# Am I over reacting. Please tell me I’m wrong.



## nickr (5 Jun 2017)

In the light of what seems like almost daily reports about the danger of inhaling diesel exhaust. I have from today stopped commuting to work by bicycle.

I’ve been commuting by bike for 5 years between Kingston and Chiswick and have loved it. Its been additive, like a drug. I've tried to ignore the dangers, but cannot do so any longer. I've tried many different routes but have found it impossible to avoid what I consider to be a dangerous level of exposure to the fumes.

Its seems to me that to have continued would been as idiotic as climate change denial.


----------



## Markymark (5 Jun 2017)

Nah, I still do it. I feel the health benefits outweigh the risks. Ask 5 scientists for a conclusive verdict and you'll get 6 answers.


----------



## TheDoctor (5 Jun 2017)

You're overreacting. The thing to worry about isn't the diesel fumes, it'd be the bus / lorry / taxi that's producing them.
Truth be told, you're far more likely to die at home in your sleep.


----------



## dodgy (5 Jun 2017)

So instead of cycling, how do you get into work now?


----------



## vickster (5 Jun 2017)

Can't you commute along the river path? Sounds like the perfect excuse for a new gravel bike


----------



## ianrauk (5 Jun 2017)

Overreacting. 
You best not go out on foot either in that case as you are still breathing in the same air. Diesel particles don't magically stay in the road.


----------



## smutchin (5 Jun 2017)

nickr said:


> Its been additive, like a drug.



That'll be the diesel fumes making you light-headed and giving you an asphyxiation high.


----------



## Fab Foodie (5 Jun 2017)

ianrauk said:


> Overreacting.
> You best not go out on foot either in that case as you are still breathing in the same air. Diesel particles don't magically stay in the road.


This.
And the health benefits of cycling still outweigh the risks.


----------



## Welsh wheels (5 Jun 2017)

People who commute by car and don't get any exercise are far more likely to suffer serious health problems than people who get exercise when they commute.


----------



## mjr (5 Jun 2017)

nickr said:


> In the light of what seems like almost daily reports about the danger of inhaling diesel exhaust. I have from today stopped commuting to work by bicycle.


Then sorry but you've screwed up. Motorists, bus passengers and some walkers inhale more fumes: https://www.theguardian.com/environ...2/london-air-pollution-public-transport-video

Walking quiet routes is the only mode that does better than cycling, but you may not have such a route and it takes longer. So I think the best bet for most travellers is to carry on cycling, while doing whatever you can to help the campaigns to clean up the air.


----------



## Drago (5 Jun 2017)

You're over reacting.


----------



## nickr (5 Jun 2017)

vickster said:


> Can't you commute along the river path? Sounds like the perfect excuse for a new gravel bike



The Main problem is crossing the river and getting into Chiswick



ianrauk said:


> Overreacting.
> You best not go out on foot either in that case as you are still breathing in the same air. Diesel particles don't magically stay in the road.



The latest advise to pedestrians is to walk as far away from the road as possible. I have been filtering between two rows of stationary traffic.




Fab Foodie said:


> This.
> And the health benefits of cycling still outweigh the risks.



I don't think so 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/s...ulates-diesel-cars-fossil-fuels-a7756101.html


----------



## Bazzer (5 Jun 2017)

So what do you consider to be dangerous levels of exposure to the fumes? Have you metered the levels of fumes you are cycling through?

And your alternative transport is?


----------



## Dommo (5 Jun 2017)

...and here's the alternative view :

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...ng-walking-outweigh-air-pollution-risk-cities

https://www.newscientist.com/articl...are-still-good-for-you-despite-air-pollution/


----------



## Saluki (5 Jun 2017)

Why not just wear one of those mask things that I have seen cyclists wearing in big cities.
I think you are over reacting, you'll get just as many fumes walking, using the bus or driving. You might as well cycle and have fun.


----------



## Pale Rider (5 Jun 2017)

Would a paper mask get you back into a safe zone?

Edit: crossed with @Saluki.


----------



## smutchin (5 Jun 2017)

Saluki said:


> Why not just wear one of those mask things that I have seen cyclists wearing in big cities.



Because they're entirely ineffective.


----------



## Saluki (5 Jun 2017)

smutchin said:


> Because they're entirely ineffective.


Right you are then. Having not cycled, or lived, in big cities I had no idea. I've just seen folks wearing the things.


----------



## Pale Rider (5 Jun 2017)

User said:


> Not as a placebo solution to a relatively low risk problem that could enable him to carry on riding they aren't.



And they must be a bit more effective than walking a couple of metres away in the same air.


----------



## Fab Foodie (5 Jun 2017)

nickr said:


> The Main problem is crossing the river and getting into Chiswick
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Kingston to Chiswick looks a pretty OK commute, through Richmond park, choice of 2 bridges to cross the Thames. Quite a few back-roads less frequented by trucks and buses.
Walk over the bridges on the upwind side to remove you from filtering between buses?

Your alternative is....
Infernal combustion Car? Do these filter all diesel particulates?
Electric car?
Bus?
Train?
Horseback?
Personal Jetpack (I was promised we'd all be using these when I was a kid).


----------



## Markymark (5 Jun 2017)

Fab Foodie said:


> Personal Jetpack (I was promised we'd all be using these when I was a kid).


