Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Come on, feel the noise: how I unplugged my headphones and reconnected with the world

News Feed
Sunday, June 9, 2024

Until about a month ago, the thought of leaving my flat without my headphones connected to my smartphone filled me with anxiety. Any length of time, whether a two-minute walk to the shop or a two-hour commute, with nothing but my own thoughts and the racket of the city to listen to, was enough to send me into a mild frenzy.This borderline compulsive relationship with my headphones wasn’t something I was even aware of until earlier this year, when my friend, the environmental sound artist Lance Laoyan, noted how headphones not only disconnect us from the reality of noise pollution, but also keep us distracted under the guise of helping us to focus. This conversation sent me down a bit of a thought spiral, of which I am prone, and I became acutely aware of the ubiquity of headphones in our culture and how little attention we pay to it.In Manchester, where I live, you’ll be hard pressed to spot anybody in the city centre not wearing a pair. Cyclists, commuters, runners, everyone. In 2022, according to research by Statista, 30 million of us used headphones, the majority in-ear Bluetooth headphones, such as Apple AirPods. By 2027, it’s predicted half of us will own headphones, the majority aged 25 and 45. Whether it’s music, a podcast or an audiobook, many of us choose to tune into anything but the outside world when we’re out and about but increasingly I’ve begun to question exactly why.So, in April, I gave up my headphones for a month, in the pursuit of greater awareness of my surroundings and my relationship to my headphones – which is dependent, to say the least. They were intricately linked to my daily routine. Taking the bins out, exercising, washing dishes, writing, eating lunch, trying to sleep. The only time I lived without them was when their battery died. It was never – and I mean never – by choice. The anxiety that followed, until I was able to charge them, should have been enough to tell me that I was, at the very least, habitualised. Illustration: Luke McConkey/The ObserverObviously, it hasn’t always been like this. Sony released the revolutionary Walkman in 1979, the world’s first personal listening device. It came with lightweight headphones and it seemed miraculous that music was suddenly portable; that you could walk around wrapped up in your own curated soundscape. Headphones, in this sense, are acutely generational, each one more seductive and addictive than the last: Generation X had their Walkman; Millennials their beloved MP3 players and iPods, which digitised the personal listening experience, making it easier still to listen to anything, anywhere, any time. Generation Z – my generation – have been weaned on the smartphone and streaming services. The draw to listen to anything other than the outside world has never been more powerful.The invention of the Walkman didn’t just alter how human beings listen to music; it changed how we interacted with our environment, other people and ourselves. It was a monumental shift and, despite the studies which have shown that headphone use is accelerating hearing loss and even causing more road collisions due to people being distracted, nobody seems to be questioning it.One person who is closely studying our collective use of headphones is Michael Bull, professor of sound studies at the University of Sussex. Bull conducted some of the first sociological research into their prevalence. He believes our reliance on them can be explained by one very human motivation: a need for control. This can be broken down into four aspects. The first, cognitive, relates to the ability to control our mood, while the second, the environmental aspect, is concerned with the power to block out displeasurable noises. Then there’s the bodily aspect – which could mean anything from feeling more empowered while walking through a crowd of strangers to being able to focus without the threat of distraction from unpredictable noises. And, finally, social control: headphones allow us to block everybody out, unless we choose to let them in.But, Bull notes, this control is a double-edged sword. While headphone users often describe themselves as being freer, he says, “They are dependent on the machine for that to be true; they’re locked into the economic dynamic of the world and the medium they’re using. That’s a big contradiction: you’re being manipulated, but the manipulation creates a sense of freedom.” This resonated. I try to be aware of my relationship with what appears to be pervasive, but not actually necessary in our culture. For example, we find that we “need” our smartphones or social media accounts simply because they are so omnipresent, but research consistently suggests that these things aren’t good for us long term. Are headphones any different?I see this paradox most clearly in my desire for both cognitive and environmental control, the two of which are heavily interlinked. I often find it disorienting to live in a city. I witness so much horror and I have no choice but to avert my gaze. I walk around Manchester listening to Northern Soul, passing homeless people with a spring in my step, fully engulfed by my own audiotopia. In some ways it feels necessary. It is difficult to see so much sadness on a daily basis while unable to immediately help. I understand, then, the need to feel in control of my own experience; the sense of freedom that comes with tuning it all out. The same goes for blocking out the noise of industrialisation. I can understand the argument that headphones can be used as a tool for personal liberation, something Bull found in his research. But surely, true liberation would be for the outside world to be better suited to our needs (and, of course, the needs of the natural world).skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThere is something lovely about hearing the city in all its totalityHowever, we cannot change the things we are not aware of. This is something Laoyan said to me in the conversation which preceded my experiment. I’d never thought before about how our incessant use of headphones, or reluctance to hear the outside world, shields us from reality. He comes at this issue from an environmental perspective. An artist and researcher concerned with the effects of noise pollution on our natural environments, he says: “For me, understanding noise pollution is a way of processing the sorts of environments we have created, are creating, and what impacts they have on an ecological basis. These unwanted sounds can cause spikes in stress hormones in us and in animals and, if exposed for long periods of time, can prove to be destructive.” Wherever there are high levels of noise pollution, he explains, there is a higher risk of mental and physical degradation. To tune it out is simply to accept it, but change requires us to critique it, and to critique requires listening.Refusing to wear headphones is not just about acknowledging the ugliness of the world, it’s about experiencing its beauty. When we block out the noises of the city which we deem negative, we also block out the noise of the natural world. When I walk through the tree-lined main roads on the way to my gym, I hear the birds singing. They are not drowned out by the traffic, not if you listen out for them, and there is something quite lovely about hearing the city in its totality. Using headphones, particularly to listen to music, explains Bull, is a way to “aestheticise our experience”, to make things seem more beautiful; pleasurable. But there is pleasure in the real world, too. It’s ripe for the taking. Beauty is all around us, we just have to notice it.It’s no secret that gratitude practices fulfil numerous benefits for our mental health. To be grateful for what exists outside our personal possessions; to be grateful for what we have even when we feel that we have nothing, is boundlessly positive. Perhaps what is truly liberating, then, is to accept things as they are, and to know that while a lot of those things are bad, there are plenty that are wonderful. This is what Laoyan calls “taking back control of our ears”, something he encourages. “There is an empowering feeling in being able to experience the places we live in through the tactility and senses that we naturally have,” he says. “As much as new technologies can enhance or augment our human bodies, we cannot hide from the fact that we are intricately entangled with this world.”And while all of this can feel a little philosophical, and likely requires a shift in perspective beyond simply leaving your headphones at home, I did notice some concrete benefits in my daily life, too. In one of our email chains about the experiment, Laoyan asked me if I’d noticed I had more “natural energy”. I hadn’t thought about it in this way, but he was right. Things I previously found tedious to the point of paralysis, daily chores like doing the dishes or hanging the laundry, became, if not fun, then relaxing.As neuropsychologist Dr Amber Johnston explains, music stimulates dopamine and the reward centres in our brain. We live in a dopamine-fuelled society, and much of our favourite technology contributes to this. When we use music to get a dopamine hit during otherwise “boring” tasks, we find it more difficult to tolerate boredom. “If people can’t tolerate feeling bored then they are still seeking dopamine to help them soothe their discomfort, and music and headphones might be a way to do that,” she says. “So, actually, practising spending time in a state of not seeking dopamine, but instead feeling comfortable with boredom will, over time, reduce the amount of additional stimulus that’s needed to get that same dopamine hit.”‘If I wasn’t aware of the grip headphones have on society, I only had to look at my friends and acquaintances’ confused faces when I told them my plan to abstain.’ Photograph: Juan Algar/Getty ImagesIf I wasn’t already aware of the grip headphones have on society, I only had to look at my friends and acquaintances’ confused faces when I told them my plan to abstain. Most of them lamented the horrors of being forced to listen to other people. And look, I get it. There is something empowering about being able to easily ignore people, especially when it comes to unwanted behaviour like catcalling. But it also closes us off to genuine interaction. A 2021 study by audio firm Jabra found that UK headphone users wore them for on average 58 minutes a day, with 38% keeping them on to actively avoid talking to others. Some researchers worry this could be contributing to a culture of disconnection, and growing loneliness.I didn’t start speaking to strangers in the street the moment I stopped wearing headphones, but I did hear snippets of humanity in a way that made me feel more connected. Importantly though, I was able to give my loved ones more attention when speaking to them on the phone. I often used headphones as a means to multitask while speaking with people on the phone. I’ll cook my dinner, or navigate on Google Maps. When I no longer did this, I noticed that when I spoke to friends and family members, they had my undivided attention.Despite this, I am not actively against headphones. They can be a means for focus and productivity, and for those with sensory processing issues, they can prove invaluable. But something magical happened when I chose not to wear them. I began to feel calmer. My thoughts didn’t vanish, but they no longer held as much weight. They would pass by me like cars on the motorway. I learned to exist exactly as I was, and appreciate the world for exactly what it is.A month after my experiment concluded, I still wear them now and then but they no longer exert the same control over me. Music is just music, not a necessity to get me through boring tasks. Podcasts and audiobooks are forms of entertainment and information, not a means of distraction from my own thoughts. And the sounds of the city are just sounds, not something I need to escape.

Worried she was missing out, Ella Glover took off her headphones for a month and rediscovered the soundscape of humanity, made space to listen to friends – and tuned in to her own thoughtsUntil about a month ago, the thought of leaving my flat without my headphones connected to my smartphone filled me with anxiety. Any length of time, whether a two-minute walk to the shop or a two-hour commute, with nothing but my own thoughts and the racket of the city to listen to, was enough to send me into a mild frenzy.This borderline compulsive relationship with my headphones wasn’t something I was even aware of until earlier this year, when my friend, the environmental sound artist Lance Laoyan, noted how headphones not only disconnect us from the reality of noise pollution, but also keep us distracted under the guise of helping us to focus. This conversation sent me down a bit of a thought spiral, of which I am prone, and I became acutely aware of the ubiquity of headphones in our culture and how little attention we pay to it. Continue reading...

Until about a month ago, the thought of leaving my flat without my headphones connected to my smartphone filled me with anxiety. Any length of time, whether a two-minute walk to the shop or a two-hour commute, with nothing but my own thoughts and the racket of the city to listen to, was enough to send me into a mild frenzy.

This borderline compulsive relationship with my headphones wasn’t something I was even aware of until earlier this year, when my friend, the environmental sound artist Lance Laoyan, noted how headphones not only disconnect us from the reality of noise pollution, but also keep us distracted under the guise of helping us to focus. This conversation sent me down a bit of a thought spiral, of which I am prone, and I became acutely aware of the ubiquity of headphones in our culture and how little attention we pay to it.

In Manchester, where I live, you’ll be hard pressed to spot anybody in the city centre not wearing a pair. Cyclists, commuters, runners, everyone. In 2022, according to research by Statista, 30 million of us used headphones, the majority in-ear Bluetooth headphones, such as Apple AirPods. By 2027, it’s predicted half of us will own headphones, the majority aged 25 and 45. Whether it’s music, a podcast or an audiobook, many of us choose to tune into anything but the outside world when we’re out and about but increasingly I’ve begun to question exactly why.

