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.

Save our waves: surfing pumps $2.71 billion into the Australian economy and boosts wellbeing

News Feed
Friday, August 2, 2024

Ever since Polynesian pioneers took to the ocean on wooden rafts, people have been hooked on riding waves. Today, surfing is one of the world’s fastest-growing sports and one of the latest additions to the Olympic games. Surfing is especially valuable to Australia. My new research shows surf-related expenditure contributes nearly A$3 billion to the Australian economy every year. And the mental health benefits to Australian surfers are in the order of $6 billion a year. Yet many surf breaks are subject to coastal erosion, water pollution and other threats. The surfing event in Tahiti for this year’s Olympics is a case in point: it involved drilling into delicate coral reef to build a new judging tower. It’s vital to recognise and measure the true benefits of surfing in dollar terms, so decision-makers realise it makes sense to invest in protecting Australia’s surf breaks. Both surfer and scientist, author Ana Manero volunteers for Surfing Mums. Ana Manero The economics of surfing Waves are essentially free. All you need is a surfboard and you’re set. Well, you might want to grab yourself a leg rope and a wetsuit too. If you have a wave virtually at your doorstep, it’s likely you’re paying a real estate premium. Otherwise, you’re probably spending your weekends chasing waves up and down the coast. You may even have your family in tow. The costs soon add up. Using an online survey of 569 Australian surfers, my team and I explored the influence of recreational surfing on the economy and people’s wellbeing. We found the average Australian surfer spends more than $3,700 a year, within Australia, on surfing-related purchases. Half goes on equipment, while the rest is spent on domestic travel. A further $1,975 is spent on international travel. There are an estimated 727,000 Australian adult surfers, which brings the total spend to $2.71 billion every year being pumped into the domestic economy. If we factor in flow-on effects, such as business-to-business spending, the overall contribution of recreational surfing comes to $4.88 billion. Economic impacts can inform government priorities and public decisions affecting coastal management. For example, the 2023 Margaret River Pro drew $8 million and 3,500 visitors to the region. These figures, as well as local and international support, encouraged the organisers to renew the contest until 2028. Mental health and wellbeing Besides direct economic impacts, surfing contributes to participants’ wellbeing in multiple ways. In our survey, more than 94% of respondents reported improvements in their physical and mental health, as well as their ability to deal with stress and difficulty in their lives. More than 75% of surfers reported an improvement in their sense of belonging to a community and ability to foster positive relationships. One way to measure wellbeing in economic terms is by comparing workplace productivity and healthcare costs between groups. Previous research has quantified the benefits of being in nature to mental health, using data from national parks visits. When applying this approach to surfing, the researchers found gains in surfers’ mental health worth $7,650 per person per year – or $5.6 billion across Australia’s surfers. Deadly but delicate The first-time inclusion of surfing in the 2020–21 Tokyo Olympics was hailed as a landmark recognition of the sport’s cultural significance. A year later, surfing was admitted as a permanent Olympic sport. But built infrastructure, such as ports and sea walls, human-induced climate change, coastal erosion and water pollution are endangering waves around the world. The tiny village of Teahupo'o, in Tahiti, is home to one of the world’s “heaviest” waves. But some residents feared the Olympics would irreversibly damage their pristine environment. In response, visitor numbers were capped and construction minimised. The world-renowned wave of Mundaka, in Spain’s Basque Country, disappeared in 2005 as a result of dredging activity in the nearby rivermouth. The wave eventually came back, but the area had already suffered a slowdown in economic growth, including the cancellation of a professional contest. In Australia, three surf breaks were lost to construction of Perth’s Ocean Reef marina in 2022. Local residents’ calls for an artificial reef are now being considered. Highlights from the Men’s Surfing at the 2024 Olympics. Protection for a precious resource Australia is blessed with more than 1,440 surf breaks and a surf-loving culture. But if we want those waves to exist for future generations, we must look after them now. A good starting point could be to include surf breaks in the Australia State of the Environment Report. The review already evaluates pressures on recreational fishing, snorkelling and scuba diving – but not surfing, despite it attracting more participants than the other three sports combined. Form a legal standpoint, only a few of our waves are protected: the iconic Bells Beach in Victoria comes under the Heritage Act 2027. A dozen of “surfing reserves” in New South Wales are safeguarded by the Crown Lands Act 1989. In Queensland, coastal protection policies are being developed for the Noosa and Gold Coast World Surfing Reserves. Across the world, more countries are adopting protections for surfing’s recreational and environmental values. In Brazil, the waves at Doce River Mouth were recently granted special protection, as a new bill acknowledged the ocean as a living being with intrinsic rights. The goal to better understand and protect the value of surf breaks is in line with the 2021–30 Oceans Decade, a United Nations initiative to leverage scientific knowledge for ocean sustainability. It’s often said “only a surfer knows the feeling” of riding a wave, but research quantifying the benefits of surfing can help decision-makers appreciate the need to preserve a truly irreplaceable resource. Ana Manero is a volunteer with not-for-profit Surfing Mums.

