4 ms·

What nonsense. You expect all the health improvements of exercise to be negated by poor air quality? It should be noted that both of your links were not average

by ciaranm 11y ago

What nonsense. You expect all the health improvements of exercise to be negated by poor air quality? It should be noted that both of your links were not average days. There's a reason that made the news.

DanBC 11y ago
Pollution in London is consistently poor. That's why the UK gov loses court cases over air quality. > The supreme court has ordered the government to make plans for tackling the UK’s air pollution problem, which has been in breach of EU limits for years and is linked to thousands of premature deaths each year. http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/apr/29/supreme-court-orders-uk-to-draw-up-air-pollution-cleanup-plan http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/apr/29/supreme-c... > You expect all the health improvements of exercise to be negated by poor air quality? Yes, in this level of pollution there are considerable risks that need to be balanced against benefits of exercise.
- ciaranm 11y ago
  >Exercising in London pollution is probably a bad idea Is not the same as: >Yes, in this level of pollution there are considerable risks that need to be balanced against benefits of exercise. I dispute the former, not the latter. Unless you show me some evidence that exercising in a polluted city is somehow worse than living-but-not-exercising in said city, I'm going to continue to dispute that. Encouraging people to avoid exercise is incredibly reckless.
  - DanBC 11y ago
    I'm not encouraging people to avoid exercise. I'm encouraging people to avoid exercise as part of their commute (when pollution is going to be high), in London streets (where, again, pollution is highest). Nothing about "Don't jog to work at times when pollution is highest in places where pollution is highest" says "avoid exercise" and it's a perverse interpretation to suggest otherwise.
    - ciaranm 11y ago
      Again - if you'd made these points, I probably wouldn't have commented. You didn't; you flat out suggested exercising in London was a Bad Idea. I think you'll find that the benefits outweigh the negatives[1] Also, how does one commute to work in central London without exposure to air pollution? I'm curious what your alternative suggestion is. [1] https://intranet2.bham.ac.uk/collaboration/cycling/documents/public/C-Health2.pdf https://intranet2.bham.ac.uk/collaboration/cycling/documents...
      - DanBC 11y ago
        > Again - if you'd made these points, I probably wouldn't have commented. > You didn't; you flat out suggested exercising in London was a Bad Idea I've attempted to clarify any confusion. This conversation is going to be fucking tedious if you continue to refuse to accept that. I'm struggling to see the relevance of your cycling document. It doesn't mention air pollution as a risk (perhaps I missed it?) to cyclists; it's about cycling; so it has no relevance to a discussion about the risk of running in London pollution. (As an aside: It also strongly over emphasises the benefits of exercise on mental health. That's something I know a bit about and the document getting that wrong makes it feel less truthy). > Also, how does one commute to work in central London without exposure to air pollution? When you exercise you breath differently. You take more air into the lungs; you take that air deeper into the lung. This means that you take a greater quantity of particulates into the lung and that you take them deeper into the lungs. I'm really not sure why you think "don't jog through London rush hour" is such an outrageous suggestion. It's the advice given by public health officials. Here are three news reports giving pretty much the same advice (avoid the worst streets; avoid the worst times; avoid strenuous exercise) http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/how-to-stay-safe-in-londons-air-pollution-cloud-10166913.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/how-to-stay-s... (This article recommends not going out at rush hour, let alone doing exercise) >> You’ll massively increase your exposure if you do strenuous physical exercise outside. It might be a good idea to skip your run today, especially if you have asthma. Indoor exercise like going to the gym or swimming at an indoor pool might make a nice change. http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2012/aug/05/air-pollution-should-stop-you-exercising http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2012/aug/05/air-poll... >> On high-pollution days, the advice for older people and those with lung problems is to reduce strenuous physical exercise. But even healthy people can experience discomfort such as sore eyes, a cough or sore throat, and are warned to consider decreasing outdoor exercise if they do. On days with very high levels of pollution – such as we experienced last month – everyone is advised to cut down their physical exertions. http://www.itv.com/news/london/2015-06-05/pollution-warning-as-toxic-air-makes-jogging-unsafe-in-city-streets/ http://www.itv.com/news/london/2015-06-05/pollution-warning-...

