Google sponsored links
The benefits of cycling far outweigh the risk and even the pollution that one breathes.
http://www.latimes.com/features/health/la-he-bikesafety22may22,0,334857.story?coll=la-headlines-health
There are obvious benefits to riding a bicycle — such as saving money, not polluting and getting regular exercise to help ward off obesity, heart disease and perhaps even cancer.
But riding a bike in a congested and polluted city amid bigger vehicles puts the rider at risk for accidents and for sucking down the very pollution they're helping to reduce. Pollution can even trigger heart attacks in some out-of-shape or sensitive individuals.
In fact, as long as you're generally healthy — if you don't have heart disease, diabetes or lung problems — and if you learn to ride in a defensive and safe manner, the risks of riding are outweighed by the boon of exercise, experts say.
This is an archived thread, you can find the full version of this thread, with images, links and more content
here.
Ready to buy? Check out these two online bike stores:
-
http://www.nashbar.com (you can find the latest bike nashbar coupons in
this thread)
-
http://www.performancebike.com (you can find the latest performance bike coupons in
this thread)
Cya on the forums,
- The BikeForums Team
-
http://www.bikeforums.net
The risks (and I'd add the drawbacks) are outweighed by the benefits. That's for sure.
And today the sun is finally out! After I don't know how long. Months? Big smile!
It's good to see the health benefits being recognized.
I was a little disapointed that the article claims the risks of breathing in pollution is a greater risk for cyclists than for motorists. there have been several studies that show motorists breath in as much, if not more, polution than cyclists.
Recently, the Wall Street Jounal had a feature on cycling and mentioned,
The danger of cycling is far outweighed by the
benefits, says Rutgers University's John Pucher, a
professor of urban planning specializing in cycling
issues. Cycling builds muscle, deepens lung
capacity, lowers heart rate and burns calories. "The
health benefits of cycling outweigh the health risks
by two to one, if not something like five to one,"
says Dr. Pucher
I am more familialr with the study done by Mayer Hillman where he claims the risk/ benefit ratio is much larger (20 to 1) but there was another study done by Danish researchers that shows,
Even after adjustment for other risk factors, including leisure time physical activity, those who did not cycle to work experienced a 39% higher mortality rate than those who did.
For all the worries of traffic accidents, overall health is, by far, much more important and cycling clearly benefits health.
Health benefits? Today a lady I know asked me why I'm so tired.
"At 28, you shouldn't be so tired," she says.
"But I'm 46."
"Why, you're an old man!"
:D
It's good to see the health benefits being recognized.
I was a little disapointed that the article claims the risks of breathing in pollution is a greater risk for cyclists than for motorists. there have been several studies that show motorists breath in as much, if not more, polution than cyclists.
You apparently read only half the article. Studies suggesting that motorists breath 5x the pollution over cyclists were cited on the second page of the article. The article is only playing to "common sense" that a cyclists smells the pollution (since the larger particles are not filtered before entering the cyclist's nose) and therefor must be getting a bigger dose. It goes on in the next paragraph to throw mud on this claim and correct perceptions.
The only criticism I can make with the article is that it repeatedly states (maybe) mistaken "cycling is dangerous" perceptions first, and only later goes back to clear up the air with statements from cycling advocates. I can forgive this though because the first thing an article has to do is to "hook" and gain credibility with their largest audience, and the only way to do this is to set up the "cycling is dangerous" arguments first (which most people believe), so they can be knocked down later in the article.
Societal attitudes toward biking and misunderstandings about safety "perpetuate this myth that cycling on regular roads is deadly," adds League of American Bicyclists instructor Dan Gutierrez of Long Beach.
The National Center for Statistics and Analysis reported that 33,134 people in autos, and 4,500 pedestrians, died in crashes in 2004 — but there were only 725 cyclist fatalities. Even so, Gutierrez says, fatalities don't tell the whole story. And a skilled cyclist can ride with a much lower accident risk than an untrained one.