A new study quantifies the benefits of surfing, to the Australian economy as well as health and wellbeing, as Aussie surfers rule the waves in the 2024 Olympic Games. Let’s protect our surf breaks.

Ever since Polynesian pioneers took to the ocean on wooden rafts, people have been hooked on riding waves. Today, surfing is one of the world’s fastest-growing sports and one of the latest additions to the Olympic games.

Surfing is especially valuable to Australia. My new research shows surf-related expenditure contributes nearly A$3 billion to the Australian economy every year. And the mental health benefits to Australian surfers are in the order of $6 billion a year.

Yet many surf breaks are subject to coastal erosion, water pollution and other threats. The surfing event in Tahiti for this year’s Olympics is a case in point: it involved drilling into delicate coral reef to build a new judging tower.

It’s vital to recognise and measure the true benefits of surfing in dollar terms, so decision-makers realise it makes sense to invest in protecting Australia’s surf breaks.

The author riding a wave
Both surfer and scientist, author Ana Manero volunteers for Surfing Mums. Ana Manero

The economics of surfing

Waves are essentially free. All you need is a surfboard and you’re set. Well, you might want to grab yourself a leg rope and a wetsuit too.

If you have a wave virtually at your doorstep, it’s likely you’re paying a real estate premium. Otherwise, you’re probably spending your weekends chasing waves up and down the coast. You may even have your family in tow. The costs soon add up.

Using an online survey of 569 Australian surfers, my team and I explored the influence of recreational surfing on the economy and people’s wellbeing. We found the average Australian surfer spends more than $3,700 a year, within Australia, on surfing-related purchases. Half goes on equipment, while the rest is spent on domestic travel. A further $1,975 is spent on international travel.

There are an estimated 727,000 Australian adult surfers, which brings the total spend to $2.71 billion every year being pumped into the domestic economy. If we factor in flow-on effects, such as business-to-business spending, the overall contribution of recreational surfing comes to $4.88 billion.

Economic impacts can inform government priorities and public decisions affecting coastal management. For example, the 2023 Margaret River Pro drew $8 million and 3,500 visitors to the region. These figures, as well as local and international support, encouraged the organisers to renew the contest until 2028.

Mental health and wellbeing

Besides direct economic impacts, surfing contributes to participants’ wellbeing in multiple ways.

In our survey, more than 94% of respondents reported improvements in their physical and mental health, as well as their ability to deal with stress and difficulty in their lives.

More than 75% of surfers reported an improvement in their sense of belonging to a community and ability to foster positive relationships.

One way to measure wellbeing in economic terms is by comparing workplace productivity and healthcare costs between groups. Previous research has quantified the benefits of being in nature to mental health, using data from national parks visits. When applying this approach to surfing, the researchers found gains in surfers’ mental health worth $7,650 per person per year – or $5.6 billion across Australia’s surfers.

