-
Isn't there a bit of a cause vs correlation issue with this?
“Cycle commuters had a 52 per cent lower risk of dying from heart disease and a 40 per cent lower risk of dying from cancer. They also had 46 per cent lower risk of developing heart disease and a 45 per cent lower risk of developing cancer at all,” the study’s authors wrote.
Just let those numbers soak in a bit. They truly are significant. If a pharmaceutical company created a pill that could reduce your chance of dying by almost half, with particular success against those stubborn scourges of humanity of cancer and heart disease, it would be heralded as a wonder drug. Luckily, this pill is already hanging from the rafters of your garage.
hoefla-
IIRC, the various Scandinavian studies have always been hesitant to claim cause/effect, and instead talks of finding a link.
This Swdish one for example:
" Researchers noted no minimum distance or time requirement, but they were clear that the results were observational. There is no strict cause-and-effect relationship between commuter biking and cardiovascular health. "There's also a huge Danish one, but struggle to find it right now.
-
Isn't there a bit of a cause vs correlation issue with this?
Again, if I understand you correctly, this was asked in the comments. The actual study paper makes it clear that they controlled for BMI, lifestyle etc to try and remove showing the unastonishing result that healthy people tend to cycle more.
starfish&coffee
mashton
Chin up:
http://shifter.info/forget-all-the-other-reasons-you-should-be-riding-a-bike-this-is-the-one-that-matters/