3 ms·

From the Barcelona study linked in the article: "Conclusions We observed that exposure to road traffic noise at school, but not at home, was associated with sl

From the Barcelona study linked in the article: "Conclusions We observed that exposure to road traffic noise at school, but not at home, was associated with slower development of working memory, complex working memory, and attention in schoolchildren over 1 year. Associations with noise fluctuation indicators were more evident than with average noise levels in classrooms." So, at the very least, the title of the original article does not seem justified. In fact the whole article comes off like a bad internet argument, tons of links that aren't understood, and the whole thing is designed to reach a pretermined conclusion, which is, of course: "Car-free zones The best way to protect children from excessive noise is by reducing traffic around schools, says Foraster. " I mean. Why not just sound proof class rooms? Seems way easier than entirely reengineering traffic in a dense urban environment. This really feels like "think of the kids!" now applied to traffic.

rustcleaner 2y ago
You just know this is sponsored Walkable City™ SEO-slop.
lovethevoid 2y ago
Because it’s not just class rooms, although those are places you want them to be at their peak. It’s just the easiest to consistently test. Additionally, with how severely under funded education is, you’re not going to get much effective sound proofing. Most classrooms can’t even afford regular maintenance.
xnyan 2y ago
>We observed that exposure to road traffic noise at school, but not at home, was associated with slower development of working memory, complex working memory, and attention in schoolchildren over 1 year Pretend I'm dumb, why is this not a bad thing? >Why not just sound proof class rooms? Seems way easier than entirely reengineering traffic in a dense urban environment. I see it completely the other way. Reductions in the maximum allowed speed in the direct area around the school to archive the target noise maximum would be far more efficient than sound mitigation for the school.
- jajko 2y ago
  I have even better idea, since your doesn't cover biggest noise polluters IMHO - have a technical check on the car/bike that includes noise levels above certain threshold. Now I realize there may be corner cases and so on, but in general this would work wonders and so far I see 0 being done there. The thing is, certain cars and many motorbikes simply can't be quiet regardless of rpms, even in 30kmh they wake many people up through closed window. As somebody who lived just next to very busy street for few years, there are 2, or maybe 3 main noise pollutants in the order of intensity: 1) ambulances & police, they are really properly mental level and they don't care even on completely empty 3am streets, if I don't cover my ears when they pass me it physically hurts, even with my subpar hearing of higher frequencies; 2) motorbikes like choppers by default, and all tuned rest, aka Akrapovic and similar mods should be banned in inner cities, permanently, 24/7. And 3) sports cars obviously, but they posed the least problem even in uber rich place like Geneva where seeing a Ferrari or McLaren is not unusual, and nobody looks at Porsche or below. This goes also for performance variants of ie BMW, Mercs or Audis too in lesser way.
- aaron695 2y ago
  [dead]
karaterobot 2y ago
This article definitely flipped my "let's assume this is bullshit until proven otherwise" bit. That bit really ought to be on by default, come to think of it. I think about this quote when reading articles like this (to say nothing of the research it draws on): > The best way to identify sketchy scientific claims is by their level of abstraction.... if a new paper claims that attractive people are more (or less) generous than ugly people, I would be highly suspicious. “Generosity” is a very abstract and nebulous quality, and I would want to know how it was measured...The profound abstractions of everyday life—happiness, relationships, sleep, nutrition, motivation, pain, belonging—are the concepts most vulnerable to scientific abuse. (https://worksinprogress.co/issue/how-trust-undermines-science/ https://worksinprogress.co/issue/how-trust-undermines-scienc...) The phrase "hurts children's brains" seems almost ludicrously abstract to me, so it's a little suspicious from the get go. Then I get to their examples. The example of a train track literally running next to a classroom is one thing—I can see that being a problem—but it's a bit different than being next to a city street, which is where the article immediately pivots. Is the average classroom so loud that people physically cannot concentrate? Quoting studies that say that loud classrooms affect student performance doesn't demonstrate that most classrooms are too loud to concentrate, and that anything needs to be done about it. And even if classrooms in Barcelona are all too loud to concentrate, that says nothing about classrooms anywhere else—not even anywhere else in Spain, let alone the entire world. Blegh.
- kiba 2y ago
  Noise pollution affecting children(or adults) in negatives ways is not an exactly an original claim that the paper make nor is it the first one to say so. It would be like a paper claiming that exercise is good for you, which is heavily supported by robust evidence and mountain of papers.
  - karaterobot 2y ago
    As I said, it's not really a question of whether noise pollution has negative effects, the thing they should have tried to demonstrate was that a lot of students are currently, in reality, being affected by it. In your analogy, it's like they're saying that slippery kettlebells are extremely dangerous—people can really get hurt by them—and shouldn't somebody do something to make sure kettlebells aren't slippery? Nobody's doubting that dropping a kettlebell on your foot would be bad, the question is whether slippery kettlebells are a plague that's ruining today's gyms or not. Maybe it really is a problem, but you've got to address that point. You can't just go from "a hypothetical threat exists" to "let's take drastic steps to solve it".
kiba 2y ago
Car dependency and car related infrastructure are enormously expensive to society. Think of every parking lots needed for people to park their car, motor accident, tire, noise, CO2 pollution, materials needed for repaving and repairing road damage, etc. Soundproofing sounds cheaper, but it's just another additional cost imposed by cars. The sooner we are able to walk or cycle or use public transit, the better off we are collectively for many reasons.
- throwaway7ahgb 2y ago
  Did you read the article, the first 3 paragraphs are about public transportation being too loud.