So, in April, I gave up my headphones for a month, in the pursuit of greater awareness of my surroundings and my relationship to my headphones – which is dependent, to say the least. They were intricately linked to my daily routine. Taking the bins out, exercising, washing dishes, writing, eating lunch, trying to sleep. The only time I lived without them was when their battery died. It was never – and I mean never – by choice. The anxiety that followed, until I was able to charge them, should have been enough to tell me that I was, at the very least, habitualised.

Illustration: Luke McConkey/The Observer

Obviously, it hasn’t always been like this. Sony released the revolutionary Walkman in 1979, the world’s first personal listening device. It came with lightweight headphones and it seemed miraculous that music was suddenly portable; that you could walk around wrapped up in your own curated soundscape. Headphones, in this sense, are acutely generational, each one more seductive and addictive than the last: Generation X had their Walkman; Millennials their beloved MP3 players and iPods, which digitised the personal listening experience, making it easier still to listen to anything, anywhere, any time. Generation Z – my generation – have been weaned on the smartphone and streaming services. The draw to listen to anything other than the outside world has never been more powerful.

The invention of the Walkman didn’t just alter how human beings listen to music; it changed how we interacted with our environment, other people and ourselves. It was a monumental shift and, despite the studies which have shown that headphone use is accelerating hearing loss and even causing more road collisions due to people being distracted, nobody seems to be questioning it.

One person who is closely studying our collective use of headphones is Michael Bull, professor of sound studies at the University of Sussex. Bull conducted some of the first sociological research into their prevalence. He believes our reliance on them can be explained by one very human motivation: a need for control. This can be broken down into four aspects. The first, cognitive, relates to the ability to control our mood, while the second, the environmental aspect, is concerned with the power to block out displeasurable noises. Then there’s the bodily aspect – which could mean anything from feeling more empowered while walking through a crowd of strangers to being able to focus without the threat of distraction from unpredictable noises. And, finally, social control: headphones allow us to block everybody out, unless we choose to let them in.

But, Bull notes, this control is a double-edged sword. While headphone users often describe themselves as being freer, he says, “They are dependent on the machine for that to be true; they’re locked into the economic dynamic of the world and the medium they’re using. That’s a big contradiction: you’re being manipulated, but the manipulation creates a sense of freedom.” This resonated. I try to be aware of my relationship with what appears to be pervasive, but not actually necessary in our culture. For example, we find that we “need” our smartphones or social media accounts simply because they are so omnipresent, but research consistently suggests that these things aren’t good for us long term. Are headphones any different?

I see this paradox most clearly in my desire for both cognitive and environmental control, the two of which are heavily interlinked. I often find it disorienting to live in a city. I witness so much horror and I have no choice but to avert my gaze. I walk around Manchester listening to Northern Soul, passing homeless people with a spring in my step, fully engulfed by my own audiotopia. In some ways it feels necessary. It is difficult to see so much sadness on a daily basis while unable to immediately help. I understand, then, the need to feel in control of my own experience; the sense of freedom that comes with tuning it all out. The same goes for blocking out the noise of industrialisation. I can understand the argument that headphones can be used as a tool for personal liberation, something Bull found in his research. But surely, true liberation would be for the outside world to be better suited to our needs (and, of course, the needs of the natural world).

skip past newsletter promotion

after newsletter promotion

However, we cannot change the things we are not aware of. This is something Laoyan said to me in the conversation which preceded my experiment. I’d never thought before about how our incessant use of headphones, or reluctance to hear the outside world, shields us from reality. He comes at this issue from an environmental perspective. An artist and researcher concerned with the effects of noise pollution on our natural environments, he says: “For me, understanding noise pollution is a way of processing the sorts of environments we have created, are creating, and what impacts they have on an ecological basis. These unwanted sounds can cause spikes in stress hormones in us and in animals and, if exposed for long periods of time, can prove to be destructive.” Wherever there are high levels of noise pollution, he explains, there is a higher risk of mental and physical degradation. To tune it out is simply to accept it, but change requires us to critique it, and to critique requires listening.

Refusing to wear headphones is not just about acknowledging the ugliness of the world, it’s about experiencing its beauty. When we block out the noises of the city which we deem negative, we also block out the noise of the natural world. When I walk through the tree-lined main roads on the way to my gym, I hear the birds singing. They are not drowned out by the traffic, not if you listen out for them, and there is something quite lovely about hearing the city in its totality. Using headphones, particularly to listen to music, explains Bull, is a way to “aestheticise our experience”, to make things seem more beautiful; pleasurable. But there is pleasure in the real world, too. It’s ripe for the taking. Beauty is all around us, we just have to notice it.

It’s no secret that gratitude practices fulfil numerous benefits for our mental health. To be grateful for what exists outside our personal possessions; to be grateful for what we have even when we feel that we have nothing, is boundlessly positive. Perhaps what is truly liberating, then, is to accept things as they are, and to know that while a lot of those things are bad, there are plenty that are wonderful. This is what Laoyan calls “taking back control of our ears”, something he encourages. “There is an empowering feeling in being able to experience the places we live in through the tactility and senses that we naturally have,” he says. “As much as new technologies can enhance or augment our human bodies, we cannot hide from the fact that we are intricately entangled with this world.”

And while all of this can feel a little philosophical, and likely requires a shift in perspective beyond simply leaving your headphones at home, I did notice some concrete benefits in my daily life, too. In one of our email chains about the experiment, Laoyan asked me if I’d noticed I had more “natural energy”. I hadn’t thought about it in this way, but he was right. Things I previously found tedious to the point of paralysis, daily chores like doing the dishes or hanging the laundry, became, if not fun, then relaxing.