When you were a kid the wheel was still in the realms of science fiction...


----------



## smutchin (5 Jun 2017)

Pale Rider said:


> And they must be a bit more effective than walking a couple of metres away in the same air.



From what I understand (which may not be up to date information, I admit), none of the main brands of masks aimed at cyclists (eg Respro, Totobobo) are able to filter out ultra-fine particles, which are the most harmful ones. 

The filter will probably go grey after an hour's use in central London but that only means it has caught the larger particles.

What's more, they tend to make breathing very difficult if you're putting in anything above the bare minimum level of effort - so probably fine for walking, but not really for cycling.


----------



## Pale Rider (5 Jun 2017)

smutchin said:


> From what I understand (which may not be up to date information, I admit), none of the main brands of masks aimed at cyclists (eg Respro, Totobobo) are able to filter out ultra-fine particles, which are the most harmful ones.
> 
> The filter will probably go grey after an hour's use in central London but that only means it has caught the larger particles.
> 
> What's more, they tend to make breathing very difficult if you're putting in anything above the bare minimum level of effort - so probably fine for walking, but not really for cycling.



I was more thinking about a multi-pack of paper masks from B&Q which would probably be even less effective.

A relation of mine commuted on a motorcycle into central London in the 1960s.

He told me his face was black at the end of a journey, particularly if he'd ridden through a pea souper.

His children used to like to see the two white circles after he'd removed his goggles.


----------



## Vegan1 (5 Jun 2017)

You're wrong.


----------



## byegad (5 Jun 2017)

As an asthmatic whose condition reacts badly to diesel fumes, I fully understand the OP's reaction. I suspect that larger cities are nearly always going to bad news for everyone especially on dry still days. The more rain and wind you get on a day the cleaner the air will be.


----------



## classic33 (5 Jun 2017)

smutchin said:


> From what I understand (which may not be up to date information, I admit), none of the main brands of masks aimed at cyclists (eg Respro, Totobobo) are able to filter out ultra-fine particles, which are the most harmful ones.
> 
> The filter will probably go grey after an hour's use in central London but that only means it has caught the larger particles.
> 
> What's more, they tend to make breathing very difficult if you're putting in anything above the bare minimum level of effort - so probably fine for walking, but not really for cycling.


The correct ones are available, they'll filter out the particles. You have around 30 - 45 minutes of use from them.


----------



## palinurus (5 Jun 2017)

byegad said:


> The more rain and wind you get on a day the cleaner the air will be.



I'll remember that tomorrow morning when I go out in the rain to get my bike out of the shed.


----------



## jay clock (5 Jun 2017)

+1 for overreacting. If you are inside a bus it is pretty much the same air you will breathing, without the exercise benefit


----------



## smutchin (5 Jun 2017)

classic33 said:


> The correct ones are available, they'll filter out the particles. You have around 30 - 45 minutes of use from them.



Good to know. What are they like for cycling in?


----------



## Simontm (5 Jun 2017)

nickr said:


> The Main problem is crossing the river and getting into Chiswick
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Kew Bridge or Chiswick? When I was in Paddington, I went via Kew Bridge onto Chiswick High. You're over it in about a minute or so. The biggest problem would be the Petersham Road where there are frequent bottlenecks at the bottom of Richmond Hill, so take the park route


----------



## CanucksTraveller (5 Jun 2017)

I think you've overreacted. Pollution is harmful to some extent of course, but pollution exists whether you're driving, bussing, walking or whatever. Cycling to work is really good for you and to give that up is the far bigger risk to your health.


----------



## dodgy (5 Jun 2017)

And still hasn't told us what his alternative commute plans are.


----------



## PK99 (5 Jun 2017)

nickr said:


> In the light of what seems like almost daily reports about the danger of inhaling diesel exhaust. I have from today stopped commuting to work by bicycle.
> 
> I’ve been commuting by bike for 5 years between Kingston and Chiswick and have loved it. Its been additive, like a drug. I've tried to ignore the dangers, but cannot do so any longer. I've tried many different routes but have found it impossible to avoid what I consider to be a dangerous level of exposure to the fumes.
> 
> Its seems to me that to have continued would been as idiotic as climate change denial.



Which way do you commute?

Richmond Park and Sheen is a pretty good low traffic commute.


----------



## Lee_M (5 Jun 2017)

dodgy said:


> And still hasn't told us what his alternative commute plans are.



Driving a diesel transit :-D


----------



## classic33 (5 Jun 2017)

smutchin said:


> Good to know. What are they like for cycling in?


You'll draw air in at slightly increased rate, like you said. But the warmer air leaving can leave your face feeling damp.

Found them irritating to the skin, but I was using them for less than a month, whilst cycling.


----------



## nickr (5 Jun 2017)

dodgy said:


> And still hasn't told us what his alternative commute plans are.



I will be using overground trains. I have not seen any survey regarding the air quality on trains, but I think its safe to say that its better than Chiswick High road at 18:00. Even if it were worse (which I very much doubt), I will not be breathing hard. The total volume of air passing through my lungs will be greatly reduced. 

Regarding the reduction in exercise. Its not as if I'm going to be completely sedentary. I'll have more energy for other forms of exercise.

