Commuting - Throat Cancer

So I met another cyclist this afternoon on the bike un-friendly roads of Mississauga. He told me he wears a mask because of the pollutants, that eventually gave throat cancer. I was just in disbelief. Does anyone else wear a mask for these purposes? I wear mine simply for the cold...but never thought of wearing a for anything else.

Probably get run over before you die of cancer caused by riding, but whatever makes you happy

So I met another cyclist this afternoon on the bike un-friendly roads of Mississauga. He told me he wears a mask because of the pollutants, that eventually gave throat cancer. I was just in disbelief. Does anyone else wear a mask for these purposes? I wear mine simply for the cold...but never thought of wearing a for anything else.

wuss, it's only cold enough for a mask when it gets below -15°C then again you are in Canada so it actually might be. Everything gives you cancer though, even the fibers in your mask, so really you are not saving yourself.

brad has it right, you have a better chance to get hit by a car and die than getting cancer.

Unless it is an N-95 mask, it will not prevent particulates that cause cancer from entering your respiratory tract. No physician would say "you got throat cancer from XYZ". That was this persons own hypothesis of what caused his head/neck cancer.

Head/neck cancer is fairly rare and carcinogenesis is not well understood.

http://dvice.com/pics/steamgas.jpg

http://dvice.com/pics/steamgas.jpg
http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/starwars/images/thumb/0/0a/Lando7.jpg/800px-Lando7.jpg

:lol:

So I met another cyclist this afternoon on the bike un-friendly roads of Mississauga. He told me he wears a mask because of the pollutants, that eventually gave throat cancer. I was just in disbelief. Does anyone else wear a mask for these purposes? I wear mine simply for the cold...but never thought of wearing a for anything else.


I just use a mask made out of tinfoil, since I have so much around - it keeps the .gov out of my head, so it ought to keep the cancers out of my throat, right?

http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w66/darthdilbert/Blog/its_a_conspiracy.jpg

Does he wear one when he's in his office/at home/walking to the shops. If not then it's pointless wearing one when cycling for that reason. The only time when out cycling your likely to inhale anything extra worth mentioning compared to what you'd inhale in day to day life anyway is if you get stuck behind a large lorry/bus or something.

It will probably be so rarely that your stuck in the cloud of a lorry for any amount of time that it's just not worth it, and as a percentage extra of all the other things that you encounter throught the day that will give you cancer it's tiny.

I mean even standing next to a kettle will increase your chance of cancer, eating toast increases your chance of cancer, everything seems to increase your chance of cancer. Heck, me sitting typing this message is probably increasing my chance of cancer as much as a cycle ride would.

I don't even know how much those masks filter stuff out, I've never bothered reading into it

I always figured I would die of suffocation if I tried wearing an N95 mask while cycling. I think I'll take cancer over asphyxiation, thanks.

Ok....well I understand what you all are saying. That the odds are rare and nobody can truly make the link.

That being said, MANY MANY times, a truck, bus, pick up truck passes by and I end up inhaling the exhaust fumes. That's what he associated his cancer to. Now, maybe he did get it from something else... but heck...those exhaust fumes can't be good for anyone.

This is what he was wearing http://www.mec.ca/Products/product_detail.jsp?PRODUCT%3C%3Eprd_id=845524442095791&FOLDER%3C%3Efolder_id=2534374302882532&bmUID=1225327910556

http://images.mec.ca/media/Images/Products/Cycling/4016219_v1_m56577569830706545.jpg

An N-95 mask would do nothing to filter out toxic/carcinogenic fumes.

Did he mention the 3 packs a day that he smoked for 18 years?

Road pollution is all around us. Wearing a mask while riding is just wishful thinking on his part. He's probably in at least as much danger from house dust that he breaths in while sleeping.

That being said, MANY MANY times, a truck, bus, pick up truck passes by and I end up inhaling the exhaust fumes. That's what he associated his cancer to. Now, maybe he did get it from something else... but heck...those exhaust fumes can't be good for anyone.
Ride faster so that MANY MANY trucks, buses, and pickup trucks won't pass you.