Deadly but delicate

The first-time inclusion of surfing in the 2020–21 Tokyo Olympics was hailed as a landmark recognition of the sport’s cultural significance. A year later, surfing was admitted as a permanent Olympic sport.

But built infrastructure, such as ports and sea walls, human-induced climate change, coastal erosion and water pollution are endangering waves around the world.

The tiny village of Teahupo'o, in Tahiti, is home to one of the world’s “heaviest” waves. But some residents feared the Olympics would irreversibly damage their pristine environment. In response, visitor numbers were capped and construction minimised.

The world-renowned wave of Mundaka, in Spain’s Basque Country, disappeared in 2005 as a result of dredging activity in the nearby rivermouth. The wave eventually came back, but the area had already suffered a slowdown in economic growth, including the cancellation of a professional contest.

In Australia, three surf breaks were lost to construction of Perth’s Ocean Reef marina in 2022. Local residents’ calls for an artificial reef are now being considered.

Highlights from the Men’s Surfing at the 2024 Olympics.

Protection for a precious resource

Australia is blessed with more than 1,440 surf breaks and a surf-loving culture.

But if we want those waves to exist for future generations, we must look after them now.

A good starting point could be to include surf breaks in the Australia State of the Environment Report. The review already evaluates pressures on recreational fishing, snorkelling and scuba diving – but not surfing, despite it attracting more participants than the other three sports combined.

Form a legal standpoint, only a few of our waves are protected: the iconic Bells Beach in Victoria comes under the Heritage Act 2027. A dozen of “surfing reserves” in New South Wales are safeguarded by the Crown Lands Act 1989. In Queensland, coastal protection policies are being developed for the Noosa and Gold Coast World Surfing Reserves.

Across the world, more countries are adopting protections for surfing’s recreational and environmental values. In Brazil, the waves at Doce River Mouth were recently granted special protection, as a new bill acknowledged the ocean as a living being with intrinsic rights.

The goal to better understand and protect the value of surf breaks is in line with the 2021–30 Oceans Decade, a United Nations initiative to leverage scientific knowledge for ocean sustainability.

It’s often said “only a surfer knows the feeling” of riding a wave, but research quantifying the benefits of surfing can help decision-makers appreciate the need to preserve a truly irreplaceable resource.

The Conversation

Ana Manero is a volunteer with not-for-profit Surfing Mums.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Turns Out, There Are 5 Sleep Styles — And Each Affects Your Brain Differently

By I. Edwards HealthDay ReporterTHURSDAY, Oct. 9, 2025 (HealthDay News) — A new study suggests there’s more to sleep than how long you snooze each...

THURSDAY, Oct. 9, 2025 (HealthDay News) — A new study suggests there’s more to sleep than how long you snooze each night. Your overall sleep pattern could shape your mood, brain function and even long-term health.Researchers from Concordia University in Montreal identified five distinct sleep profiles that may help explain why some people feel well-rested while others struggle with fatigue, poor focus or emotional ups and downs.The findings, published Oct. 7 in PLOS Biology, show that these “sleep-biopsychosocial profiles” reflect a mix of biological, mental and environmental factors — from stress and emotions to bedroom comfort — that all affect how well you sleep.“People should treat their sleep seriously,” study co-author Valeria Kebets, a manager at Concordia’s Applied AI Institute, told NBC News. “It affects everything in their daily functioning.”The researchers identified five sleep profiles:1. Poor sleep and mental healthPeople in this group reported the worst sleep quality and higher levels of stress, fear and anger. They also had a greater risk of anxiety and depression.These individuals had poor mental health or attention issues but said their sleep felt fine, suggesting “sleep misperception,” or being unaware of underlying sleep problems, researchers said.3. Sleep aids and sociabilityThis group used sleep aids, but also reported strong social support and fewer feelings of rejection. However, they showed lower emotional awareness and weaker memory.4. Sleep duration and cognitionPeople sleeping fewer than six to seven hours a night scored lower on tests measuring problem-solving and emotional processing. They also showed higher aggression and irritability.5. Sleep disturbances and mental healthThose with issues like frequent waking, pain or temperature imbalance had higher rates of anxiety, substance use and poor cognitive performance.The study analyzed data from 770 healthy adults aged 22 to 36, using MRI scans and questionnaires about sleep, lifestyle and mood.Experts say the profiles could help doctors tailor sleep treatments in the future.“We really need to consider multiple sleep profiles in our research and clinic — the value of a multidimensional approach to data,” Dr. Phyllis Zee, director of the Center for Circadian and Sleep Medicine at Northwestern University, who was not involved in the study, told NBC News.Sleep experts also say the research reinforces the importance of good rest for both mental and physical health.“Sleep is a more complex issue than just how much time you spend in bed,” Dr. Rafael Pelayo, a sleep medicine specialist at Stanford University, said in the NBC News report. “If I can improve your sleep, it has downwind effects on your overall health — not just your mental health, but your physical health.”SOURCE: NBC News, Oct. 8, 2025Copyright © 2025 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

