Irish cyclists looking for a €1b investment? - note stay on-topic warning, post #160

Chuchote

prinzeugen wrote: »

Most of that is rubbish.

A kid cycling to school will still be overweight if they have a bad diet. Cycling will not undo the xxl McDonald's they had the night before.

Kids will still cycle alongside parents (who will still walk) on the pavement making it hell for pedestrians.

As for freeing up the health service.. Nope.

I cycled a 8 mile round trip on my paper round as a teen, up at 06:30, 362 days of the year for 4 years in every form of Scottish weather (-14°c to 19°c)

Now aged 34, the doctors tell me that my knees & ankles are fecked and I am going to have big problems as I get older, and my circulatory system is like that of a 50 year old..

All thanks to cycling miles when I was younger. I think I will be more of a burden on the health service than a diabetic of someone with a dodgy ticker.

I'm very sorry to hear about your health problems, prinzeugen, but doubt very much they're to do with cycling in your youth.

I've cycled all my life, despite being a serious asthmatic, and now, at 67, my knees and ankles are absolutely fine, and my circulatory system is that of a 40-year-old.

In general, cycling will give kids a get-out to some extent even if their diet is bad. I agree absolutely with you that it's not right to feed kids lots of McFood - but a youngster who scarfs back a load of burger and chips and Coke and then sits into the car to be brought to school is at even more risk than a kid with the same diet who gets some exercise by cycling.

The main problem of the health service is lifestyle-caused diseases: heart disease is huge in Ireland, diabetes - even among children now - is a growing problem due to obesity, and hypertension is a growing danger. Building infrastructure that would get more people cycling is the main thing that would cut waiting lists and hospital overcrowding.

Of course there would still be people with familial heart disease and diabetes and hypertension, and of course there would still be people whose lifestyles wrecked their health, but cycleways would get many people out of their cars and cycling for the 40% of journeys that are under 4km.

magicbastarder

i think childhood obesity is more about issues with the parents, rather than giving the kids an outlet to burn a few more calories.

and burning off food is harder than you think. if strava is to be believed, i burn 500-600 calories an hour at about 26km/h, hauling my 80KG mass around.
a kid cycling half an hour a day to school would probably burn a couple of hundred calories at best. while it's certainly to be welcomed, it's no magic bullet.

Chuchote

magicbastarder wrote: »

i think childhood obesity is more about issues with the parents, rather than giving the kids an outlet to burn a few more calories.

and burning off food is harder than you think. if strava is to be believed, i burn 500-600 calories an hour at about 26km/h, hauling my 80KG mass around.
a kid cycling half an hour a day to school would probably burn a couple of hundred calories at best. while it's certainly to be welcomed, it's no magic bullet.

Yeah, but if there are safe, protected cycleways, kids will cycle to school, and then they'll also cycle with their friends, cycle to their friends' homes and back, go on trips on the bike together, etc.

Seaswimmer

magicbastarder wrote: »

i think childhood obesity is more about issues with the parents, rather than giving the kids an outlet to burn a few more calories.

and burning off food is harder than you think. if strava is to be believed, i burn 500-600 calories an hour at about 26km/h, hauling my 80KG mass around.
a kid cycling half an hour a day to school would probably burn a couple of hundred calories at best. while it's certainly to be welcomed, it's no magic bullet.

true but hopefully it will get them into a lifelong habit of cycling thus leading to a far healthier population in a generation or 2.

magicbastarder

Chuchote wrote: »

Yeah, but if there are safe, protected cycleways, kids will cycle to school, and then they'll also cycle with their friends, cycle to their friends' homes and back, go on trips on the bike together, etc.

you've never played minecraft, have you?

AndrewJRenko

prinzeugen wrote: »

I cycled a 8 mile round trip on my paper round as a teen, up at 06:30, 362 days of the year for 4 years in every form of Scottish weather (-14°c to 19°c)

Now aged 34, the doctors tell me that my knees & ankles are fecked and I am going to have big problems as I get older, and my circulatory system is like that of a 50 year old..