by ciaranm 11y ago

DanBC 11y ago

Pollution in London is consistently poor. That's why the UK gov loses court cases over air quality. > The supreme court has ordered the government to make plans for tackling the UK’s air pollution problem, which has been in breach of EU limits for years and is linked to thousands of premature deaths each year. http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/apr/29/supreme-court-orders-uk-to-draw-up-air-pollution-cleanup-plan http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/apr/29/supreme-c... > You expect all the health improvements of exercise to be negated by poor air quality? Yes, in this level of pollution there are considerable risks that need to be balanced against benefits of exercise.

ciaranm 11y ago
>Exercising in London pollution is probably a bad idea Is not the same as: >Yes, in this level of pollution there are considerable risks that need to be balanced against benefits of exercise. I dispute the former, not the latter. Unless you show me some evidence that exercising in a polluted city is somehow worse than living-but-not-exercising in said city, I'm going to continue to dispute that. Encouraging people to avoid exercise is incredibly reckless.
- DanBC 11y ago
  I'm not encouraging people to avoid exercise. I'm encouraging people to avoid exercise as part of their commute (when pollution is going to be high), in London streets (where, again, pollution is highest). Nothing about "Don't jog to work at times when pollution is highest in places where pollution is highest" says "avoid exercise" and it's a perverse interpretation to suggest otherwise.
  - ciaranm 11y ago
    Again - if you'd made these points, I probably wouldn't have commented. You didn't; you flat out suggested exercising in London was a Bad Idea. I think you'll find that the benefits outweigh the negatives[1] Also, how does one commute to work in central London without exposure to air pollution? I'm curious what your alternative suggestion is. [1] https://intranet2.bham.ac.uk/collaboration/cycling/documents/public/C-Health2.pdf https://intranet2.bham.ac.uk/collaboration/cycling/documents...
    - DanBC 11y ago
      > Again - if you'd made these points, I probably wouldn't have commented. > You didn't; you flat out suggested exercising in London was a Bad Idea I've attempted to clarify any confusion. This conversation is going to be fucking tedious if you continue to refuse to accept that. I'm struggling to see the relevance of your cycling document. It doesn't mention air pollution as a risk (perhaps I missed it?) to cyclists; it's about cycling; so it has no relevance to a discussion about the risk of running in London pollution. (As an aside: It also strongly over emphasises the benefits of exercise on mental health. That's something I know a bit about and the document getting that wrong makes it feel less truthy). > Also, how does one commute to work in central London without exposure to air pollution? When you exercise you breath differently. You take more air into the lungs; you take that air deeper into the lung. This means that you take a greater quantity of particulates into the lung and that you take them deeper into the lungs. I'm really not sure why you think "don't jog through London rush hour" is such an outrageous suggestion. It's the advice given by public health officials. Here are three news reports giving pretty much the same advice (avoid the worst streets; avoid the worst times; avoid strenuous exercise) http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/how-to-stay-safe-in-londons-air-pollution-cloud-10166913.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/how-to-stay-s... (This article recommends not going out at rush hour, let alone doing exercise) >> You’ll massively increase your exposure if you do strenuous physical exercise outside. It might be a good idea to skip your run today, especially if you have asthma. Indoor exercise like going to the gym or swimming at an indoor pool might make a nice change. http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2012/aug/05/air-pollution-should-stop-you-exercising http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2012/aug/05/air-poll... >> On high-pollution days, the advice for older people and those with lung problems is to reduce strenuous physical exercise. But even healthy people can experience discomfort such as sore eyes, a cough or sore throat, and are warned to consider decreasing outdoor exercise if they do. On days with very high levels of pollution – such as we experienced last month – everyone is advised to cut down their physical exertions. http://www.itv.com/news/london/2015-06-05/pollution-warning-as-toxic-air-makes-jogging-unsafe-in-city-streets/ http://www.itv.com/news/london/2015-06-05/pollution-warning-...