Ride faster so that MANY MANY trucks, buses, and pickup trucks won't pass you.

right....i'll pump my speed up to 65 km/hr.. because im THAT fast.... lol

there have been several studies showing that the air in the interior of an automobile has far more carcinogenics and pollutants than the air surrounding the automobile. Due to the fire ******ants *(OMG! The GD censoring software just x'ed out the word re tard ants!) and plastics used in production of an automobile. These decompose over the life of the automobile into the air in the car. This combined with the outside air on the streets and highways is evidently a pretty toxic mix.

If you're going to wear a mask- wear it when you drive.

[QUOTE=BCRider;7757838]Did he mention the 3 packs a day that he smoked for 18 years?

I had cancer of the larnyx in 95 and lost all of one vocal chord and half of the other. I smoked 2 packs a day for 30 years. Most of the laryngectomies I've talked to smoked, worked in petro-chemical or the rag trade.

The only effect today is that I have to stay well hydrated or my throat itches.

Even though I live in a heavily populated county of 3.5 million, the traffic along most of the roads that I use is fairly light and there are few diesel trucks. The county transit system has replaced most of the diesel buses with CNG buses, which spew less than half the pollutants and particulates of diesels. Even the garbage trucks and street sweeper vehicles (my favorite city workers) have CNG vehicles. The biggest breathing hazard here is the general air pollution levels. Most of the time the AQI is between 50 and 100. This time of year, AQI gets above 100 fairly often when the wind slows down. Luckily this year we have not had any large wildfires in the nearby hills. Last year we had massive firestorms that dumped incredible particulate pollution into the air, resulting in a rainfall of ashes for almost 2 weeks. I was off the bike for that time last year, because the particle levels were so bad they exceeded the maximum amount of the air quality index scale. I had to wear particle breathing masks to walk to the bus stop and from bus stop into work.

Only an asbestos mask will stop those pollutants.

I hate cycling on a busy road if there's no cross wind. I dunno about cancer but it sure doesn't smell good.

You'd really need something like a P100 cartridge filter mask to effectively filter out the kinds of things you're exposed to when riding in traffic: Oil containing particulates and vapours.
An inexpensive half mask respirator can cost as little as $12.00, but then you have to buy the cartridges separately, and they'll run you about $25.00 a pair and you have to swap them out after their exposure lifespan, or else they lose efficacy.

Ah, this thread reminds me of Beijing -

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/06/sports/olympics/06masks.html

So I met another cyclist this afternoon on the bike un-friendly roads of Mississauga. He told me he wears a mask because of the pollutants, that eventually gave throat cancer. I was just in disbelief. Does anyone else wear a mask for these purposes? I wear mine simply for the cold...but never thought of wearing a for anything else.

I don't think most facemasks are good enough to filter out the dangerous but very small cancer inducing particles. Research indicates however, that cyclists and pedestrians are less at risk than car drivers. The car drivers may not smell the fumes as easily, but since they may ride directly behind other cars, the dangerous particles are sucked in through the air intakes into the drivers compartment.

--
Regards

there have been several studies showing that the air in the interior of an automobile has far more carcinogenics and pollutants than the air surrounding the automobile. Due to the fire ******ants *(OMG! The GD censoring software just x'ed out the word re tard ants!) and plastics used in production of an automobile. These decompose over the life of the automobile into the air in the car. This combined with the outside air on the streets and highways is evidently a pretty toxic mix.

If you're going to wear a mask- wear it when you drive.

Isn't this a lot like the helmet debate? Worried about one (unlikely) thing and dealing with it via a piece of equipment that is suspect in it's effectiveness, while ignoring the same threat in a different setting that is just as pressing?

Did the auto industry design all thier vehicles so the exhaust pipes would
smog pedestrians into getting a car? That thought crosses my mind
while I suck on exhaust from pipe after pipe after pipe. :(

I live in southern Taiwan, one of the many polluted cities in Southeast Asia, and, aside from the comments above, can honestly say there is a difference when wearing the mask.

