Study finds bus and train commuters healthier than people who ride bikes to work

Sakurashinmachi wrote:

And commuting by car simply doesn't happen in Tokyo, or Osaka for that matter, so I'm really puzzled how they found sufficient car commuters in Osaka to draw meaningful conclusions for their study.  

The impression of the word "commute" in my mind is half an hour or more on a train or in a car going to and from work. In this study, as far as we can tell, the people were going to work within a suburb of Osaka. In English, rather than call that commuting, we'd probably just call it 'going to work'. 
The study looks piss poor and the reporting of it is little better, but asserting that no-one commutes by car in urban Japan is also off the mark. If lots of people didn't do it, Osaka City would not have "No My-Car Days" . 
Who commutes by car in Japan? People with work parking spaces such as company owners and executives, and shop owners, people who use cars in business (salesmen, gas fitters, deliverers). The people commuting by car may be leaving Moriguchi for destinations outside that city, maybe heading north over the river, or they may be commuting within the city. Without information about length of journey, the small sample sizes are essentially meaningless.

velobetty wrote:

I'm starting to realise that cycling is a terrible way of getting around London. It's dangerous, stressful, polluted and unpleasant. Compared to the bus where you can daydream, look out of the window, listen to music and not have to deal with people constantly trying to kill you.

Yeah, had my closest near miss in a year yesterday, driver pulled out on me from just a few metres away.  I think it was just the force of my shout that stopped him or I'd have landed on his hood.

The weather does little to put me off cycling in the Winter, it's how much worse the average driver becomes once it's cold and dark.  Those sort of incidents do shake you up, but still back on the bike today.

velobetty wrote:

I'm starting to realise that cycling is a terrible way of getting around London. It's dangerous, stressful, polluted and unpleasant. Compared to the bus where you can daydream, look out of the window, listen to music and not have to deal with people constantly trying to kill you.

Unless they're people who >are< trying to kill you.  Or sneezing, coughing, vomiting or otherwise generally being unsanitary.  

Another point not raised in the article - cultural norms.  You won't find many senior executives cycling to work in Japan, or many 'highly successful' people.  So the demographics of health come into play - poor people have worse health, even in Japan, and poor people are more likely to cycle.

velobetty wrote:

I'm starting to realise that cycling is a terrible way of getting around London. It's dangerous, stressful, polluted and unpleasant. Compared to the bus where you can daydream, look out of the window, listen to music and not have to deal with people constantly trying to kill you.

The mindset TFL are keen to promote.

Beatnik69 wrote:

Perhaps many of the cyclists have decided to commute as a way of improving their health.

That isn't how things are in Japan...

Moriguchi is in ‘Greater Osaka’. Major routes from Osaka to Kyoto and beyond pass through it. The data was collected at health checks conducted by a health center in Moriguchi City. Normally, these medicals are subsidized by  city government health funds and would be limited to Moriguchi residents. There is no indication, however, wheter the scheme was open to local businesses to enable out-of-town employees to check their health.

At the presentation, the age ranges probably would have been indicated. Most people who voluntarily get annual health checks in Japan are either chronically ill or in their mid 40s or over. An age and gender break down would have been interesting. The implication is that commuting was within or to outside Moriguchi. The author simply suggests that people in Japan go by car or take public transport if the journey time would otherwise be more than 20 min.

Imagine the questionnaire:
How do get to work?
Car. Train. Bus. [?Motorcycle/Scooter]. Bicycle. Walk.
This format makes no allowance for distance or type of bicycle (electronic assist). Data analysis simply revealed relatively greater obesity and diabetes among people who circled “Bicycle”. So, the brilliant researcher thinks it plausible that walking to and from the station or bus stop is enough to account for the difference.  ​ 

The paper fails to mention that, for safety reasons, many Japanese companies specify that full-time employees are *not* allowed to cycle to work. And, in Japan, decent employers pay the commuting fees of their employees. One implication of this is that public-transport commuters have full-time jobs and are better paid. Unfortunately, occupation and income were not part of the data analysis.
I suspect that people who cycle to work tend to be poorer people who work in the service industry and do not have their commuting paid for by the company. If the cyclists are poorer, a JPY 7,000 low-geared 'comfort cycle' would be a good investment to save on fares. 'Free' transport would be useful if you were reemployed every six months at a different branch of some franchise (another local quirk). 

Cycling is more energy efficient than walking. If you don't raise your pulse, you are not going to see any health benefit. Moriguchi mostly occupies what used to be a flood plain: it is generally flat. The steepest inclines are ramps to go over the bridges crossing the drainage channels. On a comfort cycle, locally called a mamachari, a rider would be lucky to average 8 kph. According to the researcher’s suggestion that 20 min is the journey limit, commuting might involve a 5 km return journey. During most of the year, the cyclists in this study probably arrive sweatless at their site of drudgery.
If the cyclists are poorer they are likely to eat more cheap food (i.e., carbs) and would tend to be fatter.