Times article urban cycling and heart disease

Did anyone see the article in yesterday's Times? I coudn't see how to
make a link, so here it is.
-----

Urban cyclists raise their risk of heart disease
Sarah-Kate Templeton, Medical Correspondent


CYCLISTS may be doing themselves more harm than good by pedalling to
the office along congested roads, according to pioneering research by
the British Heart Foundation.

After just one hour of cycling through traffic, tests showed
microscopic particles in diesel fumes caused significant damage to
blood vessels, increasing the risk of heart disease.

Those cycling at high speeds in the hope of improving their fitness
levels are doing themselves the most damage by breathing in a higher
volume of the polluted air.

The current system of locating most cycle paths in bus lanes has the
perverse effect of forcing cyclists to inhale the most dangerous air,
spewed out by diesel-powered buses and taxis. The number of
diesel-engined cars in Britain has also increased dramatically from
1.6m to 5m between 1994 and 2004.

The health warning will dismay the large numbers of commuters who have
switched to bicycles to improve their fitness, to avoid high fuel
prices or, in London, because they fear another terrorist attack on
public transport.

There is no dispute in principle about the health benefits of cycling
— it improves the circulation, keeps weight down and boosts overall
fitness — yet the new research indicates that they could be outweighed
by the polluted conditions of a busy road.

Dr David Newby, British Heart Foundation senior lecturer in cardiology
at Edinburgh University, said: “Cycling through congested traffic
exposes the cyclist to high levels of air pollution, especially as the
exercise of cycling increases breathing and the individual’s exposure.
This is bad for the heart.”

In his tests 15 healthy men cycled on exercise bikes in a chamber
while being exposed to levels of diluted diesel exhaust comparable to
the air they would inhale cycling along a congested city road.

The men cycled for one hour. Six hours after exposure to the fumes,
damage was detected to their blood vessels. The blood vessels became
less flexible and there was a reduction of a protein that breaks down
blood clots in the heart. This damage is associated with the early
stages of heart disease.

Diesel exhaust includes nanoparticles of carbon and a range of metals.
The particulates are so tiny that experts say it is pointless for
cyclists to wear masks, because the mesh cannot be fine enough to
block them.

Newby said: “While they are exercising, cyclists breathe two to three
times as much air as car drivers. We need to locate cycle lanes away
from major roads.” Newby’s research has been submitted to the journal
Circulation.

Next month the Committee on the Medical Effects of Air Pollutants, a
government advisory body, will publish a report highlighting the risks
of heart disease from traffic pollution.

Jon Ayres, chairman of the committee, says that typical urban traffic
pollution poses the same risk of heart disease as passive smoking.

------


Best wishes,
--
,,
(**)PeeWiglet~~
/ \ / \ pee AT [guessthisbit].co.uk

"Peewiglet" wrote in message
...
Did anyone see the article in yesterday's Times? I coudn't see how to
make a link, so here it is.

What's the betting the proposed solution is to make the victims change their
behaviour, not the actual causes.... move the cyclists away, not decrease
the traffic...

Moi, a cynic?? ;-)

Cheers, helen s

Peewiglet wrote:
Did anyone see the article in yesterday's Times? I coudn't see how to
make a link, so here it is.
-----

Urban cyclists raise their risk of heart disease
Sarah-Kate Templeton, Medical Correspondent


CYCLISTS may be doing themselves more harm than good by pedalling to
the office along congested roads, according to pioneering research by
the British Heart Foundation.


Hmm... is the air inside the traffic producing the fumes any better I
wonder?

--
Chris

wafflycat wrote:

"Peewiglet" wrote in message
...

Did anyone see the article in yesterday's Times? I coudn't see how to
make a link, so here it is.


What's the betting the proposed solution is to make the victims change
their behaviour, not the actual causes.... move the cyclists away, not
decrease the traffic...

That would be as stated:
"We need to locate cycle lanes away from major roads."

I wonder if this 'damage' offsets the health benefits of cycling.

On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 14:23:12 +0100 someone who may be Peewiglet
wrote this:-

Did anyone see the article in yesterday's Times? I coudn't see how to
make a link, so here it is. [snip]

The current system of locating most cycle paths in bus lanes has the
perverse effect of forcing cyclists to inhale the most dangerous air,
spewed out by diesel-powered buses and taxis.

I suspect that the "dangerous air" is perfectly able to move to
adjacent general traffic lanes, where it will be sucked into the
passenger compartment of cars. ISTR concentrations of fumes inside
cars in congested conditions are up to three times as high as
outside.

In his tests 15 healthy men cycled on exercise bikes in a chamber
while being exposed to levels of diluted diesel exhaust comparable to
the air they would inhale cycling along a congested city road.

So, these "tests" didn't compare a cyclists with motorists (and
pedestrians and bus passengers) on a city street. Instead they are
theoretical and only look at cyclists.

I wonder if Mr Newby has learnt anything about how to undertake
experiments?

Newby said: “While they are exercising, cyclists breathe two to three
times as much air as car drivers. We need to locate cycle lanes away
from major roads.” Newby’s research has been submitted to the journal
Circulation.

Looks like Mr Newby has reached an opinion, "we need to locate cycle
lanes away from major roads" and then come up with "research" to
"justify" that opinion.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

Peewiglet wrote:

Did anyone see the article in yesterday's Times? I coudn't see how to
make a link, so here it is.
-----

Urban cyclists raise their risk of heart disease
Sarah-Kate Templeton, Medical Correspondent

There is no dispute in principle about the health benefits of cycling
— it improves the circulation, keeps weight down and boosts overall
fitness — yet the new research indicates that they could be outweighed
by the polluted conditions of a busy road.

Dr David Newby, British Heart Foundation senior lecturer in cardiology
at Edinburgh University, said: “Cycling through congested traffic
exposes the cyclist to high levels of air pollution, especially as the
exercise of cycling increases breathing and the individual’s exposure.
This is bad for the heart.”

And what about walking on city streets or sitting in a bus or car? Do
you suppose that doesn't expose you to pollutants at all? This is
flawed research in that it only looks at a small part of the fitness
ballance of cycling in cities.
--
Phil Cook looking north over the park to the "Westminster Gasworks"

Chris Smith wrote:
Peewiglet wrote:

Did anyone see the article in yesterday's Times? I coudn't see how to
make a link, so here it is.
-----

Urban cyclists raise their risk of heart disease
Sarah-Kate Templeton, Medical Correspondent

CYCLISTS may be doing themselves more harm than good by pedalling to
the office along congested roads, according to pioneering research by
the British Heart Foundation.


Hmm... is the air inside the traffic producing the fumes any better I
wonder?


I doubt it. I have vague recollections of a study which showed the air
inside cars was worse than outside. I guess the point is that if you're
cycling then you are breathing in rather more of it.

Pete

"Peewiglet" wrote in message
...
Did anyone see the article in yesterday's Times? I coudn't see how to
make a link, so here it is.
-----

Urban cyclists raise their risk of heart disease
Sarah-Kate Templeton, Medical Correspondent


CYCLISTS may be doing themselves more harm than good by pedalling to
the office along congested roads, according to pioneering research by
the British Heart Foundation.

After just one hour of cycling through traffic, tests showed
microscopic particles in diesel fumes caused significant damage to
blood vessels, increasing the risk of heart disease.

Those cycling at high speeds in the hope of improving their fitness
levels are doing themselves the most damage by breathing in a higher
volume of the polluted air.

The current system of locating most cycle paths in bus lanes has the
perverse effect of forcing cyclists to inhale the most dangerous air,
spewed out by diesel-powered buses and taxis.

....

Surely, experienced commuting cyclists will have already planned
journeys which avoid roads populated by buses and taxis, as far
as is possible?

snippage

In his tests 15 healthy men cycled on exercise bikes in a chamber
while being exposed to levels of diluted diesel exhaust comparable to
the air they would inhale cycling along a congested city road.

....

Again surely experienced commuting cyclists will have already planned
journeys which avoid the most congested city roads ?

....


Newby said: "While they are exercising, cyclists breathe two to three
times as much air as car drivers. We need to locate cycle lanes away
from major roads." Newby's research has been submitted to the journal
Circulation.

....

No. Many experienced commuting cyclists journeys will already
have been planned so as to avoid major roads. For any number
of reasons.

Measures to alleviate the effects of speed humps on rat runs,
such as compulsory gaps sufficient to accomodate cyclists
wanting to continue travelling at full speed in the absence
of any traffic at all, might be a more productive idea. Given
that we are living in the real world.

But there are probably no research grants or snappy headlines
in a mundane suggestion such as that.


michael adams

....

snippage



Best wishes,
--
,,
(**)PeeWiglet~~
/ \ / \ pee AT [guessthisbit].co.uk

Peewiglet wrote:

After just one hour of cycling through traffic, tests showed
microscopic particles in diesel fumes caused significant damage to
blood vessels, increasing the risk of heart disease.

There doesn't seem to have been a control group making the same journey
by car, bus, or any other means. What was found in their blood?

Jon Ayres, chairman of the committee, says that typical urban traffic
pollution poses the same risk of heart disease as passive smoking.

That'll be heavy passive smoking, as in working full-time in a smoky
venue, or being a child of heavy-smoking parents. For those of us
who do our best to avoid both forms of pollution, the traffic is
far-and-away the worse hazard.

--
Nick Kew

David Hansen wrote:

I wonder if Mr Newby has learnt anything about how to undertake
experiments?


Newby said: “While they are exercising, cyclists breathe two to three
times as much air as car drivers. We need to locate cycle lanes away

from major roads.” Newby’s research has been submitted to the journal

Circulation.


Looks like Mr Newby has reached an opinion, "we need to locate cycle
lanes away from major roads" and then come up with "research" to
"justify" that opinion.


And all from feeding particulate contaminated air to cyclists on
exercise bikes!



--
Tony

"I did make a mistake once - I thought I'd made a mistake but I hadn't"
Anon