It seems that they didn't take nutrition into account at all. How much of this study is just "people who exercise just eat better"?
I cycle to work everyday off year I am mostly cheese and beer
Not clear on that, but even if you had a poor diet and exercised regularly, you'd still be better off than if you had a poor diet and were totally sedentary.
That seems reasonable but that's also what this study was supposed to put to the test so we can't just assume it.
many comments saying “duh cardio good” ignore the corollary to this: a society that prevents bike commuting due to dangerous or inaccessible car-centric infrastructure is performing social violence and causing prevetable death
edit: similar considerations apply to the obesity epidemic.
"Groundbreaking study finds that cardio is good for you"
YOU wont BELIEVE this ONE WEIRD TRICK that cardiologists HATE!
I don't believe in cardio. It's a conspiracy created by Big Exercise.
I think you mean curvy exercise
We must now do a new study to see if walking more each day extends your life.
And then another study to see if jogging extends your life.
And other to see if swimming can extend your life.
Isn't this essentially "exercise is good for you"?
It's also reassuring people like the dozen nervous nellies in this thread that cycle commuting (ie specifically biking through the city with traffic on a daily basis) is a net benefit despite the perceived risks.
Exercise is good for you and being able to afford to live somewhere biking to work is a viable means of transportation.
The nuance is that exercise that's baked into people's everyday routines gets done, and so extends healthy life. Exercise that requires extra time and effort gets done a lot less. This is why everyday physical activity through moving around is so important
This is part of why I like working a trades job. On a big install i can easily walk down and back up the customer's basement stairs 25 times. I get to use my muscles on wrenches and hammers. It isnt as good or consistent as exercise at a gym and I should be doing yoga more often to help with driving related posture, repetitive movements from work, and overall muscle maintenance, but I'm at least more active than a desk job.
I would have a signficantly shorter lifespan when I get run down by a ford
What happens when you get ran over by a Toyota instead?
Apparently bike commuters still come out ahead, judging by the wording.
I read another study that said even downhill MTB riders still come out ahead on average, despite the much higher risk of injuries, so it seems likely that commuters are still better off too.
Excuses, bring AR while cycling. /s
You joke, but I bet a visibly armed cyclist get messed with a lot less. I usually just opt for a camera though, being visibly armed can get you targeted by people who either want a gun or already have one and are about to do something terrible.
You clearly just need a more heavily armoured bike. You should start running down the fords!
Reactive armor: If they're going to take you out, they're gonna go too!
[pretend I posted that picture of a cargo bike hauling propane here]
To follow this advice, I'd end up getting my bike out of the garage, riding around the block ... then going back inside to turn on my work laptop. I love working from home.
That being said, a 15 minute morning bike ride before work would still be a good idea.
With remote work I found having a routine to start and end the day help separate it, was killing some hobbies because was hard for my brain to separate them, so a fake commutes would actually probably be amazing for that.
Go get breakfast then come back and start working? I did that when I was remote and it wasn't a 1:1 replacement for a good ride but it was still pretty good.
Breakfast is in my kitchen. A quick ride while I wait for the coffee to brew wouldn't be a bad thing, though
When I work from home, I bike with my dog for 20-30 minutes in the morning. On office days, I only bike 5 minutes to the train station…
I used to have a wonderful 11km bike commute along the river, my favorite of all time.
That sounds pretty nice, but I'd just be happy with a system of protected trails where I live. I still ride but it can get pretty dangerous in some spots (this is why I ride with a camera and at least one means of self defense though, and a helmet of course).
I only bike with the dog on protected lines, definitely crucial!
wonderful 11km bike commute along the river
That sounds lovely! I live in a city that has parkways and greenery along most of the river front -- if that were my route to work each day, I'd find it rather soothing. Beautiful path.
You can still use the bike for shopping and the like. It's still good to get out on WFH days.
I suppose I could. It's not super practical, though. I don't have panniers on my bike, limiting the amount I can carry*
Also, it's a 20 minute bike ride to my usual grocery store - bad for cold stuff (only 5 minutes to the expen$ive local shop, TBF)*
Really, though, my wife picks up more of the groceries than I do -- she has a 20 minute drive to work, and the grocery store is only a 5 minute detour by car.