To be honest pollution is not the only reason I have given up. The fear of being hit has played a large part too. I've survived 5 years with no injuries and hopefully no long term side effects. As I said in my initial post, its like a drug, I love it but I know its very dangerous.


----------



## vickster (5 Jun 2017)

nickr said:


> I will be using overground trains. I have not seen any survey regarding the air quality on trains, but I think its safe to say that its better than Chiswick High road at 18:00. Even if it were worse (which I very much doubt), I will not be breathing hard. The total volume of air passing through my lungs will be greatly reduced.
> 
> Regarding the reduction in exercise. Its not as if I'm going to be completely sedentary. I'll have more energy for other forms of exercise.
> 
> To be honest pollution is not the only reason I have given up. The fear of being hit has played a large part too. I've survived 5 years with no injuries and hopefully no long term side effects. As I said in my initial post, its like a drug, I love it but *I know its very dangerous.*


It's really not (as evidenced by your 5 years with no injuries) but it's your decision.


----------



## classic33 (5 Jun 2017)

nickr said:


> I will be using overground trains. I have not seen any survey regarding the air quality on trains, but I think its safe to say that its better than Chiswick High road at 18:00. Even if it were worse (which I very much doubt), I will not be breathing hard. The total volume of air passing through my lungs will be greatly reduced.
> 
> Regarding the reduction in exercise. Its not as if I'm going to be completely sedentary. I'll have more energy for other forms of exercise.
> 
> To be honest pollution is not the only reason I have given up. The fear of being hit has played a large part too. I've survived 5 years with no injuries and* hopefully no long term side effects*. As I said in my initial post, its like a drug, I love it but I know its very dangerous.


Long term side effects, it got you cycling more.

Travelling by train can result in more colds/infections being caught. All that rebreathed, damp air, that's passed through a system that might have been cleaned.


----------



## Fab Foodie (5 Jun 2017)

nickr said:


> The fear of being hit has played a large part too. *I've survived 5 years with no injuries* and hopefully no long term side effects. As I said in my initial post, its like a drug, I love it but I know its very dangerous.


Not terribly dangerous then.....
Enjoy overground trains, you'll need drugs to use them every day!


----------



## mjr (5 Jun 2017)

nickr said:


> To be honest pollution is not the only reason I have given up. The fear of being hit has played a large part too. I've survived 5 years with no injuries and hopefully no long term side effects. As I said in my initial post, its like a drug, I love it but I know its very dangerous.


It's really not. I think I've been hit twice in about 40 years: once from behind by another bike (maybe 10 years ago) and once from the front/side by a car (a few weeks ago). Still no injuries.



classic33 said:


> Travelling by train can result in more colds/infections being caught. All that rebreathed, damp air, that's passed through a system that might have been cleaned.


Isn't it more all the sick people transferring germs onto the train's surfaces by sneezing and touch, which you then touch and eventually transfer to a soft opening?


----------



## iateyoubutler (5 Jun 2017)

I`ll give up the commute when it suits me, when I`m old, broken, and past it, not because of the actions of the engine loving fraternity.

Keep cycling


----------



## Bazzer (5 Jun 2017)

nickr said:


> I will be using overground trains. I have not seen any survey regarding the air quality on trains, but I think its safe to say that its better than Chiswick High road at 18:00. Even if it were worse (which I very much doubt), I will not be breathing hard. The total volume of air passing through my lungs will be greatly reduced.
> 
> Regarding the reduction in exercise. Its not as if I'm going to be completely sedentary. I'll have more energy for other forms of exercise.
> 
> To be honest pollution is not the only reason I have given up. The fear of being hit has played a large part too. I've survived 5 years with no injuries and hopefully no long term side effects. As I said in my initial post, its like a drug, *I love it but I know its very dangerous*.



Seriously?

Personally I consider some of my other activities to be more dangerous and that would include driving.


----------



## Simontm (5 Jun 2017)

nickr said:


> I will be using overground trains. I have not seen any survey regarding the air quality on trains, but I think its safe to say that its better than Chiswick High road at 18:00. Even if it were worse (which I very much doubt), I will not be breathing hard. The total volume of air passing through my lungs will be greatly reduced.
> 
> Regarding the reduction in exercise. Its not as if I'm going to be completely sedentary. I'll have more energy for other forms of exercise.
> 
> To be honest pollution is not the only reason I have given up. The fear of being hit has played a large part too. I've survived 5 years with no injuries and hopefully no long term side effects. As I said in my initial post, its like a drug, I love it but I know its very dangerous.


Why not use Wellesley Road to and from Kew Bridge?


----------



## booze and cake (5 Jun 2017)

In my view being killed to death by diesel is still a better option than getting the train or bus. *shudder*


----------



## Drago (5 Jun 2017)

nickr said:


> I don't think so
> 
> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/s...ulates-diesel-cars-fossil-fuels-a7756101.html



You ask us if you are over reacting.

Someone tells you that you are.

You then challenge that with the link above.

That being the case, you think your actions are justifiable, so why bother asking what we think?


----------



## atalanta (5 Jun 2017)

I get where you're coming from, totally. But London has terrible air quality full-stop, and Richmond borough is one of the greenest places you could live (I live here too). Even riding along the river doesn't help? I know it lengthens the commute, but...


----------



## Drago (5 Jun 2017)

On a related thought, does the OP own a car? Is it diesel powered?