Gutierrez, who teaches a 12-hour course on how to ride bikes in traffic, says cycling as if you're a vehicle — so-called "vehicular" or "integrated traffic" cycling — will remove most of the ways you can be harmed while riding in traffic.
Aside from the typical safety gear such as helmets and gloves, Gutierrez recommends riding on roads that have two lanes going in one direction — so that cars can easily pass you — and learning to look out for hazards such as potholes (easy enough to dodge unless it's raining) and places where the gutter meets the road. The street's asphalt will sink an inch or two next to the concrete gutter, and this can grab your front wheel.
But the biggest danger to riders, Gutierrez says, is the "door zone" — the space next to parked cars where car doors are prone to swing open unannounced. He cites one New York study in which 16% of bicycle messengers reported such door trouble.
"It's much better for a cyclist to ride for their own safety than rely on the whims of drivers," he says.
The course that Dan teaches (see blue above) includes some very interesting video clips, like this one:
http://www.cyclistview.com/downloads/Safe-Full-Lane-Use.wmv
These are taken with two cyclists, one riding behind the other, slightly staggered. The front guy is shooting backwards while the front guy is shooting forwards (though both could switch from front to rear with the flick of a switch) so that every frame has a cyclist in it.
By the way, I have it on good (horse's mouth) authority that Dan never said the door zone is the biggest danger to riders (see red above). But at least the concept of a "door zone" got put out there by this article. A misquote like the "biggest danger is being hit from behind" would have been much worse!
If you're in the LA area, and are interested in taking a class from Dan, PM me and I'll get you in touch.
It might cost you around a hundred bucks or so, but worth every penny. Cycling will never be the same. Check out the video...
Did you ever get another copy of the DVD?
No, but their current stuff is even better. That site above has four good example clips. They're still trying to decide how best to present it on the internet. The raw footage is okay, but it really needs discussion of underlying theory to be most educational.
http://www.cyclistview.com
You apparently read only half the article. Studies suggesting that motorists breath 5x the pollution over cyclists were cited on the second page of the article. The article is only playing to "common sense" that a cyclists smells the pollution (since the larger particles are not filtered before entering the cyclist's nose) and therefor must be getting a bigger dose. It goes on in the next paragraph to throw mud on this claim and correct perceptions.
You're right. I did only read half the article. For some reason, the second page couldn't load so I'm glad it was explained as you described.
I'll also agree that newspapers want to hook attention so they often give an appearance of something, and even if they go on to later disprove the common assumption, there is often damage done because the impression given in the hook is often remembered more than the truth.
The more interesting LA article is:
http://www.latimes.com/features/health/la-he-biking22may22,0,5921368.story?coll=la-headlines-health
It's the health 'above the neck' that cycling really benefits.
No, but their current stuff is even better. That site above has four good example clips. They're still trying to decide how best to present it on the internet. The raw footage is okay, but it really needs discussion of underlying theory to be most educational.
http://www.cyclistview.com
I just checked out "passed on high speed... " Looks a lot like noisebeam's videos... those guys are really trucking along, doing a good 20+MPH. Especially liked the comment "got a cabbie cutting his margins tight... "
But the real challenge is to do the same high speed arterial (gee, only 40MPH) as a slow student or cyclo tourist... then you'll see a lot of uh, interestingly "cut margins."
"See that... dip**** dropped a cigarette right in my path..." Classic. Good thing it wasn't a soda... :rolleyes:
Well sure, goes to show that one can indeed ride on high speed arterials... but the real question is how much fun is that going to be for your average collegiate cyclist. I think the stress that comes off in these videos would make this sort of journey a real turn off for a lot of potential cyclists... i.e. there is little fun factor.
Interesting how they made these though.
The more interesting LA article is:
http://www.latimes.com/features/health/la-he-biking22may22,0,5921368.story?coll=la-headlines-health
Uh, same article as the OP.
Uh, same article as the OP.
No it wasn't. The OP was 2 pages and this one is 4 pages.
