Live long and prosper

The Rookie

"During the course of the study, regular cycling cut the risk of death from any cause by 41%, the incidence of cancer by 45% and heart disease by 46%.

The cyclists clocked an average of 30 miles per week, but the further they cycled the greater the health boon."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-39641122

meanredspider

What I always wonder with these studies is how long you need to have been doing this for and how quickly the effect diminishes when you retire.

asprilla

The Rookie wrote:

"...regular cycling cut the risk of death from any cause by 41%...."

Wait, what?

tgotb

Asprilla wrote:

The Rookie wrote:

"...regular cycling cut the risk of death from any cause by 41%...."

Wait, what?

That's what it says! So presumably, if we all continue cycling until we die, 41% of us can expect to live forever :-)

More seriously, I never quite understand what these stats actually mean; for instance, if my risk of dying from cancer and heart disease decreases by 40%, my risk of dying from other causes must surely increase to compensate (because I have a 100% chance of dying from something). So you could surely claim that cycling to work increases my risk of dying from (say) Alzheimers...

mrfpb

"Risk of Death" in these studies means risk of dying by a particular age, so possibly it means 41% less chance you'll die by 60 (or 65 or 70) compared to someone who drives to work or commuttes on their backside the whole way.

The Rookie

As above, say (as an example) in your 70th year a non cyclist has a 1% chance of dying in that year, then a cyclist only has a 0.59% chance of dying.

asprilla

I have no issue with the underlying statistics, I'm just wondering when we'll see a journalist in main stream media outlet that's capable of covering science without writing total garbage.

tgotb

That makes sense...

I wonder how much of the correlation is causal. In other words, to what extent your risk of death is reduced actually by cycling, vs being the sort of person who is predisposed to cycling. They seem to have adjusted for the obvious factors (like smoking), at least.

mrfpb wrote:

...compared to someone who drives to work or commuttes on their backside the whole way.

Does this mean I have to ride out of the saddle to get the full benefit? This could be a problem, I almost never get out of the saddle...

MrSweary

Asprilla wrote:

I have no issue with the underlying statistics, I'm just wondering when we'll see a journalist in main stream media outlet that's capable of covering science without writing total garbage.

Put it this way - your risk of death by the time that happens is 100%.

elbowloh

30 miles week?

My commute (and it don't do it often) is 18 miles each way.

Squawk

elbowloh wrote:

30 miles week?

My commute (and it don't do it often) is 18 miles each way.

If through London, your benefits are outweighed by the increased risk of close contact with Addison Lee drivers. Either that, or we're basically immortal (Mines 14 miles each way into London)