I haven't even noticed that much promotion of cycles. I prefer walking because your body's always moving whereas cycling, your legs can sometimes be still while free wheeling.
Cycling is about four times more efficient than walking so yes walking is healthier over an equivalent distance - if you're able and time isn't an issue. Cycling is more like fun though.
Cycling is about four times more efficient than walking so yes walking is healthier over an equivalent distance - if you're able and time isn't an issue. Cycling is more like fun though.
Lower impact on the joints too, which is an issue for some people. And of course a very sedate walk may be less beneficial to health than a much faster bike ride, even over the same distance.
But not brilliant for doing the weekly shopping, dropping the kids off somewhere or going long distances.
It is fine doing the weekly shopping, you just need a decent trailer. The kids can cycle (depending on age obviously) and is better for them as well as you. It depends what you call long distances, the bike cannot replace the car for 100 mile commutes but is ideal for up to 10 miles.
they're probably doing it wrong. Choose the easy gears. They're the funny spikey things that go round.
Plus, cycling is very good exercise for rehabilitating knees, what with it being low impact.
And for people who need additional help, there are always electric bikes. I tried one the other day, and was impressed by how well they work. You can choose the level of assistance, or use none at all.
I've no problem with the promotion of cycling, it'd judt cyclists who give me the pip.
Example, just last night. OH and myself were out walking our beautiful but rather stupid Cocker Spaniels. We had to cross a busy road so went to the propper crossing, pressed the button and waited for our right of way. The lights changed, a van stopped so we went over. A cyclist came careering through the red light, missing me by inches. Luckily, the dog didn't notice as she does have a habit of charging off in all sorts of directions!
We live on the edge of a villiage and often I have to go along a main road to the next village. Some years ago a cycle way was built at enormous public expense but do the cyclists use it? No!! They go onto the road causing all sorts of hold ups while the cycle way sits there empty, apart from a couple of runners!
Some maybe but it won't work for those with bad knees, fear of rush hour traffic and fear of getting their hairstyles ruined by a helmet
Cycling is relatively gentle on the knees, I know several people who have had to give up running* because of bad knees and have taken to cycling instead. As CravenHaven said the correct selection of gears is important and it is a common mistake to select too high a gear.
Rush hour traffic is often safer than non rush hour traffic because car speeds are often lower and car speeds are the biggest danger to cyclists. Not that cycling in general is particularly dangerous as statistically it is more dangerous not to cycle (based upon average life expectancy).
*Running is not bad for the knees however it is common for people to have knee problems that prevent them running.
Plus, cycling is very good exercise for rehabilitating knees, what with it being low impact.
And for people who need additional help, there are always electric bikes. I tried one the other day, and was impressed by how well they work. You can choose the level of assistance, or use none at all.
It wasn't that low impact when I flew off two drops last week that were somewhat larger than I anticipated, shot off the side of a berm and ended up in a field
It wasn't that low impact when I flew off two drops last week that were somewhat larger than I anticipated, shot off the side of a berm and ended up in a field
Lower impact on the joints too, which is an issue for some people. And of course a very sedate walk may be less beneficial to health than a much faster bike ride, even over the same distance.
Yep, impact on joints is an issue for me. Also I like to do my own minimal aerobic HIT, high intensity 3 X 20 second, go mad bursts, several times a week, on my cycle rides. Overall though I just love cycling and bicycles.
I'm all for a nice cycle in the countryside, rural areas, parks, wooded area, can be great fun.
But to cycle in the middle of a city centre is just suicide. There's already enough hazards on the road, and enough fatal accidents. In my opinion It's not worth risking your life for.
I'm all for a nice cycle in the countryside, rural areas, parks, wooded area, can be great fun.
But to cycle in the middle of a city centre is just suicide. There's already enough hazards on the road, and enough fatal accidents. In my opinion It's not worth risking your life for.
Kind of a free choice though, uh. I do all sorts of riding - I love cycling in traffic in the city.
That's allowing for your assertion that it is by definition suicidal - which clearly it is not.
We live on the edge of a villiage and often I have to go along a main road to the next village. Some years ago a cycle way was built at enormous public expense but do the cyclists use it? No!! They go onto the road causing all sorts of hold ups while the cycle way sits there empty, apart from a couple of runners!
AGHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!
It should be the law that if cycle lane facilities are available then it is compulsory for cyclists to use them, regardless of if you are Bradley Wiggins or own a racing bike. if it means them having to go a bit slower then tough shit. Cyclist on the highway can often cause queuing traffic and contribute to congestion, not ease it.
It's just not right that good money is being wasted on cycle schemes for them not to use them. What a wicked waste!
It should be the law that if cycle lane facilities are available then it is compulsory for cyclists to use them, regardless of if you are Bradley Wiggins or own a racing bike. if it means them having to go a bit slower then tough shit. Cyclist on the highway can often cause queuing traffic and contribute to congestion, not ease it.
