Risks of Parkinson's Disease May Increase With Prolonged Exposure to Road Traffic Noise
- Reference: 0184668284
- News link: https://science.slashdot.org/story/26/07/24/2246224/risks-of-parkinsons-disease-may-increase-with-prolonged-exposure-to-road-traffic-noise
- Source link:
> The researchers modeled noise exposure at the most and least exposed exterior of the residence of each participant and calculated the difference in noise levels. The magnitude of the effect was modest but consistent; at the most exposed facade, for every 11.5dB rise in noise level, the risk of Parkinson's disease rose by 3% over the study period. Having a quiet part of the home may mitigate the association between exposure to road traffic noise and higher risk of Parkinson's disease, according to the findings.
>
> The study, published in Jama Neurology, included 3.1 million Danish participants aged 40 and over, and followed them for 18 years. It was established using nationwide health register data, making it the largest study on road traffic noise and Parkinson's disease. Previous research linked the rise in neurological disorders, including Parkinson's disease, with exposure to environmental toxins. Environmental risk factors such as air pollution, microplastics and pesticides have become the main focus of prevention strategies. The study is one of the first to make the link to noise pollution.
[1] https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamaneurology/article-abstract/2851756
[2] https://www.theguardian.com/society/2026/jul/23/road-traffic-noise-parkinsons-disease-study-health
I'm not buying it (Score:2)
Correlation vs causation, I'm willing to bet there is something else going on. Plus with regression and big data you can get the answer you want. And then the interesting studies where someone did tip the scales end up on the news and here.
Re: (Score:2)
And Europe is not known for encouraging widespread ownership of automobiles.
Re:I'm not buying it (Score:4, Insightful)
Mate you're full of shit.
Car ownership is ubiquitous in Europe, and some parts of it (like most of the UK outside of London) are completely car brained. The difference is Europe didn't have an aggressive, lethal hostility towards pedestrians like America.
Re: I'm not buying it (Score:2)
No we only hate cyclists over here for some reason!
Re: (Score:2)
Funny thing is I can't actually tell where over here is!
Motorists hate cyclists on both sides of the pond. A substantial fraction are literally psychopaths who retard cyclists as less human than themselves. And a lot of drivers are frankly fucking morons. So make will pull dangerous manuvers to overtake just to slam straight into the red light that was right in front of them.
Re: (Score:2)
Cars per capita in the UK is about half what it is in the US.
Any more stupid claims?
Re: (Score:2)
Honestly it's probably the pollution more than anything else. Modern cars are certainly better but they didn't make pollution go away we are all breathing tire particulate pretty much Non-Stop.
Re: (Score:2)
I strongly suspect these long tirades in the style of rsilvergun and ending with "www.fark.com/politics" are generated by some sort of LLM. Whether bots are used to moderate, I don't know. I don't have any position on that.
Re: I'm not buying it (Score:2)
Damn those tire particulates!!!
cops cause crime (Score:3)
Everywhere there are cops there is crime. Obviously, cops cause crime.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps, and perhaps not. But clearly laws cause crime.
Just road traffic noise? (Score:2)
Could it be that large amounts of noise in general might lead to a possible increase of Parkinson's? For example, if you work in a mill where machinery runs 24/7, or are involved in some type of construction where there's constant pounding or drilling, or maybe at an airport where there is the near constant noise of planes, would that increase the possible likelihood of Parkinson's? Maybe it's not just road traffic noise, but noise in general.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't know if it's plain volume or some more subtle characteristic of the noise; but I'd suspect that there's more to it than noise alone; given how rare(and often slightly disconcerting in practice) genuinely silent environments are and would have been in evolutionary history.
Even in totally undeveloped areas where you and your little teeny band of hunter-gatherer pals are the only thing going the wind is always up to something; some combination of birds and insects will be doing their thing depending
Re: (Score:2)
Noise can make for poor sleep quality. I can definitely be woken by traffic noise sometimes. So possibly noise > poor quality sleep > influences Parkinsons progression?
Re: (Score:1)
I get the impression that it's the lack of consistency that's the problem.
If you're in a noisy environment where something is being hammered, then that hammering noise continues more-or-less nonstop and unchanged for however many hours.
Traffic noise is constantly changing. Whoosh, whoosh, VAROOM! A few cars, a big truck changing gears or engaging jake brakes, then a smaller truck then truck goes by with a load of metal junk rattlinging in the back, then there's a police siren then... The noise may be con
Re: (Score:2)
> Could it be that large amounts of noise in general might lead to a possible increase of Parkinson's?
From the paper: "Accumulating evidence suggests that modifiable environmental exposures may contribute to the development of PD, thereby representing potential targets for prevention. This includes fine particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5 [microns] or less (PM2.5) air pollution, which has been found to modestly increase the PD risk. More recently, environmental noise has been proposed as a potential risk factor for PD."
> For example, if you work in a mill where machinery runs 24/7, or are involved in some type of construction where there's constant pounding or drilling, or maybe at an airport where there is the near constant noise of planes, would that increase the possible likelihood of Parkinson's? Maybe it's not just road traffic noise, but noise in general.
Seems likely. Someone should look into that.
Let me check IMDB (Score:2)
Nope, Michael J. Fox isn't known for road trip movies.
More about nervous system overstimulation (Score:2)
While the article is making a stretch, I see it this way - if you live a life that includes constant over stimulation, whether it's noise, job stress, relationship turmoil, etc...you're flooding your body with stress hormones, and constantly in fight or flight. It wouldn't surprise me if this can lead to neurological problems later on.
Wonder if it might be noise related... (Score:2)
Since they explicitly called that factor out between the "interesting" group and not. And my mind first goes to "sleep" if noise is the issue. I guess "stress" in general might be higher too, and that might lead to something, but...
Mental health in general (Score:2)
I'd say the ear splitting noise from many trucks and cars today is enough to damage anyone's sanity in general.
Correlation does not equal causation... (Score:5, Insightful)
And TFA article says as much. Maybe its not the amount of noise, but more noise equals bigger roadways, which equals more pollutants in the air, along with higher percentages of carbon monoxide and less oxygen in the air near their homes.
Re: (Score:2)
Having a quiet part of the home may mitigate the association between exposure to road traffic noise and higher risk of Parkinson's disease, according to the findings.
Re: (Score:2)
> Having a quiet part of the home may mitigate the association between exposure to road traffic noise and higher risk of Parkinson's disease, according to the findings.
Thats the Slashdot editors, taking something the author of the article suggested and stating it as a fact. TF study itself [1]makes no such claim [jamanetwork.com].
[1] https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamaneurology/article-abstract/2851756
Re: (Score:3)
>> Having a quiet part of the home may mitigate the association between exposure to road traffic noise and higher risk of Parkinson's disease, according to the findings.
> Thats the Slashdot editors, taking something the author of the article suggested and stating it as a fact. TF study itself [1]makes no such claim [jamanetwork.com].
No, they do. In the Results section of the abstract, "Having a difference between noise at the most and least exposed facades ([Greek letter delta]noise, indicator of having a quiet side) of 10 dB or more was associated with a decline in PD risk across different levels of LDEN-Max above 50 dB." Elsewhere: "[delta]noise indicates the difference in noise level between the most and least exposed facades for each residence." And "Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this cohort study show that long-term expos
[1] https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamaneurology/article-abstract/2851756
Re: (Score:3)
Are soundproof rooms in homes commonplace?
I've lived in very quiet neighbourhoods of Victoria, BC most of my adult life (since 1994). In the last decade, I moved to Vancouver for 3yrs, and the thing that stood out most to me was the traffic noise.
You couldn't escape it. I was always pretty central in the city, with major roadways within a few blocks. There was always that noise in the background, day and night.
That said, I don't know how you can separate the impacts of pollution from noise, since in a city
Re: (Score:3)
You couldn't escape it. I was always pretty central in the city, with major roadways within a few blocks. There was always that noise in the background, day and night.
And yet, we have a multitude of people on here, and elsewhere, saying people should be forced to live in cities rather than in the suburbs.
If you're bitching about the neverending noise, why shoud people be forced to live there?
Re: (Score:2)
> And yet, we have a multitude of people on here, and elsewhere, saying people should be forced to live in cities rather than in the suburbs.
> If you're bitching about the neverending noise, why shoud people be forced to live there?
Really? A multitude? I've completely missed that somehow. Google AI says, "Harvard economist Edward Glaeser and historian Ben Wilson both famously describe cities as humankind's greatest invention. Glaeser uses the phrase as the core premise of his book Triumph of the City, while Wilson used it as the subtitle for his historical work Metropolis ," but two people wouldn't seem to be a "multitude", and I honestly don't know whether either of them ever said anyone should be "forced" to live in a city.
Some env
Re: (Score:2)
The conservative cinematic universe has decided that anything 'green' is part of a totaltarian conspiracy to force everyone live in Judge Dredd megabuildings eating cricket paste. Not sure how bike lanes or greenways get us there but that's the fear. Meanwhile the oligarchs are trying to build 1984 but keep shooting themselves in the foot.
Re: (Score:2)
Committing between suburbs is only a problem in that way if you do it by car.
I'm in suburban south London, going east/west for about 5 miles. Fortunately there's a decent bus and enough LTNs, parks, modal filters and bike lanes than I can do it on a bike without mixing it up with angry psychopaths.
I don't believe I'm concurring significantly to pollution or traffic jams, but I do see the odd gnarly one when crossing some busy roads. No wonder drivers are always so angry.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know of anyone who says people should be forced to live in cities. But people being able to live close to where they work reduces traffic, and that's a good thing, right?
And making it safe enough for children to walk to the store alone to buy candy or [1]popsicles [archive.org] gives them independence and breaks them out of a sort of suburban [2]house arrest [medium.com] that I didn't have to live through as a child and so why should they?
That said, I wouldn't want to live facing a noisy street but rather tucked behind a building t
[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20130719111434/https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/08/the-popsicle-and-halloween-tests-what-makes-a-place-livable/244021/
[2] https://medium.com/illumination/american-children-are-under-house-arrest-be5375c9deb5
Re: (Score:2)
Firstly, no you don't have multitudes, don't lie.
Secondly, cities aren't loud, cars are loud. If you don't put massive stroads or motorways through the places where people are living you have way fewer problems.
Cities are only bad if you worship at the altar of the mighty automobile companies and issues cars are supreme and all else must take second place. I live in South London, edge of zone 2 if you care, just inside the south circular troll. At night it is deathly quiet.
Love in the sticks, live in as cit
Re: (Score:3)
Well, maybe. At any rate, near me, there is an interesting study being carried out. Quite by accident.
Many years ago, there was a guy with a small, hobby farm. And then the state decided to build not one, but two freeways right next to his property. The animals did not like it, so he retired and gifted his farm to the city. With a covenant attached to the deed: The property was to be used for public benefit. Such as educational facilities. It is now a preschool. Strangely enough, due to the undesirability
Re: (Score:2)
> .... the state decided to build not one, but two freeways right next to his property. The animals did not like it, so he retired and gifted his farm to the city.
Is it possible that he gave the farm to the city? Sorry. I apologize in advance, but certain linguistic neologistic cliches just irritate me.
"Old roots: The verb 'to gift' first appeared in the 1500s [yeah, well, what did they know? They didn't even have dictionaries] and was used in legal or formal settings. Modern return : Popularity grew again in the late 20th century, helped by media and marketing .
Yeah, see, there it is: marketing just frankly pisses me off. It also leads to abominations like "our new
Re: (Score:2)
> Is it possible that he gave the farm to the city?
> The verb 'to gift' first appeared in the 1500s ... and was used in legal or formal settings.
Still is today. Use the wrong term and the IRS will haunt you for eternity, according to my financial planner.
Re: (Score:2)
> Well, maybe. At any rate, near me, there is an interesting study being carried out. Quite by accident.
> Many years ago, there was a guy with a small, hobby farm. And then the state decided to build not one, but two freeways right next to his property. The animals did not like it, so he retired and gifted his farm to the city. With a covenant attached to the deed: The property was to be used for public benefit. Such as educational facilities. It is now a preschool. Strangely enough, due to the undesirability of the location, it is now the preferred site of a bunch of light industrial facilities. And due to low rents, also about half a dozen more preschools and daycare facilities. At least one or two generations have grown up attending these. So I hope someone is tracking the long term health of their alumni.
The obvious question to ask is the extent to which road noise correlates with and is associated with other characteristics such as poverty and poverty-associated health effects. Roads, railroads, and airports tend to be built near poor people. I imagine the statistical correlation between road noise and wealth is moderate to strong. I know that as I aged and accumulated wealth, I was able to restrict my home search to quieter locations, often quieter spots in the same neighborhood.
Then again, even though th
Re: (Score:2)
While it’s bad to overstate something, it’s equally bad to understate something. And you’re doing the latter. The very abstract of the JAMA article says “Meaning: These findings suggest that road traffic noise may be a risk factor for Parkinson disease and that access to a quiet facade may mitigate the associated risk.”
This isn’t just some random correlation done by naive idiot scientists looking at two variables that reasonable people would never think would be linked. T