As neuropsychologist Dr Amber Johnston explains, music stimulates dopamine and the reward centres in our brain. We live in a dopamine-fuelled society, and much of our favourite technology contributes to this. When we use music to get a dopamine hit during otherwise “boring” tasks, we find it more difficult to tolerate boredom. “If people can’t tolerate feeling bored then they are still seeking dopamine to help them soothe their discomfort, and music and headphones might be a way to do that,” she says. “So, actually, practising spending time in a state of not seeking dopamine, but instead feeling comfortable with boredom will, over time, reduce the amount of additional stimulus that’s needed to get that same dopamine hit.”

‘If I wasn’t aware of the grip headphones have on society, I only had to look at my friends and acquaintances’ confused faces when I told them my plan to abstain.’ Photograph: Juan Algar/Getty Images

If I wasn’t already aware of the grip headphones have on society, I only had to look at my friends and acquaintances’ confused faces when I told them my plan to abstain. Most of them lamented the horrors of being forced to listen to other people. And look, I get it. There is something empowering about being able to easily ignore people, especially when it comes to unwanted behaviour like catcalling. But it also closes us off to genuine interaction. A 2021 study by audio firm Jabra found that UK headphone users wore them for on average 58 minutes a day, with 38% keeping them on to actively avoid talking to others. Some researchers worry this could be contributing to a culture of disconnection, and growing loneliness.

I didn’t start speaking to strangers in the street the moment I stopped wearing headphones, but I did hear snippets of humanity in a way that made me feel more connected. Importantly though, I was able to give my loved ones more attention when speaking to them on the phone. I often used headphones as a means to multitask while speaking with people on the phone. I’ll cook my dinner, or navigate on Google Maps. When I no longer did this, I noticed that when I spoke to friends and family members, they had my undivided attention.

Despite this, I am not actively against headphones. They can be a means for focus and productivity, and for those with sensory processing issues, they can prove invaluable. But something magical happened when I chose not to wear them. I began to feel calmer. My thoughts didn’t vanish, but they no longer held as much weight. They would pass by me like cars on the motorway. I learned to exist exactly as I was, and appreciate the world for exactly what it is.

A month after my experiment concluded, I still wear them now and then but they no longer exert the same control over me. Music is just music, not a necessity to get me through boring tasks. Podcasts and audiobooks are forms of entertainment and information, not a means of distraction from my own thoughts. And the sounds of the city are just sounds, not something I need to escape.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

The National Trust must again resist the group trying to turn grievances into policy | Rowan Moore

Burning with unquenchable resentment, Restore Trust is making another attempt at taking over the institutionThe leaves are starting to change and there’s autumnal coolth in the air. Which means that the opaquely funded private organisation called Restore Trust is once again making its annual attempt to take over one of the country’s most successful and best-loved institutions, the National Trust. Burning with unquenchable resentment about a 2020 report that truthfully stated that Winston Churchill opposed Indian independence; armed with inflated stories about mushroom bans, cancelled Easters and vote-rigging; and furious about a single disco ball in one room of one of the National Trust’s 230 historic houses, Restore Trust has once again put up a slate of candidates for the National Trust’s council, with a view to turning their grievances into policy. If you’re a member of the National Trust, and you’d rather not see it turned into a platform for an angry minority, vote now for its recommended candidates. Continue reading...

The leaves are starting to change and there’s autumnal coolth in the air. Which means that the opaquely funded private organisation called Restore Trust is once again making its annual attempt to take over one of the country’s most successful and best-loved institutions, the National Trust. Burning with unquenchable resentment about a 2020 report that truthfully stated that Winston Churchill opposed Indian independence; armed with inflated stories about mushroom bans, cancelled Easters and vote-rigging; and furious about a single disco ball in one room of one of the National Trust’s 230 historic houses, Restore Trust has once again put up a slate of candidates for the National Trust’s council, with a view to turning their grievances into policy. If you’re a member of the National Trust, and you’d rather not see it turned into a platform for an angry minority, vote now for its recommended candidates.Selective memoryA memorial wall in front of the Grenfell Tower. Photograph: Henry Nicholls/AFP/Getty ImagesIt must be terribly hard being Sodali & Co, an agency paid to defend the reputation of Kingspan, the building materials company found responsible in last week’s Grenfell Tower report for “deeply entrenched and persistent dishonesty”. But if, as Sodali puts it, you “advise corporate clients worldwide as they navigate the complex dynamic of shareholder and stakeholder interests”, you don’t quit. When I wrote about the disaster last week, its “head of special situations” sent me a near-instant email minimising Kingspan’s culpability and requesting a change to my online copy. I had told how they buried the results of a 2007 test of their insulation which threatened to burn down the laboratory where it was taking place. I should also say, Sodali argued that the test was for a “whole cladding system” of which Kingspan’s product was only one (albeit highly combustible) part.“Journalist mis-describes type of iceberg, says communications agency for the White Star Line” might be some sort of equivalent. What makes this request utterly brazen is the fact that Kingspan was happy to use a 2005 test to give the false impression that its insulation was safe on tall buildings. It glossed over that this too was a test of a whole system, one whose components were not (as the inquiry said) representative of a typical external wall. Its concern for precision as to the nature of a given test is, in other words, selective and self-serving.HoodwinkedRia Zmitrowicz as the Sheriff of Nottingham in Sherwood. Photograph: Sam Taylor/BBC/House ProductionsOne of the more risible skirmishes in the culture wars came when the TalkTV presenter Kevin O’Sullivan, apparently unaware that the BBC series Sherwood is not really about Robin Hood, lamented its portrayal of the Sheriff of Nottingham as a gay woman. GBNews then used the occasion as flimsy pretext to beat up the corporation.What’s odd is the sudden insistence on historical accuracy in such a mythologised story as that of Robin Hood. Where, pray, was O’Sullivan when Disney represented the outlaw as a fox?skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionWinds of changeA wind turbine on a hill on Shetland. Photograph: William Edwards/AFP/Getty ImagesOn Shetland, my heart stirred to the majestic sight of wind turbines. The knowledge that they’re not oil rigs, nor power stations, nor fracking installations, nor coalmines, makes me happy. But I’m aware that many Shetlanders don’t feel the same, enraged not only by the turbines but the infrastructure that comes with them. Most of all, they don’t see much benefit. Most of the energy generated will go to mainland Scotland. So it was good to hear that the profits from a community windfarm in the Hebrides are paying for the planting of a million native trees. If all such facilities led to palpable local and environmental benefits, much of the opposition to them would melt away.

