Pollution

Gazzaputt

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12298562#dna-comments

Absolute tosh.

Kieran_Burns

Wow. What an amazing non-story. I just wasted 5 minutes of my life on that rubbish.

il_principe

Why does the article come with a photo that was quite clearly taken in the 80's?

Load of old shite.

cjcp

/\ /\ What those guys said.

Headhuunter

Yeah that is an amazing retro cycling photo! Must be at least 20 years old if not 25.... I don't see why it's a non story though. It raises the same concerns that other similar articles do. It comes to no conclusion but then it seems there are no particularly conclusions to reach on this, but it offers a fairly balanced view of the effects of pollution...

cjcp

Headhuunter wrote:

Yeah that is an amazing retro cycling photo! Must be at least 20 years old if not 25.... I don't see why it's a non story though. It raises the same concerns that other similar articles do. It comes to no conclusion but then it seems there are no particularly conclusions to reach on this, but it offers a fairly balanced view of the effects of pollution...

But that's part of the problem isn't it? It just says some stuff and offers no conclusions.

Headhuunter

cjcp wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

Yeah that is an amazing retro cycling photo! Must be at least 20 years old if not 25.... I don't see why it's a non story though. It raises the same concerns that other similar articles do. It comes to no conclusion but then it seems there are no particularly conclusions to reach on this, but it offers a fairly balanced view of the effects of pollution...

But that's part of the problem isn't it? It just says some stuff and offers no conclusions.

The conclusion in most of these types of articles seems to be that cyclists breath more deeply therefore take in a lot of pollutants. PM10 pollutants get into your lungs more deeply and these often come from (dirty, under maintained) diesel engines. You're better off trying to find a route away from major arterial commuter roads. Sunny, still days are the worst because ground level ozone and other photochemical pollutants are at their highest. Overall, yuo're probably improving your health by cycling

cjcp

Headhuunter wrote:

cjcp wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

Yeah that is an amazing retro cycling photo! Must be at least 20 years old if not 25.... I don't see why it's a non story though. It raises the same concerns that other similar articles do. It comes to no conclusion but then it seems there are no particularly conclusions to reach on this, but it offers a fairly balanced view of the effects of pollution...

But that's part of the problem isn't it? It just says some stuff and offers no conclusions.

The conclusion in most of these types of articles seems to be that cyclists breath more deeply therefore take in a lot of pollutants. PM10 pollutants get into your lungs more deeply and these often come from (dirty, under maintained) diesel engines. You're better off trying to find a route away from major arterial commuter roads. Sunny, still days are the worst because ground level ozone and other photochemical pollutants are at their highest. Overall, yuo're probably improving your health by cycling

Yep, definitely. Staying fit helps keep my asthma under control. The article's headline should focus on the cause of the pollution.

notsoblue

The problem with articles like this is that they come to no progressive conclusion, and that they simply give those half heartedly considering it another excuse not to cycle.