Wildfire Smoke Might Damage Male Fertility

By Dennis Thompson HealthDay ReporterTHURSDAY, Oct. 9, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Wildfire smoke could be damaging men’s fertility, according to a new...

By Dennis Thompson HealthDay ReporterTHURSDAY, Oct. 9, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Wildfire smoke could be damaging men’s fertility, according to a new study.Key measures of sperm quality appeared to drop among dozens of men participating in fertility treatments, researchers recently reported in the journal Fertility and Sterility.“These results reinforce growing evidence that environmental exposures — specifically wildfire smoke — can affect reproductive health,” said senior researcher Dr. Tristan Nicholson, an assistant professor of urology in the University of Washington School of Medicine in Seattle.“As we see more frequent and intense wildfire events, understanding how smoke exposure impacts reproductive health is critical,” she added in a news release.For the study, researchers analyzed semen samples from 84 men taken as part of intrauterine insemination procedures in the Seattle area between 2018 and 2022.Major wildfire smoke events hit Seattle in 2018, 2020 and 2022, researchers noted. The team compared the men’s sperm quality during and between these events.“This study takes advantage of our institution’s location in the Puget Sound region, where wildfire smoke events create distinct pre- and post-exposure periods in a natural experiment to examine how a sudden, temporary decline in air quality influences semen parameters,” researchers wrote.Results showed consistent declines in sperm concentration, total sperm count and sperm movement during wildfire smoke exposures.Wildfire smoke contains particle pollution that can invade a person’s organs through their lungs and bloodstream, researchers said.This exposure has previously been linked to lung cancer, respiratory disease, heart attack, stroke and mental impairment, but its effect on male fertility has not been well-studied, researchers said.Overall, the pregnancy rate among the men’s partners was 11%, and the live birth rate 9% — both at the low end of the average range, researchers noted.However, the team added that the study was not designed to fully evaluate the direct impact of wildfire smoke on reproductive outcomes.Researchers next plan to see what happens after wildfire smoke has dented a man’s fertility.“We are very interested in how and when sperm counts recover after wildfire smoke exposure,” Nicholson said. “Currently we are conducting a prospective pilot study of men in the Seattle area to evaluate how wildfire smoke affects sperm quality.”SOURCE: University of Washington, news release, Oct. 1, 2025Copyright © 2025 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

AirPods Pro 3 review: better battery, better noise cancelling, better earbuds

Top Apple buds get upgraded sound, improved fit, live translation and built-in heart rate sensors, but are still unrepairableApple’s extremely popular AirPods Pro Bluetooth earbuds are back for their third generation with a better fit, longer battery life, built-in heart rate sensors and more effective noise cancelling, and look set to be just as ubiquitous as their predecessors.It has been three years since the last model, but the earbuds still come only in white and you really have to squint at the details to spot the difference from the previous two generations. Continue reading...