----------



## 400bhp (5 Jun 2017)

If you do nothing else OP read the conclusion:

http://www.bmj.com/content/357/bmj.j1456

I was wondering. I have windows in my house but am afraid of the UV. Shall I remove the windows from my house?


----------



## mustang1 (5 Jun 2017)

mjr said:


> Then sorry but you've screwed up. Motorists, bus passengers and some walkers inhale more fumes: https://www.theguardian.com/environ...2/london-air-pollution-public-transport-video
> 
> Walking quiet routes is the only mode that does better than cycling, but you may not have such a route and it takes longer. So I think the best bet for most travellers is to carry on cycling, while doing whatever you can to help the campaigns to clean up the air.


I do not have with that report.


----------



## steveindenmark (6 Jun 2017)

I think if you are that worried about it you should stop cycling. Stop walking. Keep out of the garden.

But it seems that the rest of us can manage it and do not seem to be dying at a faster rate than usual.


----------



## ufkacbln (6 Jun 2017)

For those of us of a "certain age" ...

We have been through this all before, with pollution levels high and causing Asthma and other illnesses to exacerbate (especially in children) and how it needed to be tackled.

So the motoring lobby installed a magic box called a catalytic converter, that despite never actually being effective (most journeys are too short for it to warm up enough to work) became the ultimate answer

Then we had the fact that Diesel cars were more efficient and less polluting so we should all drive diesel

All was well, the motoring lobby managed to sell a package that cosmetically made everything better and avoided discussing the reality that ALL vehicles pollute and looking at ALL vehicle use was the real way forward 


Now some 25 - 30 years later we are allowing them to pull the same cheap card trick again

Diesel is very naughty, so we will ban diesel cars, every one can buy those nice, clean effective petrol cars and we will have cleaned up the problem..... pat ourselves onto back and sit down for another 25 years polluting away

What is needed is to stop scapegoating Diesel and look at the real problem of pollution from vehicles as a whole

Otherwise we are simply allowing the same con to be repeated


----------



## Drago (6 Jun 2017)

For our own part, us car drivers should be tackling the culture of using the car for short, unnecessary journeys. The very joirneys that create the greatest pillution.

I refuse to drive a journey of under 7 miles and will cycle or, very occasionally, use public transport. People trot out all the excuses about time, convenience, the bus timetable etc, but they're all just that - excuses.


----------



## Simontm (6 Jun 2017)

atalanta said:


> I get where you're coming from, totally. But London has terrible air quality full-stop, and Richmond borough is one of the greenest places you could live (I live here too). Even riding along the river doesn't help? I know it lengthens the commute, but...


Part of the problem, which people forget, is that London is in a bowl which doesn't exactly help with dispersing the fumes on a still day.


----------



## boydj (6 Jun 2017)

Switching to the train is a very expensive way of reducing further what is actually a very low risk of damage from pollution or other vehicles.


----------



## mjr (6 Jun 2017)

mustang1 said:


> I do not have with that report.


If that's a game of Blankety Blank, you forgot to include BLANK there. Nonetheless, if you don't trust het Grauniad, there are plenty of similar reports available and few claiming motorists are healthier.


----------



## jonny jeez (6 Jun 2017)

nickr said:


> In the light of what seems like almost daily reports about the danger of inhaling diesel exhaust. I have from today stopped commuting to work by bicycle.
> 
> I’ve been commuting by bike for 5 years between Kingston and Chiswick and have loved it. Its been additive, like a drug. I've tried to ignore the dangers, but cannot do so any longer. I've tried many different routes but have found it impossible to avoid what I consider to be a dangerous level of exposure to the fumes.
> 
> Its seems to me that to have continued would been as idiotic as climate change denial.


yes, you are over reacting.


----------



## Bimble (6 Jun 2017)

You should get back on the bike now that diesel car sales are falling: http://news.sky.com/story/diesel-car-sales-down-a-fifth-as-drivers-shift-to-electric-10905179 

Just out of interest - did you notice any downturn in your health and wellbeing during the time you commuted by bike? What about your energy levels since you stopped cycling?

I think the 'fumes' might be convenient excuse. Are you simply just tired of cycle commuting? It happens, there's no shame in it.


----------



## mjr (6 Jun 2017)

You could get an air-cleaning bicycle. http://midlifecycling.blogspot.com/2017/05/this-bike-sucks-and-thats-good-thing.html


----------



## TheDoctor (6 Jun 2017)

I have to say, the dangers of PM10 (particulate pollutants of around 10 um) was well known, and covered in the course material when I started my degree in '95 or so.
Has it really taken 20-odd years for people to start worrying about them?
And, to the OP, if you've been riding through them for the last five years, then what makes you think stopping now will help? Diesels have been around for years and years.


----------



## mustang1 (6 Jun 2017)

mjr said:


> If that's a game of Blankety Blank, you forgot to include BLANK there. Nonetheless, if you don't trust het Grauniad, there are plenty of similar reports available and few claiming motorists are healthier.


Sorry my typo. I meant to say:
I do not gel with that report. 

I remember that report when it came out and did not agree with it. I saw other news sites also duplicated the report but did not independently verify it (except to source another duplicate news site).


