I Spanien är det lagstiftat att man måste bygga en cykelväg bredvid när man bygger en ny motorväg. Både mitt idrottsfysiologiska och politiska intresse väcktes naturligtvis av denna information och som vetenskapsnörd var jag självklart tvungen att söka lite på forskning kring aktivt pendlande.
Samhällets kostnader för sjukvård är ju så stora att alla åtgärder man kan göra för att få folk att sköta sin hälsa bättre borde vara av högsta prioritet. Jag är ju relativt liberal i min syn på det mesta, men vis av erfarenhet så vet jag hur lat människan är när det gäller fysisk aktivitet. Det krävs högst troligen mer än bara information om att det är farligt och korkat att sitta stilla och äta sig fet. Vi måste nog på alla stt och vis forma samhället så att det mer eller mindre är omöjligt att inte sköta sin hälsa. Exempelvis:
- Slopa moms på frukt och grönt och träning-/sportutrustning och medlemskap i träningsanläggningar
- Göra köp av pendlingsredskap (t.ex. cykel, inlines eller regnkläder) avdragsgillt med t.ex. 10000kr var 3:e år
- Bygga ut nätet av cykel- och gångvägar
- Cykelvagnar på
Ja ja, listan kan säkert göraas längre och mer detaljerad... Bifogar i alla fall två abstracts från två typiska artiklar om detta ämne. Generellt sett verkar ju aktivt pendlande (främst är det gång och cykling som undersökts) förbättra hälsan, bl.a. genom att minska risken för hjärt-kärlsjukdomar. Intressant är ju också att cykling verkar vara aningen mer fördelaktigt än att promenera, särskilt för vissa grupper :-)
Is Active commuting the answer to population health?Shephard RJ.
Department of Public Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. royjshep@shaw.ca
This brief review examines whether active commuting is an effective method of controlling the current obesity epidemic and enhancing the cardiovascular health of the population. Of the many potential methods of active commuting, walking and cycling are the usual choices. Children and adolescents prefer cycling, but for adults issues of safety, cycle storage and company dress codes make walking the preferred option, particularly in North American cities, where urban design and weather conditions often do not favour cycling. Active transportation is more frequent in some European countries with dedicated cycle and pedestrian paths, but in most developed societies, active transportation has declined in recent years.Attempts to increase walking behaviour in the sedentary population have had only limited success to date. A weekly gross energy expenditure of at least 4 MJ is recommended to reduce all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. This can be achieved by walking 1.9 km in 22 minutes twice per day, 5 days per week, or by cycling at 16 km/h for 11 minutes twice per day, 5 days per week. When engaged in level walking, the intensity of effort may be adequate for cardiovascular benefit in older adults, but in fit young workers, it is necessary to either increase the pace or choose a hilly route in order to induce cardio-respiratory benefit; in contrast, cycling is likely to provide an adequate cardiovascular stimulus even for young adults.Empirical data to date have yielded mixed results: a reduced all-cause and cardiovascular mortality has been observed more frequently in cyclists than in walkers, and more frequently in women and older men than in young active commuters. More information is needed concerning the typical weekly dose of activity provided by active commuting, and the impact of such commuting on overall attitudes towards physical activity. It is also necessary to find better methods of involving the sedentary population, through both counselling and changes in urban design.
Active commuting and cardiovascular risk: a meta-analytic review.
Hamer M, Chida Y.
Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London WC1E 6BT, UK. m.hamer@ucl.ac.uk
OBJECTIVE: Leisure time physical activity is inversely associated with cardiovascular risk, although evidence for the protective effects of active commuting is more limited. The present review examines evidence from prospective epidemiological studies of commuting activity and cardiovascular risk. METHODS: Meta-analytic procedures were performed to examine the association between commuting physical activity and cardiovascular risk. Several cardiovascular endpoints were examined including mortality, incident coronary heart disease, stroke, hypertension and diabetes. RESULTS: We included eight studies in the overall analysis (173,146 participants) that yielded 15 separate risk ratios (RR). The overall meta-analysis demonstrated a robust protective effect of active commuting on cardiovascular outcomes (integrated RR=0.89, 95% confidence interval 0.81-0.98, p=0.016). However, the protective effects of active commuting were more robust among women (0.87, 0.77-0.98, p=0.02) than in men (0.91, 0.80-1.04, p=0.17). CONCLUSIONS: Active commuting that incorporates walking and cycling was associated with an overall 11% reduction in cardiovascular risk, which was more robust among women. Future studies should investigate the reasons for possible gender effects and also examine the importance of commuting activity intensity.