Norwegian outdoor tourism campaign shelved over environmental fears

State-owned company halts initiative after warnings over opening up ‘right to roam’ laws to large numbers of visitorsA Norwegian tourism campaign aimed at promoting the country as a destination for outdoor activities has been suspended after warnings that opening up the country’s “right to roam” laws to mass tourism could lead to environmental destruction.Allemannsretten – which gives Norwegians the legal right to camp, swim, ski and walk freely in nature, regardless of who the landowner is – provides the basis of friluftslivet (outdoor life), seen as foundational to the mountainous country’s culture. Continue reading...

A Norwegian tourism campaign aimed at promoting the country as a destination for outdoor activities has been suspended after warnings that opening up the country’s “right to roam” laws to mass tourism could lead to environmental destruction.Allemannsretten – which gives Norwegians the legal right to camp, swim, ski and walk freely in nature, regardless of who the landowner is – provides the basis of friluftslivet (outdoor life), seen as foundational to the mountainous country’s culture.But an initiative to extol these benefits to international tourists has met with strong criticism. Regional tourism bosses say it could lead to a surge of unregulated traffic and camping, putting too much pressure on the natural environment.Innovation Norway, owned by the Norwegian state, said it had wanted to “highlight the part of Norwegian culture that is about using nature” by putting outdoor activities at the centre of the campaign.Tourism bosses in northern and western Norway say they are already experiencing the effects of overtourism, however. Some called for the initiative to be suspended while they assessed any potential impact on commercial tourism, resulting in Innovation Norway halting the campaign.Interest in the the Nordic region as a whole has risen this summer as tourists have sought cooler destinations amid high temperatures in southern Europe. While tourism boards are aiming to capitalise on the surge in interest, many in Norway have urged caution.Stein Ove Rolland, the CEO of tourism board Fjord Norway, said: “We certainly want visitors to enjoy our nature, but we prefer it to happen through well-organised sustainable offerings provided by competent experienced companies within the tourism industry. This is to ensure that our amazing nature can be enjoyed by locals and visitors for decades to come.“We believe that marketing outdoor activities to a growing international holiday and leisure market can be risky because it may lead to more people wanting to explore vulnerable natural areas on their own. This can result in wear and tear on nature, increased littering, and could potentially lead to accidents and rescue operations.” As interest in tourism to Norway has grown, there has been a rise in the number of camper vans parked inappropriately, as well as litter and “general wear and tear on nature”. Rescue operations to find tourists lost in the mountains have also increased.Dag Terje Klarp Solvang, the general secretary of the Norwegian Trekking Association, which has recorded high international visitor numbers this year, said hiking could be a “very sustainable way of being a tourist” but the country needed to be prepared to handle visitor numbers before inviting them.“Too many people without being prepared can cause great damage to nature and the people living close to the actual spots being highlighted,” he said.skip past newsletter promotionSign up to Headlines EuropeA digest of the morning's main headlines from the Europe edition emailed direct to you every week dayPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionAase Marthe Horrigmo, of Innovation Norway, said in a statement on the suspension of the campaign that some stakeholders had expressed concerns during preparatory work over increased tourism in vulnerable nature and the management of visitors in popular destinations. She said the decision to suspend was “to continue our dialogue with the county municipalities and destination companies that were sceptical of the idea, to ensure that we had fully understood and considered their concerns” and because discussions this year meant it had missed the spring window for filming.“It is important to encourage tourists to behave responsibly in Norwegian nature. We also want to inspire people to visit our country and discover amazing experiences that will create memories for life,” she said. “We will continue the dialogue with the travel industry and believe this is a concept that will encourage potential tourists to embrace the philosophy behind friluftsliv and ultimately encourage them to treat our unique nature with care and respect.”Bente Lier, the general secretary of outdoor recreation organisation Norsk Friluftsliv, said although it welcomed tourists to Norway, nature must be protected with a clear strategy for visitors before they were invited. “This includes a clear plan for where to channel them to where we have the capacity, how to meet them and how to introduce them to nature,” she said. “We cannot invite 30 guests if the table is set for four.“It is important to know that with allemannsretten or roaming rights also comes the obligation to show respect to nature. In short: we shall not leave any trace. This is something we learn in Norway when we are children – from family or at school – but it is not that obvious to many international tourists.”

New Strategies To Combat Dementia: 14 Risk Factors You Can Control

The 2024 Lancet Commission report identifies vision loss and high cholesterol as new risk factors for dementia, adding to 12 others previously known. It emphasizes...