Apple’s extremely popular AirPods Pro Bluetooth earbuds are back for their third generation with a better fit, longer battery life, built-in heart rate sensors and more effective noise cancelling, and look set to be just as ubiquitous as their predecessors.The Guardian’s journalism is independent. We will earn a commission if you buy something through an affiliate link. Learn more.It has been three years since the last model, but the earbuds still come only in white and you really have to squint at the details to spot the difference from the previous two generations.The AirPods Pro 3 cost £219 (€249/$249/A$429), making them £30 cheaper in the UK than when their predecessors launched, and sit above the AirPods 4, which cost £169 with noise cancelling for those who don’t like silicone earbud tips.The shape of the earbuds has been tweaked, changing slightly the way you put them in and making them more comfortable than their predecessors for extended listening sessions of three hours or more. Five sizes of tips are included in the box, but if you didn’t get on with silicone earbuds before these won’t make a difference.The stalks are the same length as before, but the shape of the earbud has been changed to better align the tip with your ear canal. Photograph: Samuel Gibbs/The GuardianMost of the features are fairly standard for modern earbuds. Squeeze the stalks for playback controls, swipe for volume or take them out to pause the music. They support the same new features rolled out to Apple’s older earbuds, including the ability to use them as a shutter remote for the camera app and for live translation with the Translate app on the iPhone. The latter is limited to English, French, German, Portuguese and Spanish for now and isn’t available in the EU, but it works surprisingly well for casual conversations.The biggest problem is that the other person will have to rely on reading or hearing your translated speech from your iPhone. I can see it being most useful with announcements or audio guides – the kind you get on transport or in museums where you need only to translate language one way.The most interesting added hardware feature is heart rate monitoring via sensors on the side of the earbuds, similar to Apple’s Powerbeats Pro 2 fitness buds. They can be used with more than 50 workouts started in the Fitness app or a handful of third-party apps on the iPhone and proved to be roughly in line with readings from a Garmin Forerunner 970 or an Apple Watch during walks and runs. The earbuds are water-resistant to IP57 standards, which makes them much more robust against rain and sweat than before.The battery life has been increased by a third to at least eight hours of playback with noise cancelling for each charge, which is very competitive with some of the best rivals and long enough for most listening sessions.The compact flip-top case provides two full charges for a total playback time of 24 hours – six hours short of the previous generation, but five minutes in the case is enough for an hour of listening time. Photograph: Samuel Gibbs/The GuardianSpecifications Connectivity: Bluetooth 5.3, SBC, AAC, H2 chip, UWB Battery life: eight hours ANC playback (24 hours with case) Water resistance: IP57 (buds and case) Earbud dimensions: 30.9 x 19.2 x 27.0mm Earbud weight: 5.6g each Charging case dimensions: 47.2 x 62.2 x 21.8mm Charging case weight: 44g Case charging: USB-C, Qi wireless/MagSafe, Apple Watch Bigger sound and impressive noise cancellingThe silicone earbuds are infused with foam in the tips that expands slightly for a better seal for music and noise cancelling. Photograph: Samuel Gibbs/The GuardianThe sound of the third-generation AirPods Pro takes a great listen and makes it bigger. They have a wider soundscape that makes big tracks sound more expansive, while still maintaining strong but nicely controlled bass. They are detailed, well-balanced and do justice to different genres of music, with plenty of power and punch where needed. As with Apple’s other headphones, they sometimes sound a little too clinical, lacking a bit of warmth or rawness in some tracks, and they can’t quite hit the very deepest of notes for skull-rattling