I actually use the exact same mask above, as it is (supposedly) rated for aerosol and particulate matter using activated charcoal. Considering the pollution here, as compared to the U.S. and Canada, is about 10x worse and would be an asthmatics nightmare, I won't ride a day without my mask.

I doubt it filters exhaust, as I can still smell it through the mask, but it definitely reduces many of the other smells typical of this area. The majority of the pollution here is particulate matter - sulfides and the like from all the coal fired power plants, other nasty bits from all the garbage they burn (anything not recycled goes into the incinerator), flame-off from the petro-chemical refineries around every corner and massive amounts of dust and debris blown in from China / Gobi Desert / etc. The mask is fantastic for the particulates each of these generates, and definitely reduces allergies.

When I got off the plane 3+ years ago, I had an allergic attack immediately, so much so that I lost 90% of my hearing (temporarily) due to sinus / eustachian inflammation. Took a month to recover, but I wrote it off as just being overseas. During the course of my first year here, I was sick, on average, once every 3 weeks. I developed pneumonia, bronchitis and a chronic, wracking cough that lasted over 3 months.

Some friends who were leaving sold me the Respro Techno mask and extra filters. I've worn it every day since and have been sick, on average, twice a year ever since.

Is it the level of protection I really should get for living here? No. Does it make a difference? Yes. Will it prevent cancer? Who knows.

If you find you get chest infections, coughs, etc. more often than friends and family, it's worth a shot. If you live some where like the picture below, where you can't see the other side of the street on most winter days, you should probably get the mask. Also, I recommend multiple HEPA filters, house plants and sealant around every available opening (that's what I've done).

The first shot was from one of the worst days of pollution I've ever seen. It was a cloudless late autumn day around noon. I went inside a Carrefore (kinda like Wal-Mart) and it was even hazy in there.

The second is from a leg of the Tour De Taiwan '08 which went right by my house. The large, two-legged building in the background is about 100 feet shorter than the Empire State Building and less than 1 mile from where the picture was taken. The haze here was more typical, as you can easily see every detail of the building on a clear day.

What struck me more about the event, though, was hearing a foreign racer in the peloton call out to his team manager (shouting encouragement from the sidelines) that he "just couldn't breathe."

I don't have to sit directly behind a car or truck very often (perhaps once a day), but when I do I might turn my head or cover my face a little so I'm not so directly breathing in the exhaust.

If this thread really hits on anything it is the insanity of car-obsession - that we can't even bike down a road without worrying about getting cancer from doing it. It would be nice to see one percent of the effort aimed at second-hand smoke being directed at exhaust. The problem is, all of the anti-smoking nannies want to drive cars too. Apparently, driving is more important than everything else. We live in a ****ed up world.

I don't have to sit directly behind a car or truck very often (perhaps once a day), but when I do I might turn my head or cover my face a little so I'm not so directly breathing in the exhaust.

If anything this thread really hits on it is the inanity of car-obsession - that we can't even bike down a road without worrying about getting cancer from doing it. It would be nice to see one percent of the effort aimed at second-hand smoke being directed at exhaust. The problem is, all of the anti-smoking nannies want to drive cars too. Apparently, driving is more important than everything else. We live in a ****ed up world.

Yep. On Tuesday, after work, I threw my panniers on my LHT to run down the hill to the super for some milk, yogurt, and dog food for the following morning. It was already dark out, but I had on my blinky, a good headlight, and a reflective sash. (Probably overkill, but I live in a pretty rural area with two lane winding roads, and I don't want to take chances.) Anyways, the neighbor was outside watering the lawn (despite the fact we are in a drought :mad:) and he says to me, "Don't you worry about getting run over and killed?"