All thanks to cycling miles when I was younger. I think I will be more of a burden on the health service than a diabetic of someone with a dodgy ticker.

prinzeugen wrote: »

j

Must change doctors as he must know feck all:rolleyes:

You really should think about changing doctors. Good doctors all over the world are prescribing cycling for health (Google it), and your guy apparently is the one doctor in the world blaming very modest amounts of exercise for a range of issues that cycling normally helps, not hinders.

jwwb

magicbastarder wrote: »

i think childhood obesity is more about issues with the parents, rather than giving the kids an outlet to burn a few more calories.

Compare the advertising budget that I have as a parent to that of a MNC.

There is a whole raft of reasons for childhood obesity. Look at the cliff that sports participation falls off at around 12-14. The cheapness of bad food. The difficulty in getting casual exercise such as walking or cycling to school due to real or perceived dangers.

Roadhawk

Obesity in general is not going to solved by exercise alone. There are many factors that can contribute including:

Genetics, Family lifestyle, Inactivity, unhealthy diet, medical problems, certain medications, social and economic issues, age, pregnancy, giving up smoking and lack of sleep.

At best, (social or commute) cycling will make you slightly fitter than you would be if you didn't cycle.

Chuchote

Roadhawk wrote: »

Obesity in general is not going to solved by exercise alone. There are many factors that can contribute including:

Genetics, Family lifestyle, Inactivity, unhealthy diet, medical problems, certain medications, social and economic issues, age, pregnancy, giving up smoking and lack of sleep.

At best, (social or commute) cycling will make you slightly fitter than you would be if you didn't cycle.

I'll just leave this here:

magicbastarder

that's a relatively trivial coonclusion to reach though, and it runs the risk of confusing correlation and causation.
do they not cycle because they're obese; or are they obese because they don't cycle?

Chuchote

magicbastarder wrote: »

that's a relatively trivial coonclusion to reach though, and it runs the risk of confusing correlation and causation.
do they not cycle because they're obese; or are they obese because they don't cycle?

Yeah, good point. It's hard to get on a bike when you're fat and out of puff, and people can be sensitive for fear they'd be mocked.

Interesting video here made by a couple of lads who helped their father to reverse his health problems with cycling and diet:

Carawaystick

prinzeugen wrote: »

Maybe stopped smoking or something?? You cant claim it was cycling alone that made him healthier.

Stopping smoking rarely results in weight loss, it's usually the other way round.

robyntmorton

Chuchote wrote: »

Yeah, good point. It's hard to get on a bike when you're fat and out of puff, and people can be sensitive for fear they'd be mocked.

I'm quite overweight. I have health problems. I have difficulty running because it causes impact stresses on my knees.

I took up cycling last year. I'm already down 30 pounds.

It's difficult to get going. You do feel self conscious, especially if you're slow and are dealing with clothes that don't fit that well. It gets easier though. You just have to remember why you're doing it and keep on doing your thing.

Roadhawk

Chuchote wrote: »

I'll just leave this here:

Haha you may awsell have said "heres one i made earlier" with that picture on your desk.

http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/obesity/basics/risk-factors/con-20014834

http://frac.org/initiatives/hunger-and-obesity/what-factors-contribute-to-overweight-and-obesity/

https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/health-topics/topics/obe/causes

Zynks

Why is there such a concerted effort here to undermine the point that cycling makes you healthier and helps you lose weight? Sure, it is not the only thing that will do that (well done Einstein!) but it is at the very least clever use of your time to commute on a bike to save pounds while getting rid of others instead of having a high calorie coffee while being traffic.

Roadhawk

Zynks wrote: »

Why is there such a concerted effort here to undermine the point that cycling makes you healthier and helps you lose weight? Sure, it is not the only thing that will do that (well done Einstein!) but it is at the very least clever use of your time to commute on a bike to save pounds while getting rid of others instead of having a high calorie coffee while being traffic.

mmmmm...coffee!

Chuchote

Yes, Hawk, obesity can have lots of familial and medication factors, but everyone I personally know who's overweight eats a lot and takes little exercise.

Take a look at this - from the two minute mark - and imagine how fit the children or grandchildren of these 1960s kids are (or are not) now:

eeguy

Chuchote wrote: »

Yes, Hawk, obesity can have lots of familial and medication factors, but everyone I personally know who's overweight eats a lot and takes little exercise.