*(the starred items are minor obstacles, not deal-breakers. The more honest answer is "but biking would take more time!" which ... ok, is just laziness).
I have an enormous basket on the electric bike, room enough for groceries, and not even a bad ride to the store, but there is nowhere to secure it. Any half-assed locking of a bike here means no bike when you come out of the store!
I do ride to work but can park it inside the office.
From the sound of it, the cops never seem to care when it comes to bike thefts. Kind of a hidden hazard of riding.
Makes me wonder to what degree the longer life offsets the carbon savings from bike commuting.
I figure that would vary wildly depending on how the individual lives.
This feels like Hanks Razor would apply. Proximity to work, dedicated bike infrastructure and availability and quality of bikes are all pretty good stand ins for socioeconomic factors having a strong impact on the outcome.
Plus. Let’s say I have a chronic disease or am generally in weak health. I’m going to have a lower life expectancy, and I’m not going to be able to bike to work.
Correlation ≠ Causation
A lot of the costs can even out a bit more if you can manage to live car free. No car payments, insurance, repairs or gas is all extra money that can go to a decent bicycle and a higher cost for rent/mortgage. You can also advocate for biking improvements in your local area.
new study confirms
No it doesn't. Their conclusion is "This study strengthens the evidence that active commuting has population-level health benefits and can contribute to reduced morbidity and mortality."
sounds like confirmation to me, an apt popular science headline. maybe you think “confirms” means “proves”?
Confirm pretty much does mean prove, especially in this context.
false, sorry op/mod you are wrong especially in this context: https://iep.utm.edu/confirmation-and-induction/
Sorry, maybe it's just been a long day but I don't quite see how that means that confirmation does not mean anything other than it is either proven or at least very likely to be the case.
The first sentence is
The term “confirmation” is used in epistemology and the philosophy of science whenever observational data and evidence “speak in favor of” or support scientific theories and everyday hypotheses. "
I haven't exhaustively read every bit of the webpage but so far I am not seeing anything that contradicts the above. What am I missing here?
proven or at least very likely to be the case.
two very different things :) scientific folks try to be very specific with their language
Well, english is not my first language, but according to Google (they get their word meanings from Oxford) "confirm" means "establish the truth or correctness of (something previously believed or suspected to be the case)." Perhaps in this specific situation "confirm" has different meaning?
Also, there is a lot wrong how science is communicated in popular media. Taking singular study, coming up with sensational (and incorrect) title and making statements that aren't in line with the study is not the way how science should be communicated. Even if there are multiple news outlets writing numerous such articles doesn't make it right, correct or even acceptable.
definitely not trying to speak well of all popular science titles, just saying that this one seems perfectly acceptable :)
and yeah, that Oxford dictionary isn’t giving you the definition used in the scientific sense, so that’s your problem:
The term “confirmation” is used in epistemology and the philosophy of science whenever observational data and evidence “speak in favor of” or support scientific theories and everyday hypotheses. utm.edu
i checked Oxford Learner’s, and the meaning used in this context is number 2 just below what you found.
to make a position, an agreement, etc. more definite or official; to establish somebody/something clearly
language is confusing but this is definitely the scientific one the article means.
Ha not in my town.
Ebikes, bicycles, scooters, skateboards, longboards, eboards, motorcycles, skates, unicycles: Whatever floats your goat, this is all things micromobility!
"Transportation using lightweight vehicles such as bicycles or scooters, especially electric ones that may be borrowed as part of a self-service rental program in which people rent vehicles for short-term use within a town or city.
micromobility is seen as a potential solution to moving people more efficiently around cities"
Feel free to also check out
It's a little sad that we need to actually say this, but:
Don't be an asshole or you will be permanently banned.
Respectful debate is totally OK, criticizing a product is fine, but being verbally abusive will not be tolerated.
Focus on discussing the idea, not attacking the person.