I bristled a bit, but the kids were within earshot, and I didn't want to start something NEW with him, so I just waived, and went on my way. As I was riding, though, I started thinking about the risk of this way of life. I'm sure there are multiple ways to slice and dice the numbers, but it would be interesting to see if anybody has done any sort of statistical analysis to determine whether riding on a daily basis actually increases or decreases someone's projected life span. Obviously, on the plus side, there is the fitness issue. On the downside, the risk of "catastrophic injury or death" (or so says my owners manual).

My guess is it comes out on the side of the cyclist, so long as (s)he is sensible, wears a helmet and obeys the law. For me, the cycling is only part of the equation. When I started riding again, I started eating better, which led to me getting stronger, which helped me ride more, which made me want to start training again, etc.

My guess is it comes out on the side of the cyclist, so long as (s)he is sensible, wears a helmet and obeys the law. For me, the cycling is only part of the equation. When I started riding again, I started eating better, which led to me getting stronger, which helped me ride more, which made me want to start training again, etc.

+1. And note that most of the perceived danger actually has nothing to do with cycling, but has everything to do with cars. A local newspaper did an article on my commuting and the response was overwhelmingly postive, but many expressed concerned about getting hit by a car. So the solution is... to drive one of those cars?? This selfish, "me first and only" line of thinking has clearly been corrosive to society. If we were all riding bikes instead of Dodge Durangos, I doubt we'd be seeing 40,000+ killed yearly as we do with cars.

With that being said, it is also important for cyclists to make proper preparations and ride responibility as you say.

Not to derail the thread, but speaking of those masks.... I got one more for the cold than the pollution and as it was 4 below this morning I used it for the first time. Well, it fogged my safety glasses something fierce. Any secrets to avoiding that when using one?

My guess is it comes out on the side of the cyclist, so long as (s)he is sensible, wears a helmet and obeys the law.

Those wouldn't have made my top three.

...I'm sure there are multiple ways to slice and dice the numbers, but it would be interesting to see if anybody has done any sort of statistical analysis to determine whether riding on a daily basis actually increases or decreases someone's projected life span...

Multiple studies have been done that show commuter cyclists live longer than their motorized brethren.

For as much as people worry about trauma, it's poor health that gets them in the end. Only 4% of deaths are due to accidents, most of the rest are from conditions that cycling helps to prevent.

When trauma does lead to a death, it's most often in a MVA.

Deaths to cyclists are about on par with deaths from falling out of bed or choking on food and further down the list of dying from falling down the stairs.

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1375/655932140_f672bca6fc_o.jpg

Not to derail the thread, but speaking of those masks.... I got one more for the cold than the pollution and as it was 4 below this morning I used it for the first time. Well, it fogged my safety glasses something fierce. Any secrets to avoiding that when using one?

Make sure that metal piece at the nose bridge is snug and allow a little gap at the bottom. That usually helps.

+1. And note that most of the perceived danger actually has nothing to do with cycling, but has everything to do with cars. A local newspaper did an article on my commuting and the response was overwhelmingly postive, but many expressed concerned about getting hit by a car. So the solution is... to drive one of those cars?? This selfish, "me first and only" line of thinking has clearly been corrosive to society. If we were all riding bikes instead of Dodge Durangos, I doubt we'd be seeing 40,000+ killed yearly as we do with cars.

With that being said, it is also important for cyclists to make proper preparations and ride responibility as you say.

+1. Selfishness is the root cause of many ills in our society.

If you ride in a heavily populated urban environment you are going to be breathing air that is not as clean as the air in outlying areas but will still inhale far less carcinogens that the folks in those cages because they are trapped and the air circulation is poor.

Cars themselves also hold pollutants in their upholstery and carpet.

I work as a messenger and the air quality downtown is still far better than the air quality was at the machine shop I was working at... working there was akin to spending time in Mexico city where the air can be quite toxic.

Only an asbestos mask will stop those pollutants.

Good idea! With a lead dust lining, it will work twice as put the OP's mind to rest!

Kee-Rice; what some people strain their brain to worry about!

this is less a worry about throat cancer, but more on lung petrification.