I still like the original article better because it sheds light on the monumentally huge elephant in the living room that no one talks about (in any meaningful way).
Despite of all risks on a bicycle, health is better when you ride a bicycle than if you don't.
You can have accidents in a car or on foot just as you can on a bicycle, but in the end, your health is better (even considering likely accidents and collisions you will encounter when riding the bike) if you ride your bike than if you drive a car.
No it wasn't. The OP was 2 pages and this one is 4 pages.
I still like the original article better because it sheds light on the monumentally huge elephant in the living room that no one talks about (in any meaningful way).
Despite of all risks on a bicycle, health is better when you ride a bicycle than if you don't.
You can have accidents in a car or on foot just as you can on a bicycle, but in the end, your health is better (even considering likely accidents and collisions you will encounter when riding the bike) if you ride your bike than if you drive a car.
Whoa you are right... the pics are the same so I didn't even read the article. I stand VERY corrected. :o
That's two articles almost back to back about cycling... perhaps this is a new trend this cycling stuff, eh? :D
There is a third article too... it is about how to get started.
http://www.latimes.com/features/health/la-he-bikesider22may22,1,1650163.story?page=1&ctrack=1&cset=true
even cites some wiki on vc concepts... :D
And this is in LA... wow.
That's two articles almost back to back about cycling... perhaps this is a new trend this cycling stuff, eh? :D
Hope so, but every year at springtime there seems to be a bunch of stories about riding a bike. It may be a little different this year because of the gas prices.
I posted a couple of stories (one in The National Post - Canada - and one in the International Herald-Tribune) and there was another one posted from the Miami Herald.
I hope it gets looked at a little more closely because the trend has always been the advantages coupled with scary stories of traffic collisions and road rage, when I don't think those things happen very often (certainly not any more often as they do to motorists).
I was featured as a cycling commuter in a Vancouver newspaper feature about commuting, and in a long interview, the reporter found out I had been hit by a car. It ended up being the headline. Didn't matter that I was one of tens of thousands of road collision victims, what mattered that I was on a bike when it happened. From my perspective, this was bad press because a reader will turn to the story, see a cyclist that was hit and think, "If I ride a bike, I'll get hit".
There were other stories of other people who commute to work in a more conventional way (bus, car, walking) but there were no stories of those people in any kind of accidents (hardly a fair treatment)
Not to bring the helmet war into this (and I don't mean to bother anyone here so keep in mind the point of improved health intended) but during Albertas' proposed helmet law legislation (defeated for adults) there was a radio talk show I heard that had a doctor call in. He said the leading cause of brain injuries were strokes and heart attacks and even with the amount of head injuries cyclists have without helmets, the best thing people could do to avoid brain injury was to cycle, because of the health benefit of cycling in preventing strokes and heart attacks. If more people cycled, health would improve and people would not only have less strokes, heart attacks, and other ailments would decline. He said some 80% of brain injury is aquired and only 20% is from trama, of which a tiny percentage were from bicycle accidents. If more rode bikes, that would improve the 80% of victims of aquired brain injury.
I hope the message that cycling, even including accidents and collisions, benefits health, gets out there and that people don't needlessly over-worry about potential accidents (that may never occur).
There is a third article too... it is about how to get started.
http://www.latimes.com/features/health/la-he-bikesider22may22,1,1650163.story?page=1&ctrack=1&cset=true
even cites some wiki on vc concepts... :D
And this is in LA... wow.
You're not kidding!
• One of the best and safest approaches to riding around town is "vehicular cycling" (VC), which Wikipedia defines as "the practice of driving bicycles on public roads in a manner which is visible, predictable, and in accordance with the rules of the road for operating a vehicle," en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicular_cycling.
Woo hoo! At least the LA Times gets it! That's more than I can I say for some of the members here...
Previous -
Top -
Next
Copyright 1999 - 2007
BikeForums.Net - All rights reserved.
Common bike forum topics in clue bicycles, cycling, mountain biking,
cycling jerseys, shorts, socks, shoes and bike equiptment selection.