SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Most cycle-commuters will tell you cycling to work is the best way to get to and from work and it's probably doing you some good. However a recent major study, published in the British Medical Journal, suggests that the health benefits are staggering, slashing the risk of heart disease and cancer. FTFA:
Research has consistently shown that people who are less physically active are both more likely to develop health problems like heart disease and type 2 diabetes, and to die younger. Yet there is increasing evidence that physical activity levels are on the decline.
The problem is that when there are many demands on our time, many people find prioritising exercise difficult. One answer is to multi-task by cycling or walking to work. We've just completed the largest ever study into how this affects your health.
You can read an article here at The Conversation website and you the original research is here at the BMJ website.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 08 2017, @01:50PM (15 children)
For the few who can do so because conditions permit it--great, have at it biking to work.
For the other 99%, this is a joke. I also have a family to support and if a car takes me out on my bike, there goes my family's life as well.
Bike in places that were made for bikes.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Friday September 08 2017, @03:17PM (6 children)
But you're OK with a heart attack or diabetes striking you down and leaving your family in the lurch because you haven't gotten enough exercise? You're OK with the risk of getting in a car and being killed in one of the, what, 50,000 fatal car accidents per year? Or in getting in a commuter train and risk being killed in a derailment?
See, I'm thinking you walk out your front door and go to work anyway, accepting implicitly that there are risks to leaving your home everyday, no matter how you get to work.
There are risks to biking, because nothing in life is risk-free. But there are very positive things to recommend it. It's extremely cheap, you feel great, you enjoy your travel to the office because you notice more and experience more, you can go as fast or slow as you want, you don't have to deal with hordes of other people in close proximity. Oil prices and the geopolitics surrounding self-same no longer affect you. Maintenance is $60/yr only if you're too lazy to do it yourself. You'll look great and get more dates or attention from your partner. Your medical issues may subside or disappear. You'll be physically stronger, and perhaps even a little more mentally stronger because it takes courage to break out of your comfort zone and be different from the rest of the herd around you.
So give it a try and be brave. You might like it.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Friday September 08 2017, @04:12PM (5 children)
While I like bikes, I do think you're understating the risks - this page (https://bicycleuniverse.info/bicycle-safety-almanac/) discusses some of the difficulties in approximating actual risks, but comes to the conclusion that you're about 3.4x-11.5x as likely to die per mile on a bike than in a car.
Though of course the leading cause of death in the US is heart disease (611k deaths in 2016), and the top of the list is dominated by diseases whose risks would be reduced by regular exercise. (CDC's 2016 Cause of deaths - Top-10 list on page 9: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr65/nvsr65_02.pdf) [cdc.gov]
Accidents do come in number 3 though, at 130k. And roughly 35k of those are automobile accidents. Scaling bicycle accident deaths to the same mileage would put them at between 119k to 402k, somewhere between number 3 and 6 on the list. Nothing to sneeze at.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 08 2017, @05:33PM (2 children)
It's not just bike deaths that are a concern, but also non-fatal injuries.
Those can take you out of work short term or long term or at least be a real "inconvenience" for a while.
If you have dependents (small children and wife), this becomes disruptive to them too.
I appreciate your fatality statistics. I would also love to see non-fatal injury statistics. Those can also be serious.
And to the cycling fanatics: there are plenty of much safer ways to get exercise. Some even involve cycling on bike/pedestrian paths in parks, not highways.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 08 2017, @05:40PM
Apologies if the accident stats are included in the link you provided; don't have time to go beyond your summary at the moment.
(Score: 2) by rleigh on Friday September 08 2017, @07:58PM
If you have a sedentary job like I do sitting at a computer all day, that inactivity is far worse for your health that the chance of a cycling injury. You could drop dead of a heart attack, or you might have a fatal collision. Not cycling comes with its own risk factors.
I've had a few cycling injuries but nothing to stop me permanently. Our bodies wear out with age and use, but that's not a reason for avoiding reasonable and moderate exercise regimes. Not exercising can cause musculoskeletal problems, so cycling is a net benefit unless you seriously overdo it, and a commute is not going to do that for most people.
Regarding cycling off road, it's not the same. I regularly cycle between 60 and 80 miles on a day at the weekend, and you can't do that on a track in the park.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 08 2017, @06:36PM (1 child)
If you check per hour traveled, motor vehicles are more dangerous due to the higher speeds involved.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 08 2017, @06:54PM
To compare apples to apples, you have to compare incidents per MILE.
I have to commute X miles to work. I compare incidents per MILE in a car vs. a bike because those are my choices of how to travel the commuting distance. Per HOUR is meaningless.
(Score: 3, Informative) by http on Friday September 08 2017, @04:50PM (5 children)
If a car taking you out on your bike takes away your family's support, get some fucking insurance dude. There's more hazards in this life than getting hit by a car.
No place is "made" for bikes without government action. Amsterdam in 1950 was wall to wall cars, and you needed a car. The government decided to do something about it. It took a very long time, and now people think the place was built for bikes. It's an easy mistake to make, a misunderstanding of history and politics. Same for Copenhagen, Ljubljana, et cetera. Seville decided to make the push more recently, with good results.
So lobby your government.
I browse at -1 when I have mod points. It's unsettling.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 08 2017, @05:37PM (3 children)
I'd prefer to be alive with my family and contributing over them getting an insurance payout.
Maybe you feel otherwise. Do you even have a family?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 08 2017, @06:41PM (2 children)
If your car is in a crash, you are more likely to die due to the higher speeds involved.
I survived being hit by what was most likely a minivan. Still talking thanks to: luck, equipment (study rear wheel and helmet), and skill (made an emergency steering maneuver to get off the road -- did not fall under van).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 08 2017, @07:03PM (1 child)
Not sure what you are asserting. Car vs. car crash maybe?
I can say definitively that in a car, I am protected in a collision by:
1) car body crumple zones
2) seat belt
3) airbags
A bicyclist is protected by...
Maybe a little piece of styrofoam on the top of his head. That's it.
You don't have to die either for damage to be done. Head trauma is no joke.
BTW, glad you escaped serious injury that time.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 09 2017, @05:09PM
Yes, car vs car crash. It is the most common vehicle on the road after all.
As I mentioned in GP, both vehicles had a crumple zone: the bumper on the mininvan, and the rear wheel on my bike. I am not sure, but suspect that helped more than the helmet.
(Score: 2) by Common Joe on Sunday September 10 2017, @05:09AM
That feels a bit callous. I have two friends whose husbands died (both under 50) neither of which were on a bike at the time. It's not a pretty picture . Riding a bike is many places is extremely dangerous. Every time I get on one, I think about my wife and how hard it would be for her if I died -- or worse, turned into a vegetable. Even if insurance were generous enough to pay, their lives aren't just dollar signs.
And, generally speaking, if getting government to do anything productive were so easy, I don't think we'd be having the massive problems in the U.S. that we have now.
(Score: 2) by ese002 on Friday September 08 2017, @11:16PM (1 child)
The difference between those who ride to work and those who don't is not the magically perfect location for those that do. It is the determination to make it work. You see something that you don't want to do and you find reasons to support that decision.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 09 2017, @03:11AM
You're right. It's a lifestyle for those that do it. For me, it's just an impractical way to get to work. I've got other responsibilities in my life.