----------



## KnackeredBike (6 Jun 2017)

Total overreaction. Like anything there is obviously some risk to any exposure, but if we assessed risk on that basis we'd all be living underground to protect us from (some) of the background radiation.

In an ideal world you would be dancing in a field inhaling cow fart but if you want to live a modern life there will be some extra exposure to pollutants. Your commute tomorrow may be the one that kills you but in reality you are lowering your risk of acute and chronic diseases by being fit and cycling.

Plus if you have bad exposure a good few feet up imagine all those car drivers who have a fan slowly sucking air from over the bonnet into their confined space. They may look a bit pasty but they seem to be surviving even without the benefit of your exercise.

Something is going to kill you in the end, might as well do what you enjoy in the interim.


----------



## classic33 (6 Jun 2017)

KnackeredBike said:


> Total overreaction. Like anything there is obviously some risk to any exposure, but if we assessed risk on that basis we'd all be living underground to protect us from (some) of the background radiation.
> 
> In an ideal world you would be dancing in a field inhaling cow fart but if you want to live a modern life there will be some extra exposure to pollutants. Your commute tomorrow may be the one that kills you but in reality you are lowering your risk of acute and chronic diseases by being fit and cycling.
> 
> ...


Where's that air being drawn in and at what height?


----------



## nickr (6 Jun 2017)

Drago said:


> You ask us if you are over reacting.
> 
> Someone tells you that you are.
> 
> ...



This is a forum for discussions, I am hoping to be persuaded that I'm over reacting - I have to illustrate why I am worried about the dangers of cycling in London.



atalanta said:


> I get where you're coming from, totally. But London has terrible air quality full-stop, and Richmond borough is one of the greenest places you could live (I live here too). Even riding along the river doesn't help? I know it lengthens the commute, but...



I avoid Richmond - too much traffic and mad cabbies




Drago said:


> On a related thought, does the OP own a car? Is it diesel powered?




I don't own a car



boydj said:


> Switching to the train is a very expensive way of reducing further what is actually a very low risk of damage from pollution or other vehicles.



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-31612253



TheDoctor said:


> I have to say, the dangers of PM10 (particulate pollutants of around 10 um) was well known, and covered in the course material when I started my degree in '95 or so.
> Has it really taken 20-odd years for people to start worrying about them?
> And, to the OP, if you've been riding through them for the last five years, then what makes you think stopping now will help? Diesels have been around for years and years.



The advise given to smokers is that giving up will drastically reduce the chances of lung cancer - would not a drastic reduction in carcinogenic exhaust gas achieve the same?


----------



## Drago (6 Jun 2017)

Not in the same way, no.

You're still over reacting.


----------



## TheDoctor (6 Jun 2017)

We're talking entirely different levels of risk here.
About 90% of lung cancer cases are due to smoking, so that's 10% of lung cancer deaths down to everything else, including diesel fumes.
The study most often used to scaremonger about diesel fumes, the Diesel Exhaust in Miners study, shows an increase in risk of lung cancer due to diesel fumes if you work underground amongst high concentrations, all day, every day. It also shows an increased risk of cirrhosis of the liver. It goes to great pains to point out the uncertainties and limitations of the study. None of this ever makes it into the press.
But, as others have said, you've obviously made up your mind. I'm out.


----------



## Lee_M (6 Jun 2017)

Give up riding, be miserable, unfit and stuck in a train with other miserable unfit people

Or keep riding, be happy, avoid crappy public transport.

and if you die a year earlier who cares? 
I'd rather die happy at 60 than die miserable at 65 

BTW I'm 55 so hope I dont die at 60!


----------



## Shut Up Legs (6 Jun 2017)

Lee_M said:


> Give up riding, be miserable, unfit and stuck in a train with other miserable unfit people
> 
> Or keep riding, be happy, avoid crappy public transport.
> 
> ...


Too true.  Unfortunately, the majority of non-cyclists just don't understand this, and when they find I commute 30km each way regardless of how bad the weather is, they're surprised. But the cycling is why I can virtually run up escalators  , overtaking the non-cyclists who just stand on the escalators and let them do all the work.


----------



## Drago (6 Jun 2017)

Ronnie Pickering inhales pure oxygen and exhales VW grade diesel fumes.


----------



## mjr (7 Jun 2017)

Dogtrousers said:


> Here you go, a smog free bicycle, invented by a Dutchman, that cleans the air as you cycle.
> http://road.cc/content/news/223830-dutchman-invents-bike-tackles-air-pollution-you-pedal


Which I posted at 15:38 yesterday...


----------



## jefmcg (7 Jun 2017)

You're welcome


----------



## Drago (7 Jun 2017)

His will @nickr get himself to work now he's quit cycle commuting?


----------



## vickster (7 Jun 2017)

Drago said:


> His will @nickr get himself to work now he's quit cycle commuting?


He says by overground train (#38)


----------



## boydj (8 Jun 2017)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-31612253

You have to put these figures in the context of the millions of cycle journeys taken in the London area every year. Statistically, cycling is very safe for adult cyclists, even on busy roads. 

It seems to me you are looking for excuses to justify not cycling, exaggerating the risks and ignoring the benefits, not least of which is a substantial financial benefit.