A new report indicates that tackling 14 lifestyle and environmental risk factors from an early age could prevent almost 50% of dementia cases globally. Highlighting new risks like high LDL cholesterol and vision loss, the report calls for urgent, broad-spectrum preventive measures to curb the dementia epidemic.The 2024 Lancet Commission report identifies vision loss and high cholesterol as new risk factors for dementia, adding to 12 others previously known.It emphasizes the importance of early and lifelong management of these factors, including for those with a genetic predisposition to dementia. The report provides 13 recommendations targeting both individuals and governments to mitigate risk. These include managing hearing and vision loss, maintaining cognitive and social activity, using head protection in sports, managing vascular risks like cholesterol and diabetes, improving air quality, and fostering supportive communities. Research focusing on England indicates that implementing these measures could save about £4 billion by addressing risk factors such as excessive alcohol consumption, brain injuries, air pollution, smoking, obesity, and hypertension.According to the third Lancet Commission on dementia prevention, intervention, and care, addressing 14 modifiable risk factors from childhood and continuing throughout life could prevent or delay nearly half of dementia cases. This is crucial as global life expectancy increases and the number of dementia cases is projected to rise significantly in all countries. These findings were recently presented at the Alzheimer’s Association International Conference (AAIC 2024). Based on the latest available evidence, the new report adds two new risk factors that are associated with 9% of all dementia cases —with an estimated 7% of cases attributable to high low-density lipoprotein (LDL) or “bad” cholesterol in midlife from around age 40 years, and 2% of cases attributable to untreated vision loss in later life.These new risk factors are in addition to 12 risk factors previously identified by the Lancet Commission in 2020 (lower levels of education, hearing impairment, high blood pressure, smoking, obesity, depression, physical inactivity, diabetes, excessive alcohol consumption, traumatic brain injury [TBI], air pollution and social isolation), which are linked with 40% of all dementia cases.The new report estimates that the risk factors associated with the greatest proportion of people developing dementia in the global population are hearing impairment and high LDL cholesterol (7% each), along with less education in early life and social isolation in later life (5% each).The Commission, authored by 27 world-leading dementia experts, calls for governments and individuals to be ambitious about tackling risks across the life course of dementia, arguing that the earlier we can address and reduce risk factor levels, the better. The report outlines a new set of policy and lifestyle changes to help prevent and better manage dementia.More action is needed worldwide to reduce dementia risksBecause of the rapidly aging population around the world, the number of people living with dementia is expected to almost triple by 2050, rising from 57 million in 2019 to 153 million. Increasing life expectancy is also driving a surge in people with dementia in low-income countries. Global health and social costs related to dementia are estimated at over $1 trillion every year.However, in some high-income countries, including the USA and UK, the proportion of older people with dementia has fallen, particularly among those in socio-economically advantaged areas. The report’s authors say that this decline in people developing dementia is probably in part due to building cognitive and physical resilience over the life course and less vascular damage as a result of improvements in healthcare and lifestyle changes, demonstrating the importance of implementing prevention approaches as early as possible.Nevertheless, most national dementia plans do not make specific recommendations about diversity, equity, or inclusion of people from underserved cultures and ethnicities who are disproportionately affected by dementia risks.“Our new report reveals that there is much more that can and should be done to reduce the risk of dementia. It’s never too early or too late to take action, with opportunities to make an impact at any stage of life”, says lead author Professor Gill Livingston from University College London, UK. “We now have stronger evidence that longer exposure to risk has a greater effect and that risks act more strongly in people who are vulnerable. That’s why it is vital that we redouble preventive efforts towards those who need them most, including those in low- and middle-income countries and socio-economically disadvantaged groups. Governments must reduce risk inequalities by making healthy lifestyles as achievable as possible for everyone.”To reduce dementia risk throughout life, the Commission outlines 13 recommendations to be adopted by governments and individuals, including (see key messages on page 2 of the report for the full list):Provide all children with good quality education and be cognitively active in midlife.Make hearing aids available for all those with hearing loss and reduce harmful noise exposure.Detect and treat high LDL cholesterol in midlife from around age 40 years.Make screening and treatment for vision impairment accessible to all.Treat depression effectively.Wear helmets and head protection in contact sports and on bikes.Prioritize supportive community environments and housing to increase social contact.Reduce exposure to air pollution through strict clean air policies.Expand measures to reduce smoking, such as price control, raising the minimum age of purchase, and smoking bans.Reduce sugar and salt content in food sold in stores and restaurants.These actions are especially important given new evidence which shows that reducing