I do a lot of unavoidable exercise in the desert where windblown clay/silt/other random crap in the air is suspended nearly year-long. Does anyone have experience with the Sportsmask? http://groupweston.com/mu2.asp

The only time I'd consider wearing a mask like that is if I biked by fields they were spraying with pesticide on a regular (and unavoidable) basis.

Isn't this a lot like the helmet debate? Worried about one (unlikely) thing and dealing with it via a piece of equipment that is suspect in it's effectiveness, while ignoring the same threat in a different setting that is just as pressing?

No, it's not and yes it is.

Wearing a helmet will decrease your chances of becoming a vegetable, just because you toppled over while trying to impress everyone doing a track stand at the light and hit your head on the curb.

Similarly, you can take care of the obvious links to oral cancer by quitting smoking and any other behaviours linked by science to oral cancers.

Let me tell you, as a 2-time "survivor" of oral cancer, that you do not want to go where I have been and where I now sit, with the after-effects of cancer treatment. I don't wear a mask or take many other precautions when I cycle (avs. 8500 km/py) If a survivor chooses to wear a mask or any other device, or stand on their heads drinking wheat grass, fearing a return to the agonies of cancer treatment, then I fully understand their choice.

I would say walk a mile in their shoes, but I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy.

this is less a worry about throat cancer, but more on lung petrification.
my understanding is that doing damage to your lungs is not out of the question in very polluted areas. I really doubt that there is much of a risk of throat cancer.

dealing with it via a piece of equipment that is suspect in it's effectiveness


...Wearing a helmet will decrease your chances of becoming a vegetable, just because you toppled over while trying to impress everyone doing a track stand at the light and hit your head on the curb...

equipment that is suspect in it's effectiveness

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_helmet

CTC position paper on helmets:

Evidence for the efficacy of helmets in preventing serious injury is contradictory and inconclusive...Overall, according to CTC, the UK's national cyclists organisation, "the evidence currently available is complex and full of contradictions, providing at least as much support for those who are sceptical as for those who swear by them."

and from the UK Department of Transport

http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roadsafety/research/rsrr/theme1/bicyclehelmetsreviewofeffect4726?page=11#a1050

The purpose of this section is to summarise the range of arguments that have been deployed in the bicycle helmet debate and to consider some of the ways in which this debate has been conducted. A selection of papers from the late 1980s/2002 were chosen for analysis; largely editorials and opinion pieces with associated correspondence from the main journals in the field together with reports from various interest groups and associations...

In terms of tone, the bicycle helmet debate can best be described as sour and tetchy. Neither side seems willing to concede that there can be alternative points of view. Both sides can descend into language that reflects little credit for either, for instance, expressions such as irresponsible zealots who oppose legislation find their counterpart in helmet advocates dismissed as do gooders and mandarins of health promotion. This can be disappointing for those seeking enlightenment from the debate. A notable exception to this seems to be the contribution by Unwin (1996) who steps back from the details to discuss the overall criteria upon which the debate should be founded...

Key points

The pro-bicycle helmet group base their argument overwhelmingly on one major point: that there is scientific evidence that, in the event of a fall, helmets substantially reduce head injury.

The anti-helmet group base their argument on a wider range of issues including: compulsory helmet wearing leads to a decline in bicycling, risk compensation theory negates health gains, scientific studies are defective, the overall road environment needs to be improved.

The way in which the debate has been conducted is unhelpful to those wishing to make a balanced judgement on the issue.

I don't have to sit directly behind a car or truck very often (perhaps once a day), but when I do I might turn my head or cover my face a little so I'm not so directly breathing in the exhaust.

When I'm in line behind any vehicle, I try to position myself where I can be behind the city buses. Those are my favorite. If you work on it, you can track stand close enough that you can actually just leech right onto the pipe (if you also have the buses with the elevated tailpipes) and breath deep.
It's what I expect on my rides and it only makes it worthwhile. When I fail to get my inhales of exhaust... I just get home, disrobe and lay in the middle of the floor in the fetal position. I usually mumble and drool at the same time.
:love: