Corona Virus & cycling impact (see mode note post 1322)

Lumen

Given that the average sub-3 marathon runner does around 45 minutes a day averaged over the 12 weeks leading up to the race, I think anything over an hour a day is difficult to justify as "brief" or reasonable.

Stark

Where do I find this 45 mins a day sub 3 hour marathon training program?

Lumen

Stark wrote: »

Where do I find this 45 mins a day sub 3 hour marathon training program?

Averaged, based on Strava data.

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/the-running-blog/2016/apr/21/sub-3-marathon-data-strava-london

"The average time spent running per week was:

Sub 3-hour finishers: 5hs and 22mins"

AndrewJRenko

Rackstar wrote: »

There’s something seriously wrong, with some people’s thought process.

Businesses all over the country closed, travel restrictions in place, but some people think they should be allowed go wherever they want on their bike?

You might clarify what issues arise from a solo cycle.

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

Not verbal abuse as such, but I was stopped at a red light very close to my house one night last week around 9pm on my way home from work. A middle aged couple out walking were crossing. The male pointed his rolled up umbrella at me, turned to his wife/partner and said "See these lads on bikes - they're adding to this problem".

I had just worked a 13 hour shift without a break. I was so taken aback that I could make no response.

There is certainly a trend, and a risk of these restrictions being used to give succour to the kind of anti-cycling nonsense that many of us experience frequently. That's another good reason for a clear, factual, evidence-based approach to this.

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

All the more reason why they should have brought in a 2km restriction to prevent people from driving long distances.

It would certainly be easier to understand and easier to swallow the restriction on exercise if there was some comparable restriction on shopping - some restriction like 5k or 10k, some guidance to shop local, even if that means that you can't quite get your favourite brand of Stilton.



But there is no such restriction on shopping (the activity that applies to every single household, whether they do it themselves or it is done for them). So what's the sense in the restriction on cycling?

TheChizler wrote: »

I think you're looking at this backwards. I don't think they're making the argument is that cycling within 2km reduces infection. The primary rule is stay at home, which I don't think we need to prove reduces infection (do we?).

Of course there are going to be exceptions to this rule, most people will need to leave their homes at some point. Each exception rule needs to allow enough freedom for the reason for the exception to be completed and ideally no more. Each is evaluated in its own right without reference to the others.

They've decided that people need the freedom to exercise outside their homes, and that 2km radius is enough freedom to reasonably allow this. That's all this is IMO. Some exception giving more freedom for a different reason is irrelevant to the other ones.

You can't reasonably put a similar limit on shopping, can you guarantee that you can pick up all essential items within X radius of a particular point in the country?

The reasons used for not putting a radius limit on shopping also apply to exercise. Most rural homes won't have a path within 2km radius, so how are they supposed to exercise.


It's worth revisiting the history here. The 2km limit was a kneejerk response to the reports of traffic jams at Glendalough and Bray. The problem was that lots of people were driving to beaches and forests to do their exercise, and social distancing was difficult as a result.


It looks like they picked the wrong measure. If they had just shut all the car parks and actively policed illegal parking, they would have sorted this problem immediately. Any time I pass by Marlay Park in the last week, there are cars illegally parked on the bike lane and grass verge outside. They should be ticketing these and getting the message out on SM and the News.



If the problem is about people driving to exercise, then the restriction should be on driving to exercise. There's a good chance that there was no-one in the room who cycles for exercise when that decision was made.

Lumen wrote: »

The purpose of the 2km restriction is actually to make outdoor exercise less appealing, to and therefore to reduce contacts in the aggregate. It's a buzzkill policy, by design.

I'm not so sure of that. There is specific that encourages exercise within the 2km limit. I'm not sure that any public health expert is going to go out of their way to make exercise more appealing.

https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/5a4293-staying-active-during-covid-19/

magicbastarder wrote: »

The argument that 'this lockdown will possibly/probably cause more deaths than it will save, through some unexpected effect' is possibly true, but a totally unusable one from a public health policy perspective.
Can you imagine some policy twonk at a meeting in the department of health suggesting that we not take these measures because there may be some unknown or unforeseeable factor at play? He'd be dropped in the sea from a helicopter.

