Cycling: Towards Health and Safety BMA, Oxford University Press, 1992
This report, commissioned by and published in the name of the British Medical Association, examined all aspects of cycling in relation to health. It established that, in spite of the hostile environment in which most cyclists currently ride, the benefits in terms of health promotion and longevity far outweigh the loss of life years in injury on the roads. To derive these and many other benefits, it called for more emphasis to be placed on cycling and highlighted the fact that people are more likely to do so regularly if cycles are used as a form of transport rather than a recreational activity. For the great majority of the population, cycling as part of the routine of daily travel from childhood through to old age has the potential for improving fitness in a way that, given proper provision for it in the form of safe cycle networks, cannot be matched by any other comparable exercise regime.
Is this the rationale of encouraging humans to impede essential infrastructure with their own bodies?
Who really was the author of this utter nonsense?
Grand sounding but the BMA are really a union. But this report, over twenty years old, was by the Oxford Union for the BMA so one wonders how many medical doctors contributed to it.
Of course, asked if exercise is good for us, it really doesn't need a doctor to agree that it is. But, so pro cycling were the authors, that they actually imply that the benefits of road cycling cannot be replicated any other way and that is patent nonsense.
For a start cycling is very one dimensional when it comes to use of all the muscles and limbs. But cycling needn't be on busy roads for exercise anyway. Swimming is probably the best all round and beneficial exercise and walking develops entirely different muscles too; so the BMA seem to be making a justification for road cycling that doesn't stand up at all.
It is interesting that the report distinguishes between cycling as 'a form of transport rather than as a recreational activity' This accords with our observations where a great deal of road cycling is clearly just recreational, two abreast, more dangerous and to the disadvantage of the community. Does the BMA agree with us that the faster cyclists ride and the style of riding will affect their chances of collisions and the outcome and extent of cyclist injury? Did it take cycling style into consideration?
When a major infrastructure like road transport is impeded and compromised, the cost to the community, including health budgets is not considered in this report but perhaps the BMA may look to its own hospital staff car parks to see that its members cannot even practice what the BMA preaches for the rest of us.
Perhaps the BMA & Politicians may wish to disconnect with road cycling death and injury but, while they encourage road cycling, they seem to be accepting the attrition that goes with it. This BMA statement: 'in spite of the hostile environment in which most cyclists currently ride, the benefits in terms of health promotion and longevity far outweigh the loss of life years in injury on the roads.' certainly gives that impression.
Does The BMA encourage this: