A new study suggests that driving for more than two hours a day has an adverse effect on mental capacity. (The Sunday Times)
The study, conducted by researchers at the University of Leicester, investigated how sedentary behaviour affects brainpower and found that IQ scores fell faster in middle-aged people who drove long distances every day.
The researchers suggest that people who want to protect their brains against ageing should minimise their time on the road and find activities that are more mentally stimulating.
Kishan Bakrania, a medical epidemiologist at the University of Leicester, told The Sunday Times: “We know that regularly driving for more than two to three hours a day is bad for your heart.
“This research suggests it is bad for your brain, too, perhaps because your mind is less active in those hours.”
The researchers analysed the lifestyles of more than half a million Britons (aged between 37 and 73 years) over a five-year period, during which they took intelligence and memory tests.
The 93,000 people who drove more than two to three hours a day typically had lower brainpower at the start of the study, which kept on declining throughout, at a faster rate than those who did little or no driving.
Mr Bakrania said: “Cognitive decline is measurable over five years because it can happen fast in middle-aged and older people. This is associated with lifestyle factors such as smoking and bad diet — and now with time spent driving.”
While other studies suggest cognitive decline is linked to physical inactivity, Mr Bakrania says other factors may play a role.
He said: “Driving causes stress and fatigue, with studies showing the links between them and cognitive decline.”
When moving as pedestrians, is it not the case that people are in general courteous to each other due to the fact that if they are not courteous then they may feel vulnerable to a “dis-courteous” response e.g. a thump on the nose? However, when moving in the safety of a metal box I suspect they do not feel the same vulnerability to a physical response and are more likely to provide a hand gesture or shout to show their feelings towards other road users?
I agree with the comment regarding “this research suggests that…” as we are bombarded with suggestive research which often contradicts other recent suggestive research. From listening to people talk around the office this can mean that people chose to believe the research which backs up their existing behaviours. See especially regular drinking of alcohol prevents diabetes!
Nick, Lancashire
0
As individuals we are brought up to understand and respect personal space not just our own for our protection but for the giving of consideration to others personal space. So on the main street as pedestrians we dont barge into others and we always attempt to avoid interference with that safe space. More often than not we apologise if we feel that we ever infringed upon it.
Pity that doesnt happen on the road. There is plenty of information about safe space as its been with us for centuries but many dont know about it. Some do but some don’t even consider it of any importance and yet it’s part and parcel of all civilsations. Safe space should be known and understood and complied with and then our roads would be a much safer space.
Bob Craven Lancs
0
Just illustrating how, in the real world, people behave differently than in an utopian or ideological scenario which may seem good on paper or in one’s mind. The incident I mentioned shows how for some, it’s more of a ‘every man for themselves’ rather than an ‘after you sir’ state of mind. It was highly illegal as well, which shows how that same state of mind and lack of self-restraint and discipline can lead to a disregard for the laws.
Hugh Jones, Cheshire
0
Hugh, it is of course a logical fallacy to argue that an idea cannot be true if a proponent does not adhere to it, even if they don’t. And your example may even bolster the cause for adopting the idea actually! There is nothing disrespectful about going faster than someone else, so long as there is space to do so. Have you never seen someone rush past on the footway to catch a bus, or whatever?
Charles, England
0
Charles said “..deregulation would rely on road users respecting each other..” and referred us to a You Tube clip. The talking-head clip was a by a Martin Cassini, a well-known promoter of deregulation and equality/equal priority on our roads, with a view to fewer collisions and a less fraught co-existence for road users. All very nice – and a laudable aim – unfortunately that doesn’t sit well with the fact that Mr Cassini, according to press reports, was caught doing 91mph on a 60mph road ‘to pass a slower moving vehicle’. Is that an example of road user equality and considerate and respectful road user behaviour, or is it a case of ‘I’m in a hurry, therefore I have priority’? Real world chaps!
Hugh Jones, Cheshire
0
I don’t have a problem understanding your point of view but you and I are very different from the average Joe in the street as a pedestrian or one driving a motor vehicle. We all have our own agendas and problems and associated baggage that we cary around with us and that may flower or otherwise effect our cognative abilities and also our general behaviour or our behaviour in more specific circumstances. Sometimes not for the better or in this case possibly to the detriment of other road users.
Bob Craven Lancs
0
Bob, do you have the same problem with other pedestrians when you are a pedestrian – or do they behave courteously towards you (and you to them) as is the general case? So what is it that makes us different when in control of a motor vehicle? Here’s another even shorter video which might help us to understand that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7iLh5chonE
Charles, England
0
If there is deregulation then there is no regulations that must be obeyed. It’s then up to ones self to regulate ones own actions. That is self regulation. Do we give way to others getting in our way, or do we decide to ignore them and get there faster because we are in a hurry. That’s when human nature takes over. Only we can decide. It could go one way or the other.
The same thing happens when I ride a motorbike. I see that the van driver has taken notice of me but still decides that he can beat me up on the roundabout.
Bob Craven Lancs
0
Bob, I’m not talking “self regulation”, I’m talking about “de-regulation”. Sure it will rely on road users respecting each other – but that is its strength! That is why it will work, and why regulation fails. Please watch this short video (right through to the end) to see what I mean: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtxKhmLDUuo
Charles, England
0
All the media refer back to the original article written by Jonathan Leake. He has history in spinning gold out of straw from scientists published and unpublished research. The scientist quoted is a grad student still doing his doctoral thesis on causes of diabetes. He is at Leicester University. The sample quoted as being used to produce this conclusion at half a million is larger than the city of Leicester. The time scale it was run is longer than his degree course. Hello. Smell the coffee.
Bill Dean. Oldham
0
Charles, self regulation has never worked. History has shown us that. We just have to look at industry to find that out. Human nature being what it is some will take advantage of a situation to the detriment of others less able to stand up for themselves so this utopian idea is a non starter. If we redesigned all of our outdated and constrictive road infrastructure and allowed anyone to do anything without rules or regulations one has anarchy and also we would have no further need for road safety officers.
Bob Craven Lancs
0
It could be then that removing the (mainly early 20th century) outdated road safety ideas from our public roads (traffic lights, preordained priorities at road junctions, speed limits, kerbs, etc.) and redesigning our road system to work with, rather than against human nature, we could not only improve road safety but improve drivers’ mental health too! Giving drivers the full responsibility to think for themselves, rather than expecting them to all to perform the superhuman task of 100% concentration on nothing whilst driving, and we could transform our KSI figures.
Charles, England
0
How would this compare to the brains of people in countries with higher default motorway speed limits (or no limits at all)? Would their brain be “healthier” for having to take into consideration and evaluate higher risks?
David Weston
0
Is this study really representative of drivers in general? Seems not but rather a selective bunch if, as they say, the people in the study typically had lower brainpower at the start of the study. Sales reps frequently spend much of the time whilst behind the wheel concentrating on preparing for the next appointment/visit, especially if it is likely to involve some significant negotiating/haggling. So, for that group at least, the brain is likely to be too active on non-driving matters rather than less active as inferred by the researcher.
Pat, Wales
0
Wouldn’t it be nice if just one in a while a study – on anything, not just our line of work – did more that simply ‘suggests’ that something may be the case.
Also, am I the only one who was surprised to read “We know that regularly driving for more than two to three hours a day is bad for your heart”? How do ‘they’ know?
Hugh Jones, Cheshire
0