Having spent years at policy meetings (though not in the public health domain), it is not unusual at all for people to consider the known unknowns, the risks that arise from any policy measure, the possibility of unintended outcomes - all standard considerations in policy development.

Charlie69 wrote: »

But there is a restriction on time... you're allowed brief exercise ,do you think cycling for 5 hours within 2km is okay?

No, there is no restriction on the duration of exercise. The UK guidance refers to 'brief exercise', but there is no such reference in the Irish guidance or regulation.

Stark

Lumen wrote: »

Averaged, based on Strava data.

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/the-running-blog/2016/apr/21/sub-3-marathon-data-strava-london

"The average time spent running per week was:

Sub 3-hour finishers: 5hs and 22mins"

I wonder if they've corrected for people not uploading every single run they do to Strava. That seems like a very small amount of training for a high performance athlete. Most people I know who've done sub 3 hrs have done twice that volume of training.

magicbastarder

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

The 2km limit was a kneejerk response.

i really shouldn't be enaging with you on this, but i actually agree.
the next time we have a global pandemic, they should engage in focus groups, run some trials, and take public feedback before instituting limitations designed to stop our hospitals having to deal with what the hospitals in italy were faced with.

Biker79

Funny that despite the current situation...some people ( one, at least )...see it as an opportunity to continue with pedantry, obfuscation and woefully misplaced rationalising.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning

Fortunately, the majority of people will stick to the guidelines for the majority of the time and that should be enough to get things back to normal.

magicbastarder

Anyway, I wonder will sales of chamois cream go through the roof when the lockdown lifts. Think of all those poor cyclists whose underchassis has softened excessively.

pablo128

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

You might clarify what issues arise from a solo cycle.



It would certainly be easier to understand and easier to swallow the restriction on exercise if there was some comparable restriction on shopping - some restriction like 5k or 10k, some guidance to shop local, even if that means that you can't quite get your favourite brand of Stilton.



But there is no such restriction on shopping (the activity that applies to every single household, whether they do it themselves or it is done for them). So what's the sense in the restriction on cycling .

https://m.herald.ie/news/i-really-needed-some-fish-we-join-gardai-on-the-checkpoints-39120000.html

This article answers your question. There ARE restrictions on how far you can travel to a shop, it seems.

Charlie69

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

You might clarify what issues arise from a solo cycle.



No, there is no restriction on the duration of exercise. The UK guidance refers to 'brief exercise', but there is no such reference in the Irish guidance or regulation.



Covid-19 - Updated Government Guidelines as of 27.03.2020






Cycling Ireland wishes to highlight the updated guidelines announced by the government on Friday, 27th March 2020.




These state that until the 12th April, everyone within the Republic of Ireland are urged to stay in their home wherever possible. Staying at home is the best way to minimise the risk of COVID-19 to your friends, families and communities.




Stay at home in all circumstances, except in the following situations:

o to travel to and from work where the work is considered an essential service. You can see the full list of essential workers here.

o to attend medical appointments and collect medicines and other health products for yourself, your family or someone who is vulnerable or cocooning.

o for vital family reasons including caring for children, elderly or vulnerable people but excluding social family visits.

o to take brief individual physical exercise within your locality, which may include children from your household within 2 kilometres of your home and adhering to strict 2 metre social distancing measures.

iHungry

The other night some lad in my area was doing 20min laps past my house at 430am. I saw because he triggered my security camera three times. Must of been staying inside 2km from his house

mistermatthew

You do realise that cycling is actually relatively unimpacted by the regulations compared to other sports?