It's just not right that good money is being wasted on cycle schemes for them not to use them. What a wicked waste!
Maybe consult the cyclists a bit more as to where lanes are a good idea and, more importantly, keep them clear. Some of the ones near me are perma full of broken glass. And speed bumps which frankly make them too slow.
It should be the law that if cycle lane facilities are available then it is compulsory for cyclists to use them, regardless of if you are Bradley Wiggins or own a racing bike. if it means them having to go a bit slower then tough shit. Cyclist on the highway can often cause queuing traffic and contribute to congestion, not ease it.
It's just not right that good money is being wasted on cycle schemes for them not to use them. What a wicked waste!
Indeed. As a cyclist, I'd rather we didn't spend money on what passes for the majority of cycle lanes in this country as I've yet to come across one which is actually fit for purpose.
Nice to see the old chestnut about cyclists contributing to congestion though. Tell me, how many times do you get stuck in traffic behind cars compared to a bike?
Comments
Cycling is about four times more efficient than walking so yes walking is healthier over an equivalent distance - if you're able and time isn't an issue. Cycling is more like fun though.
relentless[ ri-lent-lis ]
adjective
1. that does not relent; unyieldingly severe, strict, or harsh; unrelenting: a relentless enemy
I think you're getting confused with that very similar phrase, 'very little', as in the very little promotion of cycling.
HTH
It is fine doing the weekly shopping, you just need a decent trailer. The kids can cycle (depending on age obviously) and is better for them as well as you. It depends what you call long distances, the bike cannot replace the car for 100 mile commutes but is ideal for up to 10 miles.
And for people who need additional help, there are always electric bikes. I tried one the other day, and was impressed by how well they work. You can choose the level of assistance, or use none at all.
Example, just last night. OH and myself were out walking our beautiful but rather stupid Cocker Spaniels. We had to cross a busy road so went to the propper crossing, pressed the button and waited for our right of way. The lights changed, a van stopped so we went over. A cyclist came careering through the red light, missing me by inches. Luckily, the dog didn't notice as she does have a habit of charging off in all sorts of directions!
We live on the edge of a villiage and often I have to go along a main road to the next village. Some years ago a cycle way was built at enormous public expense but do the cyclists use it? No!! They go onto the road causing all sorts of hold ups while the cycle way sits there empty, apart from a couple of runners!
AGHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!
Cycling is relatively gentle on the knees, I know several people who have had to give up running* because of bad knees and have taken to cycling instead. As CravenHaven said the correct selection of gears is important and it is a common mistake to select too high a gear.
Rush hour traffic is often safer than non rush hour traffic because car speeds are often lower and car speeds are the biggest danger to cyclists. Not that cycling in general is particularly dangerous as statistically it is more dangerous not to cycle (based upon average life expectancy).
*Running is not bad for the knees however it is common for people to have knee problems that prevent them running.
It wasn't that low impact when I flew off two drops last week that were somewhat larger than I anticipated, shot off the side of a berm and ended up in a field
Ouch!!
Yep, impact on joints is an issue for me. Also I like to do my own minimal aerobic HIT, high intensity 3 X 20 second, go mad bursts, several times a week, on my cycle rides. Overall though I just love cycling and bicycles.
But to cycle in the middle of a city centre is just suicide. There's already enough hazards on the road, and enough fatal accidents. In my opinion It's not worth risking your life for.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/245754/reported-road-casualties-in-great-britain-main-results-2012.pdf
For other modes of transport accidents are decreasing but for cyclists this is the opposite. Those Top Gear spoof bike adverts were true after all
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCt7T20N07U
That's no way to talk about the OP!
Kind of a free choice though, uh. I do all sorts of riding - I love cycling in traffic in the city.
That's allowing for your assertion that it is by definition suicidal - which clearly it is not.
It should be the law that if cycle lane facilities are available then it is compulsory for cyclists to use them, regardless of if you are Bradley Wiggins or own a racing bike. if it means them having to go a bit slower then tough shit. Cyclist on the highway can often cause queuing traffic and contribute to congestion, not ease it.
It's just not right that good money is being wasted on cycle schemes for them not to use them. What a wicked waste!
Maybe consult the cyclists a bit more as to where lanes are a good idea and, more importantly, keep them clear. Some of the ones near me are perma full of broken glass. And speed bumps which frankly make them too slow.
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/pete.meg/wcc/facility-of-the-month/ropewalk.jpg
or pick one from here
http://www.anorak.co.uk/375360/sports/britains-worst-cycle-lanes-photos-of-that-olympics-legacy-in-action.html/
Do you always use a road bypass when in a car?
My experience is that large volumes of cars cause congestion.
Indeed. As a cyclist, I'd rather we didn't spend money on what passes for the majority of cycle lanes in this country as I've yet to come across one which is actually fit for purpose.
Nice to see the old chestnut about cyclists contributing to congestion though. Tell me, how many times do you get stuck in traffic behind cars compared to a bike?