the risks of dementia not only increases years of healthy life but also reduces the time people who develop dementia spend in ill health.As Professor Livingston explains, “Healthy lifestyles that involve regular exercise, not smoking, cognitive activity in midlife (including outside formal education), and avoiding excess alcohol can not only lower dementia risk but may also push back dementia onset. So, if people do develop dementia, they are likely to live fewer years with it. This has huge quality of life implications for individuals as well as cost-saving benefits for societies.”England could achieve cost savings of around £4 billionIn a separate study published in The Lancet Healthy Longevity journal alongside the Commission, Professor Livingston, lead author Naaheed Mukadam, and co-authors modeled the economic impact of implementing some of these recommendations, using England as an example. The study’s findings suggest that using population-level interventions of known effectiveness to tackle dementia risk factors of excess alcohol use (more than 21 units per week), brain injury, air pollution, smoking, obesity, and high blood pressure could achieve cost savings of more than £4 billion and over 70,000 quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gains (one QALY equates to a year of life in perfect health). The authors stress that potential benefits may be even greater in low- and middle-income countries and any country where population-level interventions such as public smoking bans and compulsory education are not already in place.“Given the much higher burden of dementia risk factors in low- and middle-income countries with the expected rise in dementia over the next few decades from rapid population aging and increased rates of high blood pressure, diabetes, and obesity, we need urgent policy-based preventative approaches that will have huge potential benefits far in excess of the costs,” says report co-author Dr. Cleusa Ferri from Universidade Federal de Sao Paulo and Hospital Alemão Oswaldo Cruz, Sao Paulo Brazil.Commission co-author Dr. Naaheed Mukadam of University College London adds, “Prioritising population-level approaches that improve primary prevention (eg, reducing salt and sugar intake) and effective health care for conditions like obesity and high blood pressure, restricting smoking and air pollution, and enabling all children to gain a good education, could have a profound effect on dementia prevalence and inequalities, as well as significant cost savings.”Prioritising advances in research and support for people living with dementiaThe report also discusses the hopeful advances in blood biomarkers and the Anti-amyloid β antibodies for Alzheimer’s disease. The authors explain that blood biomarkers are a significant move forward for people with dementia, potentially increasing scalability and decreasing the intrusiveness and the cost of testing for accurate diagnosis. While there are promising clinical trials, the report authors caution that Anti-amyloid β antibody treatments are new, without long-term data available, and call for more research and expanded transparency about the short and long-term side effects.Finally, the report calls for more support for people living with dementia and their families. The authors stress that in many countries, effective interventions known to benefit people with dementia are still not available or a priority, including activity interventions that provide enjoyment and reduce neuropsychiatric symptoms and cholinesterase inhibitors for slowing cognitive decline in Alzheimer’s. Similarly, many carers’ needs are unevaluated and unmet. They recommend providing multi-component coping interventions for family caregivers who are at risk of depression and anxiety, including providing emotional support, planning for the future, and information on medical and community-based resources.The authors note that while nearly all the evidence for dementia still comes from high-income countries, there is now more evidence and interventions from LMICs, but interventions usually need to be modified to best support different cultures, beliefs, and environments. They also point out that the prevention estimates assume there is a causal relationship between risk factors and dementia, and while they were careful to only include risk factors with convincing evidence, they note that some associations may only be partly causal. For example, while unremitting depression in midlife may be causal, depression in late life may be caused by dementia. Finally, they note that this risk modification affects the population, and does not guarantee that any individual will avoid dementia.References: “Dementia prevention, intervention, and care: 2024 report of the Lancet standing Commission” by Gill Livingston, Jonathan Huntley, Kathy Y Liu, Sergi G Costafreda, Geir Selbæk, Suvarna Alladi, David Ames, Sube Banerjee, Alistair Burns, Carol Brayne, Nick C Fox, Cleusa P Ferri, Laura N Gitlin, Robert Howard, Helen C Kales, Mika Kivimäki, Eric B Larson, Noeline Nakasujja, Kenneth Rockwood, Quincy Samus, Kokoro Shirai, Archana Singh-Manoux, Lon S Schneider, Sebastian Walsh, Yao Yao, Andrew Sommerlad and Naaheed Mukadam, 31 July 2024, The Lancet.DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(24)01296-0“Benefits of population-level interventions for dementia risk factors: an economic modelling study for England” by Naaheed Mukadam, Robert Anderson, Sebastian Walsh, Raphael Wittenberg, Martin Knapp, Carol Brayne and Gill Livingston, 31 July 2024, The Lancet Healthy Longevity.DOI: 10.1016/S2666-7568(24)00117-XThe Lancet Commission was funded by University College London, UK, Alzheimer’s Society, Alzheimer’s Research UK and the Economic and Social Research Council. The full list of researchers and institutions who conducted the research is available in the Commission report.The Lancet Healthy Longevity paper was funded by the NIHR Three Schools.