Hikers cannot hike unless they are within 2km of the peak they are going to climb. Swimmers cannot go to pools. Or swim in the sea unless within 2km. Tennis players cannot play tennis unless it is within 2km and only with members of household. Surfers cannot surf unless within 2km. The list can go on.

Are you proposing individual explanations for each of these restriction to each sport by the govt. ?

The rule is there, as explained by many posters as a catch all. It is certainly harsh on a lot of people who participate in sports. But runners and cyclists are particularly far down the list of those most impacted. We should consider ourselves fortunate to participate in sports that we can still continue with, in a more limited scope.

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Or they could just choose measures that address the problems (in this case, driving to Glendalough for a walk) without having overall negative impacts on public health?

Eamonnator

@AndrewJRenko
No, a 12 year old Yorkshire Terrier, properly named after Springsteen. He's the Boss in our household.

magicbastarder

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Cycling Ireland is not the Government. The Government guidance is at;
https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/cf9b0d-new-public-health-measures-effective-now-to-prevent-further-spread-o/


There is no reference to brief exercise in the Government guidance.


Members of Cycling Ireland might like to ask them why they've put their own spin on Government guidance.

they didn't - until a few days ago, this was the advice (i grabbed a copy of it at the time - it has since been modified):

You should only leave your home to:...
exercise briefly by yourself, or with children from your family, and only within 2 kilometers of your home, keeping 2 metres distance from other people

originally at this link:
https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/472f64-covid-19-coronavirus-guidance-and-advice/

the text was changed sometime between late on the 8th and the 9th. but the word 'brief' was continued to be used at press conferences, etc., after this.

Large bottle small glass

The recent posts reminded me of this

https://youtu.be/hTnNsIgQArM

Doc07

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I'll be first to accept it when a public health expert explains how doing a 40km cycling in laps within a 2km radius is safer than doing a 20km out, 20km home cycle.


Could you please explain how doing a 40km cycling in laps within a 2km radius FLATTENS THE CURVE more than doing a 20km out, 20km home cycle.

Ok, let’s try a bad case scenario , maybe even an unrealistic one, but a possible one all the same.

1000 cyclists head off on their 20km out and back. Feck it, if 20k is ok well then a few might do 30/40 and not all in a straight line. Let’s say a few have a stop in a shop for a drink or a sweet. They are not all as disciplined as you , a few extra hands and therefore snots hitting shared surfaces.

They all make it home safe. So far so good this long distance healthy exercise. The Garda might accept it as the public health experts haven’t had time yet to give a specific answer to some random lad on boards.ie on how it’s more dangerous than 2km laps.

After a few days this looks so good that 1000 scobes /swingers/whatever get on their beater bikes and head off 20/30/40 km from home. Maybe they don’t do a simple out and back , maybe they have a few cans in a park 30km from home, maybe some of them get lucky. They should be more responsible but needs must eh, and how can the Garda police this?
How can they tell who are the deviants from the proper athletes like you doings 20km out and back to keep fit for major surgery or infectious inspired by the BBC.


Instead of a 12.56km squared area potentially infected to try and contact trace it’s now 1256km squared ie bigger than county Dublin.

I’m not a public health expert but I do know plenty about Perioperative fitness and have lectured under and post graduate medics on it. Optimum fitness for major surgery ( the expertise of the group in the BBC article you keep quoting) can be achieved in a one room flat with bodyweight squats
or climbing stairs if you have the luxury of stairs. Throw in some jumping jacks or burpees if your knees can take it, mine can’t unfortunately.
I know an Olympic athlete who hasn’t left his flat apart from shopping so I’m sure it’s annoying staying at home or only going outside for a short time for short distance but it can be done.

PickYourName

mistermatthew wrote: »

You do realise that cycling is actually relatively unimpacted by the regulations compared to other sports?

Hikers cannot hike unless they are within 2km of the peak they are going to climb. Swimmers cannot go to pools. Or swim in the sea unless within 2km. Tennis players cannot play tennis unless it is within 2km and only with members of household. Surfers cannot surf unless within 2km. The list can go on.

