小时的衡量基?#38469;视?#20110;男性和女性、老年人和年轻人、来自不同种族背景、职业群体、社会经济水?#38477;?#30340;人等等等等。?#35789;?#26159;患有长期病通或残疾的人,也能从花在大自然上的时间中获益——只要每周至少120分钟。这项研究发表在《科学报告》杂志上。

While the findings are based on a tremendous number of people, White cautions that it's really just a correlation. Nobody knows why or how nature has this benefit, or even if the findings will stand up to more rigorous investigation.

虽然这些发现是基于大?#24247;?#20154;所?#36152;?#30340;,但怀特警告说,这实际?#29616;?#26159;一种相关性。没有人知道大自然为什么有这种好处,也不知道这种好处是如何作用的,甚至不知道这些发现是否经得起更严格的调查。

I want to be really clear about this. This is very early stages. We're not saying everybody has to do 120. This is really to start the conversation, saying, what would a threshold look like? What research do we need to take this to the next step before doctors can have the true confidence to work with their patients? But it's certainly a starting point.

“我想把这件事说清楚。这是非常初期的阶段。我们不是说每个人都必须在大自然中呆足120分钟。抛出‘一个临界值应该是怎样的?’这个问题,才真正的开始对话。在医生有信心应对病患之前,我们还需要做?#30007;?#30740;究来把这个问题推进到下一?#21073;空餿肥?#26159;一个起点。”

小e英语Jewel翻译!

 1 2 下一页

分享到

添加到收藏

英语新闻排行

古怪猴子在线客服