It's almost like the same type of people who use antidepressants also like to live near woodlands. And they get depressed when they don't live near woodlands.
Apropos of nothing.
The study, linked to from the article.
> There is an urgent global need for accessible and cost-effective pro-mental health infrastructure. Public green spaces were officially designated in the 19th century, informed by a belief that they might provide health benefits. We outline modern research evidence that greenspace can play a pivotal role in population-level mental health.
But moving to within some distance doesn't mean they went walking there. I'm not sure how valid this study is. I think we've already done studies regarding sunlight exposure and just getting outside being good for you (assuming your environment is not bad). So was it just being outside made them feel better, and having the paths and whatnot made it more likely that they would go for a walk? Or even maybe just more likely that they take breaks? I know I'm terrible at taking breaks.
There was also one I found from back in 1984 where patients in a hospital that had a view of trees having a shorter stay vs. the group with the view of a brick wall, although not entirely sure that one was robust enough to draw any real conclusions on if view matters.
Just going outside in daylight in general should get you most of the benefits (in the right season, depending on where you live. Where I am in the PNW, midday light in the winter isn't even strong enough to trigger a lot of the benefits), so if your only option is to go for a walk outside on the sidewalk then do so, but there are even more positive benefits to be gained by being in nature, outside of an urban environment.
For me nature feels like it has a kind of fuzzing effect creating a meaningful structure from such a noisy environment.
(it does feel nice to walk in nature though)
This is not a snipe, please go outside. Take some deep breaths, be around some flora, and fauna. This kind of cynical non-sequitur tells me you're looking for something to be frustrated at.
It was merely a commentary on pricing of Bay Area homes. A bargin basement house is several million, a "nice" home is almost $10M. With prices like that, funding a study for $50k, can be well worth it if the price of your home shifts 10%.
Not something you get elsewhere.
I doubt anyone has done so, but it is amusing to think it could be economical.