Are you proposing individual explanations for each of these restriction to each sport by the govt. ?

That thought crossed my mind as well. Funny the way you don't get hillwalkers or swimmers moaning about how badly affected they are? And yet you get some outraged cyclists claiming how badly they've been treated yet again? and then continue to wonder why there's such antipathy towards them from certain quarters?

For the record, my own two primary forms of exercise are cycling and hillwalking. It’s a PITA to have to abandon both for the duration, but it’s hardly the end of my world if all I can do is an 8k daily walk in a circuit within 2k of where I live. For sure, my fitness will probably decline, but so what? I can build it up again. I can't resurrect the dead.

Curiousness99

Been noticing a lot of people cycling past my house since the lockdown, mostly because I’m now at home all the time. Given where I live anyone who cycles past my house is more than 2kms from where they live.

This prompted me to have a look on here to see what other people who cycle thought about the restrictions.. anyway got me thinking about my own situation and cycling

I am very lucky where I live up the hills where I can can go mountain biking from my house and have a few options open to me to go for decent spins(one 2 to 3 hours loop with a small bit of variation ) and stay within 2kms of my house.


There’s loads of other trails I could do but they would bring me out of the 2km range and it would be easy to Justify Sure it makes no difference but I want to show solidarity with the vast majority of other people and if we all apply exceptions to ourselves compliance would fall over

Anyway each to their own but I think the current crisis gives us an opportunity not to be selfish and I’m trying to stick with it

PickYourName

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

It's worth revisiting the history here. The 2km limit was a kneejerk response to the reports of traffic jams at Glendalough and Bray. The problem was that lots of people were driving to beaches and forests to do their exercise, and social distancing was difficult as a result.

It looks like they picked the wrong measure. If they had just shut all the car parks and actively policed illegal parking, they would have sorted this problem immediately. Any time I pass by Marlay Park in the last week, there are cars illegally parked on the bike lane and grass verge outside. They should be ticketing these and getting the message out on SM and the News.

You think that would be a good use of scarce policing resources? Checks up in all the car parks in remote areas of the country?

You're also making a lot of assumptions, there. My guess (which is at least as good as your guess) is that the 2km limit was used primarily because it is easy both to explain and to police.

CramCycle

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

There is certainly a trend, and a risk of these restrictions being used to give succour to the kind of anti-cycling nonsense that many of us experience frequently. That's another good reason for a clear, factual, evidence-based approach to this.

not been my experience, in fact, bar the odd mention, it seems to have turned the world against joggers. The only way it will really lead to an anti cycling sentiment is if at this time, a group of cyclists actually petitioned to have different rules. This would be particularly damaging for those of us who encounter muppets who can't tell the difference between any cyclist.

It would certainly be easier to understand and easier to swallow the restriction on exercise if there was some comparable restriction on shopping - some restriction like 5k or 10k, some guidance to shop local, even if that means that you can't quite get your favourite brand of Stilton.

And there is with Gardai talking to and turning back people who are making unnecessary journeys. My partner was shopping for my mother in law, and the gardai had already turned around a few people from the nicer Dunnes because they had driven from further away than necessary as there were plenty of large stores closer. Then you have to consider my oown parents, whose closest shop is 10km away, and the closest pharmacy is over 20km away. Blanket restrictions won't work as you can't have a one size fits all, so Garda descretion is the way to go here, as they are doing.

But there is no such restriction on shopping (the activity that applies to every single household, whether they do it themselves or it is done for them). So what's the sense in the restriction on cycling?

There is in that if the Gardai thinks your taking the piss, you'll be turned around or fined.

The reasons used for not putting a radius limit on shopping also apply to exercise. Most rural homes won't have a path within 2km radius, so how are they supposed to exercise.

Since when have you needed a path to walk or cycle in the country?