rustcleaner 2y ago

You just know this is sponsored Walkable City™ SEO-slop.

lovethevoid 2y ago

Because it’s not just class rooms, although those are places you want them to be at their peak. It’s just the easiest to consistently test. Additionally, with how severely under funded education is, you’re not going to get much effective sound proofing. Most classrooms can’t even afford regular maintenance.

xnyan 2y ago

>We observed that exposure to road traffic noise at school, but not at home, was associated with slower development of working memory, complex working memory, and attention in schoolchildren over 1 year Pretend I'm dumb, why is this not a bad thing? >Why not just sound proof class rooms? Seems way easier than entirely reengineering traffic in a dense urban environment. I see it completely the other way. Reductions in the maximum allowed speed in the direct area around the school to archive the target noise maximum would be far more efficient than sound mitigation for the school.

jajko 2y ago
I have even better idea, since your doesn't cover biggest noise polluters IMHO - have a technical check on the car/bike that includes noise levels above certain threshold. Now I realize there may be corner cases and so on, but in general this would work wonders and so far I see 0 being done there. The thing is, certain cars and many motorbikes simply can't be quiet regardless of rpms, even in 30kmh they wake many people up through closed window. As somebody who lived just next to very busy street for few years, there are 2, or maybe 3 main noise pollutants in the order of intensity: 1) ambulances & police, they are really properly mental level and they don't care even on completely empty 3am streets, if I don't cover my ears when they pass me it physically hurts, even with my subpar hearing of higher frequencies; 2) motorbikes like choppers by default, and all tuned rest, aka Akrapovic and similar mods should be banned in inner cities, permanently, 24/7. And 3) sports cars obviously, but they posed the least problem even in uber rich place like Geneva where seeing a Ferrari or McLaren is not unusual, and nobody looks at Porsche or below. This goes also for performance variants of ie BMW, Mercs or Audis too in lesser way.
aaron695 2y ago
[dead]

karaterobot 2y ago

This article definitely flipped my "let's assume this is bullshit until proven otherwise" bit. That bit really ought to be on by default, come to think of it. I think about this quote when reading articles like this (to say nothing of the research it draws on): > The best way to identify sketchy scientific claims is by their level of abstraction.... if a new paper claims that attractive people are more (or less) generous than ugly people, I would be highly suspicious. “Generosity” is a very abstract and nebulous quality, and I would want to know how it was measured...The profound abstractions of everyday life—happiness, relationships, sleep, nutrition, motivation, pain, belonging—are the concepts most vulnerable to scientific abuse. (https://worksinprogress.co/issue/how-trust-undermines-science/ https://worksinprogress.co/issue/how-trust-undermines-scienc...) The phrase "hurts children's brains" seems almost ludicrously abstract to me, so it's a little suspicious from the get go. Then I get to their examples. The example of a train track literally running next to a classroom is one thing—I can see that being a problem—but it's a bit different than being next to a city street, which is where the article immediately pivots. Is the average classroom so loud that people physically cannot concentrate? Quoting studies that say that loud classrooms affect student performance doesn't demonstrate that most classrooms are too loud to concentrate, and that anything needs to be done about it. And even if classrooms in Barcelona are all too loud to concentrate, that says nothing about classrooms anywhere else—not even anywhere else in Spain, let alone the entire world. Blegh.

kiba 2y ago
Noise pollution affecting children(or adults) in negatives ways is not an exactly an original claim that the paper make nor is it the first one to say so. It would be like a paper claiming that exercise is good for you, which is heavily supported by robust evidence and mountain of papers.
- karaterobot 2y ago
  As I said, it's not really a question of whether noise pollution has negative effects, the thing they should have tried to demonstrate was that a lot of students are currently, in reality, being affected by it. In your analogy, it's like they're saying that slippery kettlebells are extremely dangerous—people can really get hurt by them—and shouldn't somebody do something to make sure kettlebells aren't slippery? Nobody's doubting that dropping a kettlebell on your foot would be bad, the question is whether slippery kettlebells are a plague that's ruining today's gyms or not. Maybe it really is a problem, but you've got to address that point. You can't just go from "a hypothetical threat exists" to "let's take drastic steps to solve it".

kiba 2y ago

Car dependency and car related infrastructure are enormously expensive to society. Think of every parking lots needed for people to park their car, motor accident, tire, noise, CO2 pollution, materials needed for repaving and repairing road damage, etc. Soundproofing sounds cheaper, but it's just another additional cost imposed by cars. The sooner we are able to walk or cycle or use public transit, the better off we are collectively for many reasons.

throwaway7ahgb 2y ago
Did you read the article, the first 3 paragraphs are about public transportation being too loud.