2 ms·

I agree it's a reasonable result, but that doesn't necessarily make it correct. I think jackschultz's skepticism is warranted: this is not a proper experiment w

I agree it's a reasonable result, but that doesn't necessarily make it correct. I think jackschultz's skepticism is warranted: this is not a proper experiment with controls. A better designed experiment would have two control groups: one group that rides normal bikes, and one group that does nothing different. The latter group could try to control for people-being-studied-behaving-different effect. And the normal bike riding group could give us a better handle on what is being "missed" by using electric bikes. We could also get super-fancy and add a fourth group, based on what you said, who don't change their commute, but instead walk 4 miles a day.

auntienomen 9y ago
If you actually read the study referred to by the article, you'll see that they aren't making the claim you and jackshultz are arguing against. Nor does the article define "cheating" the way you seem to. They measured some basic indicators of metabolic health, and found that e-biking is moderately effective cardiovascular exercise. The metabolic response they saw is well outside the noise, which is typical for these experiments: Sedentary humans respond remarkably well to exercise. (If that's not good enough for you, they also analyzed heart rate and GPS logs and found that their e-bikers were averaging about 5 METS for 40 minutes a day, 3 days a week. This is roughly what a doctor will recommend to an office workers who wants to lose some weight.) Thus, you are not 'cheating' by pretending to exercise. If you want to know whether e-biking is "cheating" compared to regular biking, you can look up similar studies on the health benefits of biking and compare the numbers. Controls are necessary when you're looking for more subtle effects, but the health benefits of replacing no exercise with moderate exercise are not at all subtle. All this experiment had to do was establish that e-biking elevates one's heart rate. Which is a gigantic 'duh'. So what exactly are you hoping to accomplish by kvetching in the comments about their lack of scientific rigor?
- scott_s 9y ago
  I am not objecting to the "cheating" claim. I disregarded it immediately and only considered this as an exercise experiment. My point is that single studies without control groups are not going to tell you much. Are their conclusions reasonable? Of course. Did we learn much from the study above what we already knew about moderate exercise? Not really.

auntienomen 9y ago

If you actually read the study referred to by the article, you'll see that they aren't making the claim you and jackshultz are arguing against. Nor does the article define "cheating" the way you seem to. They measured some basic indicators of metabolic health, and found that e-biking is moderately effective cardiovascular exercise. The metabolic response they saw is well outside the noise, which is typical for these experiments: Sedentary humans respond remarkably well to exercise. (If that's not good enough for you, they also analyzed heart rate and GPS logs and found that their e-bikers were averaging about 5 METS for 40 minutes a day, 3 days a week. This is roughly what a doctor will recommend to an office workers who wants to lose some weight.) Thus, you are not 'cheating' by pretending to exercise. If you want to know whether e-biking is "cheating" compared to regular biking, you can look up similar studies on the health benefits of biking and compare the numbers. Controls are necessary when you're looking for more subtle effects, but the health benefits of replacing no exercise with moderate exercise are not at all subtle. All this experiment had to do was establish that e-biking elevates one's heart rate. Which is a gigantic 'duh'. So what exactly are you hoping to accomplish by kvetching in the comments about their lack of scientific rigor?

scott_s 9y ago
I am not objecting to the "cheating" claim. I disregarded it immediately and only considered this as an exercise experiment. My point is that single studies without control groups are not going to tell you much. Are their conclusions reasonable? Of course. Did we learn much from the study above what we already knew about moderate exercise? Not really.