bass. However, few earbuds sound better at this price and size.Apple’s implementation of spatial audio for surround sound for movies remains best in class, adding to the immersion with compatible devices and services, even if spatial audio music remains a mixed bag.The AirPods Pro are the best combination of earbuds and compact case that you can easily fit in a pocket. Photograph: Samuel Gibbs/The GuardianThe improved noise cancelling is the best upgrade. Apple says it is twice as effective as the already good AirPods Pro 2, which sounds about right. In side-by-side comparisons, the AirPods Pro 3 handle street noise, including cars, horns and engines, almost as well as the class-leading Sony WH-1000XM6, which is thoroughly impressive given they are large over-ear headphones, not little earbuds.They also do a great job of dampening the troublesome higher tones such as keyboard clicks and speech, making the commute and office work more bearable.Apple’s class-leading transparency mode is just as good on the new earbuds, sounding natural as if you weren’t actually wearing the earbuds. It makes using them as hearing aids or out on the street with some dampening of sudden loud sounds very good indeed.Call quality is first-rate, and my voice sounded clear and natural in quiet or noisy environments with only a hint of road noise from some loud streets audible on the call.SustainabilityThe case charges via USB-C, MagSafe, Qi or Apple Watch charger, and has a new feature to limit charging of the earbuds to prolong their battery health. Photograph: Samuel Gibbs/The GuardianApple does not provide an expected lifespan for the batteries. Those in similar devices typically maintain at least 80% of their original capacity for 500 full charge cycles. The earbuds are not repairable, but Apple offers a battery service for £49 per earbud or case and offers replacements for those lost or damaged costing from £79 an item. The repair specialists iFixit rated the earbuds zero out of 10 for repairability.The AirPods and case contain 40% recycled material by weight including aluminium, cobalt, copper, gold, lithium, plastic, rare earth elements and tin. Apple offers trade-in and free recycling schemes and breaks down the environmental impact of the earbuds in its report.PriceThe AirPods Pro 3 cost £219 (€249/$249/A$429).For comparison, the AirPods 4 start at £119, the Beats Powerbeats Pro 2 cost £250, the Sennheiser Momentum TW4 cost £199, the Google Pixel Buds Pro 2 cost £219, the Sony WF-1000XM5 cost £219 and the Bose QuietComfort Ultra earbuds cost £300.VerdictThe AirPods Pro 3 take what was great about the ubiquitous second-generation models and improves almost everything.Longer battery life and a better, more comfortable fit for extended listening sessions are very welcome, as is the bigger, wider sound. Proper water resistance and built-in heart rate monitoring makes them useful for workouts, particularly those such as powerlifting that make wearing a watch difficult. The live translation feature worked better than expected, but has limitations that make it less useful for real-life conversations.The best bit is very effective noise cancelling that rivals some of the greatest over-ear headphones, but in a tiny set of earbuds that are much easier to carry around.Audiophiles will find they sound a little too clinical. While they work with any Bluetooth device, including Android phones, PCs and games consoles, they require an iPhone, iPad or Mac for full functionality. But the biggest letdown remains repairability, which remains a problem for most true wireless earbuds and loses them a star. Pros: very effective noise cancelling, great sound, best-in-class transparency, water resistance, built-in HR monitoring, great controls, advanced features with Apple devices including spatial audio, very comfortable, excellent case, top class call quality. Cons: extremely difficult to repair, expensive, no hi-res audio support, lack features when connected to Android/Windows, look the same as predecessors, only available in white. The AirPods Pro 3 are some of the very best earbuds you can buy, particularly if you use an iPhone. Photograph: Samuel Gibbs/The Guardian

