Newspeak

I have to wonder whether The Times is anti-cycling. You may have heard about the results of tests by The British Heart Foundation’s cardiology researcher Dr David Newby which say that traffic pollution is as dangerous as passive smoking.

• The Times
• BHF
• The Telegraph (has helpful tips on safe cycling at the bottom)

The Times said:

There is no dispute in principle about the health benefits of cycling - it improves the circulation, keeps weight down and boosts overall fitness - yet the new research indicates that they could be outweighed by the polluted conditions of a busy road.

Yet the BHF website says:

The BHF stresses that the research is not bad news for cyclists in cities. For most cyclists, the benefits to their heart health from regular exercise far outweighs risk from pollution, which has yet to be directly proven.

You may have seen cyclists in cities wearing anti-pollution masks, I’d like to know the BHF’s opinion on their effectiveness. Respro make anti-pollution masks for cyclists which they sell on their website. One specifically for city commuters imaginatively named “City Mask” costs £24.99 or £27.99 for a high-visibility reflective one.

[The City Mask] Filters Out Hydrocarbons including Benzene & Pyrene, Nitrogen Oxides, Sulphur Dioxide, Lead Oxide and Black Smoke, PM 10′S including Pollen Dust and Building Dust.

The Times’ article also says:

Diesel exhaust includes nanoparticles of carbon and a range of metals. The particulates are so tiny that experts say it is pointless for cyclists to wear masks, because the mesh cannot be fine enough to block them.

A response to this statement can be found on bikebiz.co.uk along with an attack on the conclusions of the BHF’s research here.