Increase cycling eightfold

On 31 Mar, 07:36, Tom Crispin
wrote:
On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 22:30:53 +0100, Peter Parry
wrote:

On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 10:55:42 -0700 (PDT), Doug
wrote:

What you are overlooking is that in many countries the birth rate is
falling already.

Having local reductions is of no use at all if the world population is
still increasing, which it is.

The rate of increase is slowing *dramatically* as the World's
population becomes better educated.

The World fertility rate is now at 2.5; the replacement level is 2.1.

'Gendercide' is common in India and China, with sex defining scans
affordable at $12 per scan, and selective abortions of female
foetuses. This causes the male:female ratio to be as high as 1.3:1 in
some parts of India and China. It is the 200,000,000 unmarriageable
men in these countries which should be a cause of future concern.

We are increasing the planets population by 80 million each year. That
is 80 million fossil fuel burning consumers. We by our success on
reproducing are the problem. Anything you do on your cycle to 'save
the planet' is just lip service. The outcome is inevitable give or
take 50/100/500/5000/50,000 years.

Enjoy what you have whilst you can, you won't be leaving any sort of
'good sustainable legacy' for our decendents

On 30/03/2010 05:54, Doug wrote:
On 30 Mar, 03:57, Tom
wrote:
On Page 63 of his anual report, Sir Liam Donaldson the Chief Medial
Officer, calls for an eight-fold increase in cycling.http://www.lcc.org.uk/index.asp?PageID=1757
Full report:http://www.dh.gov.uk/prod_consum_dh/...sets/@dh/@en/@...

==========Quote==========
The Government's top health advisor, Chief Medical Officer Sir Liam
Donaldson, has said cycling must be increased eightfold to combat the
public health crisis caused by designing cities around motor vehicles.
In the last annual report before his planned retirement this year, 'On
the State of Public Health', Donaldson despairs over the low levels of
physical activity in Britain.

In particular, he calls for our transport infrastructure to be
re-designed in order to encourage the levels of walking and cycling in
the Netherlands and Denmark.

The report recommends that: "National targets should be set to double
travel on foot in England’s towns and cities, and to increase travel
by bicycle eightfold; transport policy and road design should support
the achievement of such gains." (page 63)

Cycling could save over 50,000 'healthy years'
The report says: "There would be significant reductions in heart
disease, stroke, diabetes, depression and dementia. In London alone,
over 55,000 healthy years of life could be saved every year. Travel by
bicycle or on foot needs to become the safe, viable, attractive option
for a far greater proportion of journeys." (page 60)

The report recognises that: "Lifestyle changes can make a substantial
contribution to slowing climate change and can significantly reduce
the disease and death that are associated with a sedentary lifestyle –
a lifestyle to which the current absolute dominance of motorised
transport contributes." (page 60)

Reports repeating the same message
The advice from the Chief Medical Officer reinforces the messages from
the Active Travel Strategy jointly presented by the Department for
Transport and Department of Health last month.

The strategy notes that the annual cost of physical inactivity related
to transport in urban area total £9.8 billion. This is as significant
as the cost of road casualties and congestion costs.

In 2009, a Lancet report drew similar conclusions about the need to
increase cycling to improve public health.
==========/quote==========

Yeah but who is going to listen? Our car-centric country is dominated
by motorists and their families who, if this newsgroup is anything to
go by, really hate cyclists to the point of extremism.

What? People in uk.rec.cycling hate cyclists? Give me a break.


--
John Wright

Use your imagination Marvin!

Life's bad enough as it is - why invent any more of it.

On 30 Mar, 17:50, Doug wrote:
On 30 Mar, 11:54, Peter Parry wrote:

On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 03:57:24 +0100, Tom Crispin

wrote:
The Government's top health advisor, Chief Medical Officer Sir Liam
Donaldson, has said cycling must be increased eightfold to combat the
public health crisis caused by designing cities around motor vehicles.

Actually, he didn't say this, but don't let facts confuse you.

In particular, he calls for our transport infrastructure to be
re-designed in order to encourage the levels of walking and cycling in
the Netherlands and Denmark.

Oh good, they are going to run a grader over the countryside to
flatten all our hills?

"There would be significant reductions in ...depression and dementia.

Given the transition into rabid slathering intolerant arrogant
monsters which occurs to some when they don the Lycra I can't think of
anything more likely to _increase_ levels of depression and dementia
than increasing the level of bicycle riding eightfold.

The report recognises that: "Lifestyle changes can make a substantial
contribution to slowing climate change

Indeed it can, stopping breeding being the most obvious and effective
change. *Unfortunately green activists tend to have nearly twice the
number of children normal people do.

No it not about stopping breeding it is about decreasing per capita
consumption and wastage and green activists tend to be a bit better at
that.


I'd love to see you cycle up the A9 Doug. If the hills don't kill you
the deer will.

McK.

On 30 Mar, 18:57, Jim A wrote:
Doug wrote:
No it not about stopping breeding it is about decreasing per capita
consumption and wastage and green activists tend to be a bit better at
that.

Decreasing per capita consumption is going to be pretty useless unless
we halt the increase in capitae also.

Some of the green activists I know are **** poor at reducing consumption
and wastage - one drives a 4wd Lexus - it's a hybrid but consumes twice
the fuel of the most efficient ordinary petrol cars. *Another routinely
flies hither and thither both domestic and intercontinental - in his
favour he has no children though. :-)


But the owner PAYS TAX on it.