----------



## User16625 (10 Jun 2017)

nickr said:


> In the light of what seems like almost daily reports about the danger of inhaling diesel exhaust. I have from today stopped commuting to work by bicycle.
> 
> I’ve been commuting by bike for 5 years between Kingston and Chiswick and have loved it. Its been additive, like a drug. I've tried to ignore the dangers, but cannot do so any longer. I've tried many different routes but have found it impossible to avoid what I consider to be a dangerous level of exposure to the fumes.
> 
> Its seems to me that to have continued would been as idiotic as climate change denial.





TheDoctor said:


> You're overreacting. The thing to worry about isn't the diesel fumes, it'd be the bus / lorry / taxi that's producing them.
> *Truth be told, you're far more likely to die at home in your sleep.*




She's right Nick. You don't even need to be asleep to spontaneously combust or more likely, have a brain haemorrhage. People die all the time, its nothing to worry about.


----------



## jefmcg (10 Jun 2017)

RideLikeTheStig said:


> You don't even need to be asleep to spontaneously combust


Yeah, you do,. Well, unconscious actually.

Still, I hope @nickr is OK


----------



## TheDoctor (10 Jun 2017)

RideLikeTheStig said:


> She's right Nick. You don't even need to be asleep to spontaneously combust or more likely, have a brain haemorrhage. People die all the time, its nothing to worry about.


Hang on, she's right?
*checks contents of scrotum*
I may have a bit of a moob thing going on, but that's a bit harsh...


----------



## User16625 (11 Jun 2017)

jefmcg said:


> Yeah, you do,. Well, unconscious actually.
> 
> Still, I hope @nickr is OK
> 
> View attachment 356384



Don't just take my word for it but nickr was out riding his bike last Wednesday when he was attacked and eaten by a polar bear. I do want to also point out that this is an isolated event so there is no need to worry, or for the authorities to take any action.


----------



## zer07 (12 Jun 2017)

nickr said:


> In the light of what seems like almost daily reports about the danger of inhaling diesel exhaust. I have from today stopped commuting to work by bicycle.
> 
> I’ve been commuting by bike for 5 years between Kingston and Chiswick and have loved it. Its been additive, like a drug. I've tried to ignore the dangers, but cannot do so any longer. I've tried many different routes but have found it impossible to avoid what I consider to be a dangerous level of exposure to the fumes.
> 
> Its seems to me that to have continued would been as idiotic as climate change denial.



I recall seeing a Top Gear episode where they tested the amount of fume levels people inhaled in London either in a car, as a pedestrian, on public transport or cycling (I know it had car and cycles). Cycling came out lower than car driving interestingly which I believe they accredited it to being sat behind lorries and busses with the AC on sucking in the fumes. Not sure if that episode is still on iPlayer but it had interesting results none the less.


----------



## nickr (23 Jun 2017)

boydj said:


> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-31612253
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-31612253
> You have to put these figures in the context of the millions of cycle journeys taken in the London area every year. Statistically, cycling is very safe for adult cyclists, even on busy roads.
> 
> It seems to me you are looking for excuses to justify not cycling, exaggerating the risks and ignoring the benefits, not least of which is a substantial financial benefit.



You have to be joking. I "have to put these figures into context" Cyclist only make up a fraction of the total commutors coming into London each day and how many of these travelling by train are killed each year or have life changing accidents? 

My only "excuse" for stopping cycling was that I'm scared of death. The cost of rail travel is easy to take when you consider the potential for serious injury or lung desease.


----------



## jefmcg (23 Jun 2017)

nickr said:


> lung desease.


Exercise protects you from a range of disease, including lung disease, so yes, you have to understand the risks before you change your behaviour based on them..

_COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) is the most common pulmonary disease and is the only common cause of death in which mortality is presently rising. It is caused by the inhalation of smoke, which leads to oxidative stress and inflammation both in the lungs and systemically. Reduced physical activity is a well-recognized consequence of the condition, but we argue here that *inactivity is itself an early cause of lung function decline and symptoms*. This hypothesis is supported by data from population studies that link activity levels to decline in spirometric indices, both in smokers and non-smokers. In addition, smokers with low physical activity levels are more likely to be diagnosed subsequently with COPD. Physical exercise reduces oxidative stress, has an anti-inflammatory effect and reduces the frequency of upper respiratory tract infections, providing a number of mechanisms by which it could attenuate the harmful effects of smoking. There is sufficient evidence to justify population trials of lifestyle interventions aimed at improving physical activity levels and reducing lung function decline in people diagnosed with early COPD through spirometry screening._

And if you rethink your route and cross Kingston Bridge, you will probably find it a nicer ride, and if you like you can spend a lot of your journey on car free, and low traffic sections .....


jefmcg said:


> You're welcome
> 
> 
> View attachment 355977


----------



## boydj (23 Jun 2017)

nickr said:


> You have to be joking. I "have to put these figures into context" Cyclist only make up a fraction of the total commutors coming into London each day and how many of these travelling by train are killed each year or have life changing accidents?
> 
> My only "excuse" for stopping cycling was that I'm scared of death. The cost of rail travel is easy to take when you consider the potential for serious injury or lung desease.



We're all going to die at some point. Given the pollution levels in and around London I doubt that stopping cycling will reduce your exposure by much. Your fitness will undoubtedly suffer from the reduced exercise levels and this could impact adversely on your longevity.