If You Want to Stay Healthy and Care About Humanity, Here’s What to Eat

This story was originally published by Guardian and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration. Adoption of a plant-rich “planetary health diet” could prevent 40,000 early deaths a day across the world, according to a landmark report. The diet—which allows moderate meat consumption—and related measures would also slash the food-related emissions driving global heating by […]

This story was originally published by Guardian and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration. Adoption of a plant-rich “planetary health diet” could prevent 40,000 early deaths a day across the world, according to a landmark report. The diet—which allows moderate meat consumption—and related measures would also slash the food-related emissions driving global heating by half by 2050. Today, a third of greenhouse gas emissions come from the global food system and taming the climate crisis is impossible without changing how the world eats, the researchers said. Food production is also the biggest cause of the destruction of wildlife and forests and the pollution of water. The planetary health diet (PHD) sets out how the world can simultaneously improve the health of people and the planet, and provide enough food for an expected global population of 9.6 billion people by 2050. “This is not a deprivation diet…” It “could be delicious, aspirational and healthy.” The diet is flexible, allowing it to be adapted to local tastes, and can include some animal products or be vegetarian or vegan. However, all versions advise eating more vegetables, fruits, nuts, legumes and whole grains than most people in the world currently eat. In many places, today’s diets are unhealthy and unsustainable due to too much meat, milk and cheese, animal fats and sugar. People in the US and Canada eat more than seven times the PHD’s recommended amount of red meat, while it is five times more in Europe and Latin America, and four times more in China. However, in some regions where people’s diets are heavily reliant on starchy foods, such as sub-Saharan Africa, a small increase in chicken, dairy and eggs would be beneficial to health, the report found. North American adult diets in 2020 versus planetary health recommendation, daily per capita intake in grammesGuardian Severe inequalities in the food system must also be ended to achieve healthy and sustainable diets, the researchers said. The wealthiest 30 percent of the world’s population generates more than 70 percent of food-related environmental damage, it found. Furthermore, 2.8 billion people cannot afford a healthy diet and 1 billion are undernourished, despite enough food being produced globally. The food system is also failing the 1 billion people living with obesity, the report said. The report recommends shifting taxes to make unhealthy food more costly and healthy food cheaper, regulating the advertising of unhealthy food and using warning labels, and the shifting of today’s massive agricultural subsidies to healthier and more sustainable foods. “What we put on our plates can save millions of lives, cut billions of tonnes of emissions, halt the loss of biodiversity, and create a fairer food system,” said Prof Johan Rockström, who co-chaired the EAT-Lancet Commission that produced the report. “The evidence is undeniable: transforming food systems is not only possible, it’s essential to securing a safe, just, and sustainable future for all.” “This is not a deprivation diet,” said Prof Walter Willett of the Harvard TH Chan school of public health, and another commission co-chair. “This is something that could be delicious, aspirational and healthy. It also allows for cultural diversity and individual preferences, providing flexibility.” “Our recommendations are grounded in scientific evidence and real-world experience.” The report, published in the Lancet, was produced by 70 leading experts from 35 countries and six continents. It builds on the 2019 report that introduced the PHD, but includes new evidence of the health benefits of the diet. “We have been able to look at this diet in relation to health outcomes such as total mortality, diabetes, respiratory diseases, heart disease, stroke, etc and we found very strong inverse relationships” said Willett. The diet was also linked to reduced cancer and neurodegenerative diseases. Overall, the researchers estimated global adoption of the PHD could prevent 15m early deaths a year in adults. The estimate did not include the impact of the diet reducing obesity, meaning it is probably an underestimate. The PHD recommends plant-rich, flexible diets, including: Fruits and vegetables—at least five portions a day Whole grains—three to four portions a day Nuts—one portion per day Legumes (beans, peas, lentils)—one portion per day Dairy—one serving of milk, yoghurt or cheese portions a day Eggs —three to four a week Chicken—two portions a week Fish—two portions a week Red meat—one portion a week Marco Springmann from UCL in the UK and an author of the report said the differences between the PHD and current diets vary: “What needs to be reduced differs a lot. In low income countries, it’s the starchy foods and grains, whereas in high income countries it is animal-sourced foods, sugar, saturated fats, and dairy. It’s insane how much dairy is consumed in Europe and North America.” The data underlying the report is available online and can be used to tailor different planetary health diets for the tastes of people in specific countries and of different ages. The website also shows how much the diets reduce deaths, improve nutrition, and cut environmental impacts. “Hopefully this will lead to more science-based policymaking,” said Springmann. The PHD is better than current average diets for many nutrients, including fatty acids, fibre, folate, magnesium and zinc. Adequate iron and vitamin B12 could be provided by green leafy vegetables, fermented soy foods and algae, the researchers said. Moving diets towards the PHD could be achieved by helping consumers make better everyday choices, said Line Gordon, director of the Stockholm Resilience Centre, for example by shifting taxes to make healthy foods cheaper, and putting warning labels on unhealthy foods. “But it is not just about getting prices lower, it’s also about bringing purchasing power up so that people can afford a healthier diet” she said. “Our recommendations are grounded in scientific evidence and real-world experience,” Gordon said. “Changes are already under way, from school meal programmes to regenerative agriculture and food waste reduction initiatives.” England banned price promotions on unhealthy foods on Wednesday and will ban advertising such foods online. The report estimates that food-related ill health and environmental damage costs society about $15 trillion a year. It said investments to transform the food system would cost $200 billion to $500 billion a year, but save $5 trillion. Alongside a shift in diets, the report calls for other changes to the food system, including cutting the loss and waste of food, greener farming practices, and decent working conditions, as a third of food workers earn below living wages. The launch of the PHD in 2019 led to attacks from meat industry interests. Rockström said: “The [new report] is a landmark achievement. It is a state-of-the-art scientific assessment that quantifies healthy diets for all human beings in the world and the environmental boundaries all food systems need to meet to stay safe. So we have a really rigorous foundation for our [results]. We are ready to meet that assault.”

Seasonal Allergies Might Increase Suicide Rate, Study Says

By Dennis Thompson HealthDay ReporterMONDAY, Oct. 6, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Seasonal allergies are considered an annoyance to most, and maddening...

By Dennis Thompson HealthDay ReporterMONDAY, Oct. 6, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Seasonal allergies are considered an annoyance to most, and maddening to some.Few think of seasonal sniffles and sneezes as potentially fatal — but we might be overlooking the danger they pose, a new study warns.High pollen counts are linked to a significant increase in suicide risk, according to findings published in the December issue of the Journal of Health Economics as the U.S. enters fall allergy season.Further, suicide risk increases as airborne levels of pollen rise, researchers found.The physical misery caused by seasonal allergies likely contributes to this increase, by wrecking people’s sleep and increasing mental distress, researchers speculated."During our study period, there were nearly 500,000 suicides in the U.S.," said lead researcher Joelle Abramowitz, an associate research scientist at the University of Michigan’s Institute for Social Research."Based on our incremental data, we estimate that pollen may have been a contributing factor in up to 12,000 of those deaths over the period, or roughly 900 to 1,200 deaths per year,” she said in a news release.For the study, researchers compared suicides reported between 2006 and 2018 with daily pollen counts from 186 counties in 34 metropolitan areas across the United States.Results showed an association between suicide and pollen counts that increases in strength, after the research team divided pollen levels into four tiers.Suicide risk jumped 7.4% at the worst pollen counts; 5.5% higher at the third-highest level; and 4.5% at the second level, all compared to the lowest level of airborne pollen.People with known mental health problems were more vulnerable, experiencing a nearly 9% increase in their risk of suicide on days with the highest pollen counts, results showed.“A small shock could have a big effect if you're already in a vulnerable state," Abramowitz said.The results indicate that seasonal allergies should be taken more seriously, and not seen as a mere nuisance, researchers said.More accurate pollen forecasting and better public communication on the mental health impact of seasonal allergies could save lives, by providing people the opportunity to protect themselves, researchers said.This will become even more important as climate change progresses, extending and intensifying pollen seasons, researchers said."We should be more conscious of our responsiveness to small environmental changes, such as pollen, and our mental health in general," Abramowitz said."Given our findings, I believe medical providers should be aware of a patient's allergy history, as other research has also established a connection between allergies and a higher risk for suicide,” she added. “I hope this research can lead to more tailored care and, ultimately, save lives."SOURCE: University of Michigan, news release, Sept. 29, 2025Copyright © 2025 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

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.