Your chance of being genetically prone to obesity is miniscule.

Most people use the excuse "shur my parents and siblings are all fat, must be genetic" not taking into account that they're all eating the same sh*te and not exercising.

eeguy

Deedsie wrote: »

The genetic argument is weak, how many Irish families were obese in 1980? Genetics don't change over 30-40 years. Lifestyle has changed massively, sedentary people sitting in their cars, people eating ****e, mental health problems have sky rocketed. These things are linked.

Yup, it's just another excuse to place blame on something other than yourself.

galwaytt

Deedsie wrote: »

People are very resistant to leaving their cars at home for many bizarre reasons.

True, and motor tax is but one bizarre one. Contrary to popular belief, the majority of cars in this country are pre 2008, and as such, on the old motor tax regime, not the fairy tale Green Party scheme that came in in 2008.

Being shafted for €15-€35 per week for a vehicle whether you use it or not is inclined to make people to want to extract value-for-money. The 'if I'm paying for it I might as well use it' mentality. It's hard to fault.

Zynks

Deedsie wrote: »

Ya I do understand the argument but personally I would value my health and free time more than the fact that I pay motor tax. My motor tax is €200 per year so not that bad really.

I keep finding good reasons to abolish road tax and to add a tax to fuel instead - effectively turning it into a pay per use.

Roadhawk

Zynks wrote: »

I keep finding good reasons to abolish road tax and to add a tax to fuel instead - effectively turning it into a pay per use.

Imagine the cost of public transport or a taxi if that was the case. Unless exemptions are allowed.

Not a bad idea entirely. Id be glad to see that tax implemented.

Roadhawk

And so it becomes a private vehicle tax...

Zynks

Roadhawk wrote: »

Imagine the cost of public transport or a taxi if that was the case. Unless exemptions are allowed.

Not a bad idea entirely. Id be glad to see that tax implemented.

In the same way there is private and commercial motor tax, there could also be something in the style over fuel, I guess.

magicbastarder

that raises a question - if i have to pay X amount for fuel getting from A to B in my car, on principle, why shouldn't i pay X amount for the same fuel in a taxi journey doing the same?

Zynks

For whatever reason, taxis pay less motor tax already (€95 p.a., see link), so this would be a different discussion. Having said that, i see your point.

http://www.dublincity.ie/main-menu-services-roads-and-traffic-motor-tax/motor-tax-rates

shootermacg

If you live 5km from work and take a car, well...you're really lazy. If you're really lazy, then you're probably over weight, not because you drive, but because you're lazy.

Zynks

shootermacg wrote: »

If you live 5km from work and take a car, well...you're really lazy. If you're really lazy, then you're probably over weight, not because you drive, but because you're lazy.

That's an indisputably logical argument there.

John_Rambo

Roadhawk wrote: »

Obesity in general is not going to solved by exercise alone. There are many factors that can contribute including:

Genetics, Family lifestyle, Inactivity, unhealthy diet, medical problems, certain medications, social and economic issues, age, pregnancy, giving up smoking and lack of sleep.

At best, (social or commute) cycling will make you slightly fitter than you would be if you didn't cycle.

This is bizarre. The denial is amazing. I've bolded the stupidest part of your stupid post.

When you see overweight cycle couriers or overweight Tour De France competitors and they start removing static bikes from gyms I'll take you seriously. Otherwise, your posts can be taken with a pinch of salt. No credibility whatsoever.

cython

Zynks wrote: »

For whatever reason, taxis pay less motor tax already (€95 p.a., see link), so this would be a different discussion. Having said that, i see your point.

http://www.dublincity.ie/main-menu-services-roads-and-traffic-motor-tax/motor-tax-rates

I've heard it said before that this was (in particular under the old system) to make larger/more comfortable cars more affordable to run as taxis, rather than having thousands of Fiestas (for example) roaming the streets with taxi plates. It is a bit of a legacy/archaic provision now if this is the case, as a lot of taxis are post-2008, and should have much lower motor tax rates than they otherwise would have had under the old system.