McK.

On 30 Mar, 23:16, ashley filmer wrote:
On 30 Mar, 18:55, Doug wrote:



On 30 Mar, 18:39, Peter Parry wrote:

On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 09:50:22 -0700 (PDT), Doug
wrote:

No it not about stopping breeding

Of course it is. *That is the cheapest and most effective way of
decreasing mankind's influence on the earth.

it is about decreasing per capita consumption and wastage and green activists tend to be a bit better at
that.

There is no point in them being better at decreasing per capita
consumption if they then go and breed like flies thus increasing the
number of consumers. *Decreasing consumption by 30% a person but
producing 4 new green consumers per breeding pair isn't a saving but
just continues to make things worse.

What you are overlooking is that in many countries the birth rate is
falling already.

Examples

"Russian population in steep decline"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/988723.stm

"Declining Birth Rates Raising Concerns in Asia"

http://www.eastwestcenter.org/news-c...e/declining-bi...

Now couple this with a concerted effort to reduce consumption and
wastage and problem solved.

--
UK Radical Campaignswww.zing.icom43.net
Cars are the main contributor to food miles at 48%.

You will like this website Doug

http://www.worldometers.info/

Do you mean boring?

"Brimstone" wrote in message
...


"Doug" wrote in message
...

No it not about stopping breeding it is about decreasing per capita
consumption and wastage and green activists tend to be a bit better at
that.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/20.../22/brain-food

No reaction Doug?

"Jeremy Parker" gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying:

Dutch cycling, as I recall, stayed flat

Short of some serious earthquakes, that's hardly a great surprise.

McKevvy wrote:
On 30 Mar, 18:57, Jim A wrote:
Doug wrote:
No it not about stopping breeding it is about decreasing per capita
consumption and wastage and green activists tend to be a bit better at
that.
Decreasing per capita consumption is going to be pretty useless unless
we halt the increase in capitae also.

Some of the green activists I know are **** poor at reducing consumption
and wastage - one drives a 4wd Lexus - it's a hybrid but consumes twice
the fuel of the most efficient ordinary petrol cars. Another routinely
flies hither and thither both domestic and intercontinental - in his
favour he has no children though. :-)


But the owner PAYS TAX on it.

Too bloody right they do. Their choice.

--
www.slowbicyclemovement.org - enjoy the ride

On 31/03/2010 17:42, McKevvy wrote:
On 30 Mar, 17:50, wrote:
On 30 Mar, 11:54, Peter wrote:

On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 03:57:24 +0100, Tom Crispin

wrote:
The Government's top health advisor, Chief Medical Officer Sir Liam
Donaldson, has said cycling must be increased eightfold to combat the
public health crisis caused by designing cities around motor vehicles.

Actually, he didn't say this, but don't let facts confuse you.

In particular, he calls for our transport infrastructure to be
re-designed in order to encourage the levels of walking and cycling in
the Netherlands and Denmark.

Oh good, they are going to run a grader over the countryside to
flatten all our hills?

"There would be significant reductions in ...depression and dementia.

Given the transition into rabid slathering intolerant arrogant
monsters which occurs to some when they don the Lycra I can't think of
anything more likely to _increase_ levels of depression and dementia
than increasing the level of bicycle riding eightfold.

The report recognises that: "Lifestyle changes can make a substantial
contribution to slowing climate change

Indeed it can, stopping breeding being the most obvious and effective
change. Unfortunately green activists tend to have nearly twice the
number of children normal people do.

No it not about stopping breeding it is about decreasing per capita
consumption and wastage and green activists tend to be a bit better at
that.


I'd love to see you cycle up the A9 Doug. If the hills don't kill you
the deer will.

There is a cycle track along the side of the A9 south of Inverness, all
the way to Perth AFAIK. All 110 miles of it.

--
John Wright

Use your imagination Marvin!

Life's bad enough as it is - why invent any more of it.

On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 18:45:56 +0100, "Jeremy Parker"
wrote:


"Tom Crispin" wrote

[snip]

==========Quote==========
The Government's top health advisor, Chief Medical Officer Sir Liam
Donaldson, has said cycling must be increased eightfold to combat
the
public health crisis caused by designing cities around motor
vehicles.

[snip]

Ah, back to the late 1990s, when every country seemed to have a
target of doubling cycling in five years. The result was usually
that cycling stayed essentially flat, although Denmark, which had a
target of increasing cycling by 30%, actually had a decrease of 15%.
Dutch cycling, as I recall, stayed flat, German cycling stayed flat,
US cycling stayed flat, and British cycling stayed flat.

Dutch cycling had a target to reduce cycling times to town centres by
20% - evidently, being forced to use their indirect routes was
causing some disgruntlement - but the final report never said whether
any progress had been made with that.

I seem to recall some research in about the year 2000, from the U of
Leeds, which I am too lazy to dig out right now, which said that, for
cyclists, being allowed to cycle to work was equivalent to a subsidy
of about 3p per mile. On the other hand, for non cyclists, being
forced to ride a bike to work would be equivalent to a tax of about
12p per mile.

Consequently even giving everybody their own private bike path from
bedside to deskside would not double cycling. However, paying people
£3 per day to commute by bike would double it, instantly

The experiment was never tried

The Inland Revenue will allow 20p a mile for business travel by bike.
This can include travel to a temporary place of work, where
"temporary" is up to 2 years, IIRC.