Personally I always enjoyed my commute into the centre of Glasgow - it wasn't always incident free, but much preferable to public transport. I wonder why, after 5 years, you have lost your cycling mojo when the risks are no worse than they were two or three years ago.


----------



## classic33 (24 Jun 2017)

nickr said:


> You have to be joking. I "have to put these figures into context" Cyclist only make up a fraction of the total commutors coming into London each day and how many of these travelling by train are killed each year or have life changing accidents?
> *
> My only "excuse" for stopping cycling was that I'm scared of death.* The cost of rail travel is easy to take when you consider the potential for serious injury or lung desease.


Very few will say they're not scared of death. But take into account that you'll have cut the amount of exercise done by yourself and the effect of doing so.

There's workarounds for nearly everything these days. We can cut the risks, but can't exclude them. Crossing the road, on a crossing earlier this week, I'd a driving instructor tell his pupil to go through the red light, just missing me.

We can hide, but it'll find us. Keep pushing those pedals.


----------



## slowmotion (24 Jun 2017)

Your chances of dying from inhaling diesel fumes while cycling are minute. Don't even think of wearing some kind of respirator. They are appallingly uncomfortable. Keep riding and enjoy it with a smile on your face.


----------



## Drago (24 Jun 2017)

The OP is still wrong.


----------



## User6179 (24 Jun 2017)

Drago said:


> The OP is still wrong.



The OP sadly passed away while tailgating a bus yesterday morning..............


----------



## BPCycler (28 Jun 2017)

A handkerchief could help reduce it a little but. 




nickr said:


> In the light of what seems like almost daily reports about the danger of inhaling diesel exhaust. I have from today stopped commuting to work by bicycle.
> 
> I’ve been commuting by bike for 5 years between Kingston and Chiswick and have loved it. Its been additive, like a drug. I've tried to ignore the dangers, but cannot do so any longer. I've tried many different routes but have found it impossible to avoid what I consider to be a dangerous level of exposure to the fumes.
> 
> Its seems to me that to have continued would been as idiotic as climate change denial.


----------



## Drago (28 Jun 2017)

Eddy said:


> The OP sadly passed away while tailgating a bus yesterday morning..............



But the fumes didn't kill him, right?


----------



## jefmcg (29 Jun 2017)

BPCycler said:


> A handkerchief could help reduce it a little but.


That would only take out the course particulates, which aren't a health risk. The ones that can shorten your life would pass straight through.


----------



## BPCycler (29 Jun 2017)

jefmcg said:


> That would only take out the course particulates, which aren't a health risk. The ones that can shorten your life would pass straight through.



Well, I tried.


----------



## Trevrev (30 Jun 2017)

Any excuse not to cycle!!


----------



## bonsaibilly (4 Jul 2017)

smutchin said:


> That'll be the diesel fumes making you light-headed and giving you an asphyxiation high.



It'll be the additives.


----------



## Drago (4 Jul 2017)

Is this thread still going.

You're still wrong


----------



## jefmcg (5 Jul 2017)

[QUOTE 4867638, member: 9609"]I think you are right to be worried about taking exercise in a big polluted city, I certainly wouldn't.[/QUOTE]
Seriously, the OP has one of the nicest city commutes I could imagine. As mentioned he could go through Richmond Park. He could cross the river at Kingston and come up through mostly quiet roads to Twickenham, then follow the river past Marble Hill, Orleans House and on through Syon House (how many people get to pass a recently restored Capability Brown garden twice a day?) He could follow the Thames path along the river and through gardens and a field of cows and around the outside of Kew Gardens, joining the road at Kew Bridge and then following the reasonably quiet roads along the river or he could continue past the rowing clubs to Chiswick Bridge and on to his destination. If it was me, I'd mix it up and take different options each day.

Or he could come on to CC, complain about how dirty and dangerous it is, and stomp off.


----------



## mjr (5 Jul 2017)

[QUOTE 4868005, member: 9609"]you have to wonder if regular exercise anywhere in London outside air conditioned gyms is remotely wise. The writing is on the wall, this type of pollution is having major long term affects on our health.[/QUOTE]
And that writing must surely say that switching from cycling to motorised transport (even electric, which moves the pollution to power stations outside the city) doesn't help reduce this type of pollution overall? So, for that reason as well as your own personal health, exercising while travelling around London is better than not exercising while travelling.


----------



## tablatom (25 Jul 2017)

Wear a pollution mask.

When i was a courier riding 10 hours a day in London i wore it only on the busy streets.
In the 1990's pollution was worse as the diesel engine's then belched out much more smoke.
After a days riding with the mask, when i took it off the part of my face that wasn't covered by it was dirtier than the part that was.

When i left London after 11 years of cycling there i moved to the country side, i coughed up loads of stuff from my lungs with black spots on it and my wife used to comment that i smelt of metal, i could smell it too, chemicals from the pollution no doubt.


----------



## swee'pea99 (25 Jul 2017)

[QUOTE 4867638, member: 9609"]When in town keep all movement to a minimum[/QUOTE] 
Words to live by.


----------



## confusedcyclist (26 Jul 2017)

Sorry if this was already mentioned, but actually sitting in a car or truck or bus is worse because usually the air intake is positioned at the front of the cabin, right where the exhaust of the motor infront belches out.