It's worth revisiting the history here. The 2km limit was a kneejerk response to the reports of traffic jams at Glendalough and Bray. The problem was that lots of people were driving to beaches and forests to do their exercise, and social distancing was difficult as a result.

And a good one.

It looks like they picked the wrong measure. If they had just shut all the car parks and actively policed illegal parking, they would have sorted this problem immediately. Any time I pass by Marlay Park in the last week, there are cars illegally parked on the bike lane and grass verge outside. They should be ticketing these and getting the message out on SM and the News.

The raods were impassable, closing car parks made little difference. This gives the Gardai easy way to start fining or turning around people.

If the problem is about people driving to exercise, then the restriction should be on driving to exercise. There's a good chance that there was no-one in the room who cycles for exercise when that decision was made.

Who else should have been there, marathon runners, skateboarders, kayakers etc. I am really glad none of them where, it would cripple any attempt to do anything, unusual times calls for unusual measures.

Having spent years at policy meetings (though not in the public health domain), it is not unusual at all for people to consider the known unknowns, the risks that arise from any policy measure, the possibility of unintended outcomes - all standard considerations in policy development.

And policy can be revised at a later date, nothing so far indicates that it needs to be though

No, there is no restriction on the duration of exercise. The UK guidance refers to 'brief exercise', but there is no such reference in the Irish guidance or regulation.

There was several references to it in the initial statements in late March, a simple google will pul up the links on the times, the journal, RTE, the independent, gardai policing statement, the government announcements at the time.

benneca1

This thread is getting tiresome. SI 121 of 2020 is the relevant one in relation to exercise. Regulation 4(2) i

In summary A person shall not leave place of Residence without reasonable excuse One of these is exercise alone or with another household member within 2 km of home. No time limit no other caveat It is down to individual cop on and how many times you can go around in a ring without going crazy

Those posts calling out identifiable cyclists as rule breakers are erroneous
and should be taken down

PickYourName

CramCycle wrote: »

not been my experience, in fact, bar the odd mention, it seems to have turned the world against joggers. The only way it will really lead to an anti cycling sentiment is if at this time, a group of cyclists actually petitioned to have different rules. This would be particularly damaging for those of us who encounter muppets who can't tell the difference between any cyclist.

Agreed. Am I the only one to detect the deep irony about simultaneously moaning about how badly affected they are in the current crisis and complaining about anti-cycling bias?

As a cyclist myself, I despair at the attitude of some, both in their behaviour on the roads and the constant whining victimhood.

Weepsie

Mod Note. Poster has been asked to stop being deliberately argumentative/disruptive as it appears. Nitpicking on minor details, and perceived sleights while missing the entire bigger picture is to me just willful ignorance and very close to trolling.

I'm now asking other posters to just not address them. Let them shout in an empty room as that is all their nonsense deserves right now

BoardsMember

Sorry, had quoted a mod post, think that might be against the rules.

I welcome recent mod post, hoping it will end the nonsense. And I also welcome the volume of input in support of the restrictions, great to see the majority of the community get behind this, even if it doesn't suit us.

CramCycle

BoardsMember wrote: »

Exactly. I dont understand how people are calling the 2km restriction "ridiculous". Is that medical/scientific perspective? Or is it that the measures are inconvenient.

They don't want ot be stuck in 2km and are trying to give the impression that their motive is aturistic to deflect from the fact that it is an annoyance to them.

Tenzor07 wrote: »

I know, terrible to think of all those bicycles out on the roads, I mean there's the possibility that they may be combatting some of the main underlying conditions that make the virus potentially fatal, obesity and Cardiovascular disease...

Ha, do you think lifting restrictions on cyclists will suddenly cure obesity, CVD etc. before the virus gets to those people. They could just start exercising in their house/apartment/drive way. How many of those at risk populations would take advantage of the easing of restrictions for cyclists alone. Obesity and CVD don't just disappear and any intervention if they wanted too could be done as described in their own home.