Mast Cells Trap Living Neutrophils During Allergic Reactions – “We Could Hardly Believe Our Eyes”

Researchers have discovered a surprising interaction between mast cells and neutrophils in allergic reactions, using specialized microscopy. Mast cells can trap and engulf neutrophils, creating...

This scanning electron microscopy image captures the moment where degranulating mast cells (pseudo-colored in sepia) attract and start to incorporate living neutrophils (pseudo-colored in cyan), forming cell-in-cell structures where mast cells trap living neutrophils inside them. Credit: Marcus Frank & Karoline Schulz, Universitätsmedizin Rostock, GermanyResearchers have discovered a surprising interaction between mast cells and neutrophils in allergic reactions, using specialized microscopy.Mast cells can trap and engulf neutrophils, creating a cell-in-cell structure known as “mast cell intracellular trap” (MIT). This interaction boosts mast cell function and could lead to new approaches for treating allergies and inflammatory diseases. The findings also highlight the intricate relationships among immune cells and their roles in inflammation and immune defense.Understanding Inflammation: Body’s Protective ResponseInflammation is the body’s response to harmful stimuli, characterized by heat, pain, redness, swelling, and loss of tissue function. When balanced, inflammation protects the body by clearing harmful agents and initiating tissue repair. However, excessive inflammation can cause tissue destruction and disease. Key players in this process are various immune cells, which work together during inflammation. The type of immune cells involved often varies depending on the harmful stimulus, influencing the outcome of the inflammatory response. Immune Cell Trapping During Allergic ResponsesMast cells, residing in tissues and critical for initiating inflammation, are filled with granules containing pro-inflammatory substances. These granules are released upon encountering potential dangers, including allergens, causing allergic reactions. In many people, mast cells also react to seemingly harmless environmental factors, which then act as allergens and cause allergies. The interaction between mast cells and other immune cells at sites of allergic responses has been largely unexplored.A research group at the Max Planck Institute of Immunobiology and Epigenetics used specialized microscopy to visualize the real-time dynamics of activated mast cells and other cell types during allergic reactions in living mouse tissues. Led by Tim Lämmermann, since October 2023 Director at the Institute of Medical Biochemistry at the University of Münster, the team discovered a surprising interaction: neutrophils were found inside mast cells.“We could hardly believe our eyes: living neutrophils were sitting inside living mast cells. This phenomenon was completely unexpected and probably would not have been discovered in experiments outside a living organism and highlights the power of intravital microscopy,” says Tim Lämmermann.Pulling a Neutrophil Trick To Trap NeutrophilsNeutrophils are frontline defenders of our immune system, responding quickly and broadly to potential threats. They circulate in the blood and quickly exit blood vessels at sites of inflammation. They are well-equipped to combat invaders such as bacteria or fungi by engulfing the invaders, releasing antimicrobial substances, or forming web-like traps known as “neutrophil extracellular traps.” Additionally, neutrophils can communicate with each other and form cell swarms to combine their individual functions for the protection of healthy tissue. While much is known about neutrophils’ role in infections and sterile injuries, their role in inflammation caused by allergic reactions is less understood.“It quickly became clear that the double-pack immune cells were no mere coincidence. We wanted to understand how mast cells trap their colleagues and why they do it,” explains Michael Mihlan, first and co-corresponding author of the study published today (August 2) in the journal Cell. Once the team was able to mimic the neutrophil trapping observed in living tissue in cell culture, they we were able to identify the molecular pathways involved in this process. The researchers found that mast cells release leukotriene B4, a substance commonly used by neutrophils to initiate their own swarming behavior.By secreting this substance, mast cells attract neutrophils. Once the neutrophils are close enough, mast cells engulf them into a vacuole, forming a cell-in-cell structure that the researchers refer to as a “mast cell intracellular trap” (MIT). “It is ironic that neutrophils, which create web-like traps made of DNA and histones to capture microbes during infections, are now trapped themselves by mast cells under allergic conditions,” says Tim Lämmermann.Advancing Our Understanding of Inflammatory and Allergic ReactionsWith the help of an international team, the researchers confirmed the formation of MITs in human samples and investigated the fate of the two cell types involved after trapping. They found that trapped neutrophils eventually die, and their remains get stored inside mast cells“This is where the story takes an unexpected turn. Mast cells can recycle the material from the neutrophils to boost their own function and metabolism. In addition, mast cells can release the newly acquired neutrophil components in a delayed manner, triggering additional immune responses and helping to sustain inflammation and immune defense,” says Michael Mihlan.“This new understanding of how mast cells and neutrophils work together adds a whole new layer to our knowledge of allergic reactions and inflammation. It shows that mast cells can use neutrophils to boost their own capabilities – an aspect that could have implications for chronic allergic conditions where inflammation occurs repeatedly,” says Tim Lämmermann.The researchers have already begun investigating this interaction in mast cell-mediated inflammatory diseases in humans, exploring whether this discovery could lead to new approaches to treating allergies and inflammatory diseases.Reference: “Neutrophil trapping and nexocytosis, mast cell-mediated processes for inflammatory signal relay” 2 August 2024, Cell. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2024.07.014

Honeybees Defend Their Hive by Slapping Invading Ants

Japanese honeybees use their wings to slap back ants trying to invade their hive

Honeybees Wing-Slap Ants That Try to Invade Their HiveJapanese honeybees use their wings to slap back ants trying to invade their hiveBy Gennaro TommaA Japanese honeybee uses its wing to slap a way an ant attempting to invade its hive. “Wing-Slapping: A Defensive Behavior by Honey Bees against Ants,” by Yugo Seko et al., in Ecology, Article No. e4372. Published online July 8, 2024 (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)When a hungry ant approaches a honeybee hive, the residents are ready. They sting, bite or even buzz their wings to create air currents that repel the intruder. But a new study shows that honeybees from a species native to Japan have developed a unique defensive strategy: slapping. These bees actually smack invading ants with their wings, like tiny buzzing brawlers.A bee’s neat, precise wing-slap “reminds you of someone that really delivers a perfect hit on the golf ball,” says Gro Amdam, a biologist at Arizona State University, who was not involved in the study. “That’s really beautiful.”Beekeepers had anecdotally observed this behavior among Japanese honeybees (Apis cerana japonica), but no one had done a scientific analysis. So the researchers who conducted the new study used a high-speed camera to film Japanese pavement ants (Tetramorium tsushimae) invading a hive. When the ants approached, the honeybees elegantly wing-slapped them by “tilting their bodies toward the ants, then flapping their wings while simultaneously turning their bodies,” the researchers wrote in the study, published this month in Ecology.On supporting science journalismIf you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.“When I observed wing-slapping with the naked eye, I couldn’t understand the details of the behavior because it was so quick,” says study co-author Kiyohito Morii, a researcher at the National Institute for Environmental Studies in Japan. “By watching the high-speed camera footage, I finally understood that ... the bees were precisely aiming and spectacularly slapping the ants.”To understand how effective this defense is against different kinds of ants, the researchers released ants from three common local species near two honeybee colonies. “We observed many interesting and amusing scenes, including some where wing-slapping failed,” Morii says. Sometimes, just like a baseball player’s bat misses the ball, a wing-slap simply doesn’t connect.The team found that wing-slapping was the honeybees’ most common strategy against ants. The petite blows were successful in one of every two or three attempts against two of the studied ant species (including the pavement ants) but less effective when a bigger, faster species was involved.Amdam says that the study raises many questions, such as how widespread this behavior is and whether it is innate or learned and spread through culture. “I think that depending on which field you’re in, you can see many interesting questions in this article,” she says.Morii says that wing-slapping might be widespread among other honeybee species, such as those that nest in cavities with limited entrances. But “this is just speculation, and we’ll need more surveys to verify it,” he says. “At this point, little is known.”

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.