When you cycle, the micro particles are free to disperse, in a cabin they are likely trapped in with you.


----------



## confusedcyclist (26 Jul 2017)

tablatom said:


> Wear a pollution mask.
> 
> When i was a courier riding 10 hours a day in London i wore it only on the busy streets.
> In the 1990's pollution was worse as the diesel engine's then belched out much more smoke.
> ...



Probably the Lead. It's virtually non-problematic now. FYI face masks are not effective against micro particulates that cause the problems with disel fumes. They pass right through.


----------



## classic33 (27 Jul 2017)

confusedcyclist said:


> Probably the Lead. It's virtually non-problematic now. FYI face masks are not effective against micro particulates that cause the problems with disel fumes. They pass right through.


There are face masks that will filter the particles out.


----------



## nickr (15 Aug 2017)

zer07 said:


> I recall seeing a Top Gear episode where they tested the amount of fume levels people inhaled in London either in a car, as a pedestrian, on public transport or cycling (I know it had car and cycles). Cycling came out lower than car driving interestingly which I believe they accredited it to being sat behind lorries and busses with the AC on sucking in the fumes. Not sure if that episode is still on iPlayer but it had interesting results none the less.



I simply don't believe that the air in a car equipped with a carbon activated filter is more polluted than the air outside the vehicle. 
http://www.tundraheadquarters.com/b...abin-air-filters-do-they-live-up-to-the-hype/


----------



## mjr (15 Aug 2017)

nickr said:


> I simply don't believe that the air in a car equipped with a carbon activated filter is more polluted than the air outside the vehicle.
> http://www.tundraheadquarters.com/b...abin-air-filters-do-they-live-up-to-the-hype/


I believe independent scientists more than I believe a Toyota fan site.


----------



## jefmcg (15 Aug 2017)

mjr said:


> I believe independent scientists more than I believe a Toyota fan site.


I would agree with that.

But then the actual source quoted here is


zer07 said:


> I recall seeing a Top Gear episode



But here's a scientist


----------



## mjr (15 Aug 2017)

jefmcg said:


> But then the actual source quoted here is
> 
> 
> But here's a scientist


Or the ones I mentioned earlier at https://www.cyclechat.net/posts/4829639 - no idea why there was a temporary downgrade to Top Gear.


----------



## jefmcg (15 Aug 2017)

mjr said:


> Or the ones I mentioned earlier at https://www.cyclechat.net/posts/4829639 - no idea why there was a temporary downgrade to Top Gear.


Eight pages  I'll stick with what's quoted.

Either way, it's irrelevant as the OP is going to use the train.

And it's also irrelevant because - again - there are more than one fairly direct routes between Kingston and Chiswick that are almost entirely away from heavy traffic.


----------



## nickr (16 Aug 2017)

jefmcg said:


> Eight pages  I'll stick with what's quoted.
> 
> Either way, it's irrelevant as the OP is going to use the train.
> 
> And it's also irrelevant because - again - there are more than one fairly direct routes between Kingston and Chiswick that are almost entirely away from heavy traffic.


 

Please describe such a route. I have been doing this commute for 5 year and have obviously searched for the best route. None of the routes given are any better than mine.

Also please note "exposure" to pollution is not the same as the amount actually breathed in. I would be very surprised if the pollution levels in a car with a carbon activated filter were as high as that outside the car. However, even if this were true, the volume of air passed through a cyclists lungs on a similar commute would be vastly greater than that of a motorist/bus or rail passenger on the same journey. The cyclist is also far more likely to be hit than those using other transport methods.


----------



## mjr (16 Aug 2017)

nickr said:


> I would be very surprised if the pollution levels in a car with a carbon activated filter were as high as that outside the car.


It depends where outside the car - it may be lower than the pollution at the air intake or the tailpipe of the car in front, but still higher than at the kerbside.



nickr said:


> However, even if this were true, the volume of air passed through a cyclists lungs on a similar commute would be vastly greater than that of a motorist/bus or rail passenger on the same journey.


Not vastly - most cyclists are not gonna be going that fast on a route congested by motorists, even if there's a cycle lane, because one should be cautious passing their unexpressive and unpredictable vehicles - and it also means that what pollution there is spending less time lingering in the lungs and potentially being absorbed - lungs are not a filter that all air passes through.



nickr said:


> The cyclist is also far more likely to be hit than those using other transport methods.


More likely than most but still very unlikely.


----------



## jefmcg (16 Aug 2017)

nickr said:


> Please describe such a route. I






jefmcg said:


> You're welcome
> View attachment 355977





jefmcg said:


> Seriously, the OP has one of the nicest city commutes I could imagine. As mentioned he could go through Richmond Park. He could cross the river at Kingston and come up through mostly quiet roads to Twickenham, then follow the river past Marble Hill, Orleans House and on through Syon House (how many people get to pass a recently restored Capability Brown garden twice a day?) He could follow the Thames path along the river and through gardens and a field of cows and around the outside of Kew Gardens, joining the road at Kew Bridge and then following the reasonably quiet roads along the river or he could continue past the rowing clubs to Chiswick Bridge and on to his destination. If it was me, I'd mix it up and take different options each day.





nickr said:


> The cyclist is also far more likely to be hit than those using other transport methods.


----------