Tenzor07 wrote: »

If the station the bicycles are taken to is outside the 2km restricted zone, how will they collect their bikes?

When its all over.

Just hope none of those pictured in that Tweet were on the way to work at a hospital eh? Oops!

I have met loads on the way to RTE, the hospital, Testing and Research Labs on bikes, all have their letter and ID, I think you know that they weren't, HCPs tend to understand why we are doing what we are doing. Any Garda I have had to show my letter and ID too didn't give me the talk.

harringtonp wrote: »

Would like to start a lobby for a change to the current Covid 19 exercise restrictions. Not sure how to do this but a more vocal social media presence would likely help. If your club is generally up for a change, a facebook post of some version of the text below would be a start. I would however suggest keeping the

"exercise must be started and finished from your place of residence and observe social distancing guidelines"

clause so there is at least a consistent change suggestion put out there.

I sounded this out in my own club 2 weeks ago but most were unwilling to take the step. I realise it is hard to go against the flow but I do believe that (like most things) if a few clubs post, others will soon follow. If the people who would benefit most from this change will not speak up for themselves, nobody else will.

I really hope if you do decide to put your club name to this, it is roundly rejected by the community. Others talking about cyclists being a targetted community, and then someone else thinks this is a good idea, FFS. The number of issues with the suggestion are staggering. I really hoped you were joking and then I heard from another group that they had mailed CI to give out to them for going along with the 2km limit, and sent an email similar to your own. I was shocked that anyone read what was written in the current climate and thought, this makes sense.

CramCycle

Weepsie wrote: »

Mod Note. Poster has been asked to stop being deliberately argumentative/disruptive as it appears. Nitpicking on minor details, and perceived sleights while missing the entire bigger picture is to me just willful ignorance and very close to trolling.

I'm now asking other posters to just not address them. Let them shout in an empty room as that is all their nonsense deserves right now

Apologies, missed your post, won't happen again.

Weepsie

CramCycle wrote: »

Apologies, missed your post, won't happen again.

Your among the people (along with at least 2 other regular posters I know of) who are working hard to really, really fight this, so I trust you're rather tired and your opinion on it holds an awful lot more weight, so no apologies needed.

RobFowl

I hate this 2kms limit, I hate not being able to go for spins with my mates.
I hate not being able to shoot the breeze over coffee after a hard spin.
I hate the fact that there is no racing and no sportifs.

I am though sticking to it because its part of a whole package of measures which are absolutely necessary right now.
We could argue why not 5kms, what if we live in the sticks ect.
The fact remains that these are the rules, they are not there to pick on cyclists or single us out.
There need to be adhered to and ultimately they will pass.

Tenzor07

CramCycle wrote: »

Ha, do you think lifting restrictions on cyclists will suddenly cure obesity, CVD etc. before the virus gets to those people. They could just start exercising in their house/apartment/drive way. How many of those at risk populations would take advantage of the easing of restrictions for cyclists alone. Obesity and CVD don't just disappear and any intervention if they wanted too could be done as described in their own home.

We all know that lack of exercise contributes to increasing risk of complications due to underlying conditions, so you're just being deliberately argumentative here.

CramCycle wrote: »

When its all over.

Going by your logic then the restrictions on travelling outside 2km in a motor vehicle should also be met with confiscation of the offending persons car? Not everyone has a car, and for many a bicycle is the only means of transportation.

CramCycle wrote: »

I have met loads on the way to RTE, the hospital, Testing and Research Labs on bikes, all have their letter and ID, I think you know that they weren't, HCPs tend to understand why we are doing what we are doing. Any Garda I have had to show my letter and ID too didn't give me the talk.

I was referring to those specifically in the Tweet where my comments came from, you don't have a clue if the Garda in the picture had asked for ID of those stopped.

magicbastarder

mod note - this thread is taking a temporary breather, it's going around in angry circles and probably leaving the 2km limit in the process.