- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
Cyclist in London indicating in cycle lane - copyright Simon MacMichaelBetter knowledge of Highway Code changes to protect cyclists and more 20mph speed limits recommended by professor who argues active travel is "best buy" for improving nation's health
A consultant orthopaedic surgeon has made the case for active travel being the "best buy" for improving people's health, publishing a piece in the British Medical Journal (BMJ) arguing that encouraging more cycling and walking journeys should be a priority in the United Kingdom — with better communication of the Highway Code changes designed to protect vulnerable road users, and wider implementation of 20mph speed limits two of her suggestions for helping to "challenge the UK's car dependency and enable active travel for everyone's health".
Professor Scarlett McNally authored the piece published in the BMJ, titled 'Enabling active travel can improve the UK's health', and looked at research around active travel to highlight its health benefits before recommending policy suggestions for bringing about more walking and cycling journeys.
She began by acknowledging the "urgent need to improve the nation's health, which worsened over the pandemic", and noted that an "abundance of evidence and reports" point to exercise being a "miracle cure that improves physical and mental health and reduces demands on NHS services and the need for social care".
"The best forms of exercise are those that fit into everyday life," she continued. "Active travel is a 'best buy' for improving health. Commuting by cycling reduces incidence of, and mortality from, heart disease and cancer by over 30 per cent in a dose dependent manner and reduces sick days and depression."
However, citing Department for Transport statistics which show that 71 per cent of women and 61 per cent of men believe it is too dangerous to cycle on the UK's roads, Prof. McNally suggested the need for segregated safe cycle routes which, when provided, "people use them, as has been demonstrated in Paris".
> Six in ten users of pop-up bike lanes in Paris are new to cycling, says city's government
"In the UK, massive central funds are spent on major roads. Conversely, funds for infrastructure to support active travel are stuck in local council budgets, which are facing a £4bn spending gap," she said before making "four suggestions to support active travel cheaply".
Prof. McNally followed many road safety campaigners and charities, such as Cycling UK, in calling for the Highway Code changes of January 2022, brought in to better protect vulnerable road users, to be better communicated to the public with a "bigger media campaign" about safe overtaking distances, and pedestrian and cyclist priority at junctions.
Secondly, and based on the "horrific injuries I see in orthopaedic and fracture clinics" that get "exponentially worse with every 1 mph increase in speed", she suggested the need to "demand 20 mph limits in all areas where people are".
1/2 A couple of papers for us nerds & some top data:
'Active travel is a “best buy” for improving health. Commuting by cycling reduces incidence of, and mortality from, heart disease and cancer BY OVER 30% Imagine a drug that could do that.
But how....https://t.co/0W7OMH1EBp— Chris Boardman (@Chris_Boardman) March 7, 2024
Looking at the NHS itself, the consultant orthopaedic surgeon argued that the NHS should be "role models" and lead the way on a modal shift from driving to active travel, a transition enabled with pavements in all NHS sites, secure cycle parking, and lockers for wet gear.
"Fourthly, we need to link with other initiatives," she concluded. "Every NHS organisation is required to deliver a 'green plan'. Active travel reduces pollution, which causes catastrophic ill health and harms the planet. Children getting to school under their own steam has huge benefits. Many families cannot afford a second car or live in transport poverty. People being able to get about safely reduces loneliness. Let's challenge the UK's car dependency and enable active travel for everyone's health."
In January, we reported new research published in the International Journal of Epidemiology which found that commuting by bike can improve mental health, with those who cycle to work less likely to be prescribed antidepressants.
"This work suggests that cycle commuting is causally related to reduced mental ill-health and provides further evidence in support of the promotion of active travel to encourage commuters travelling shorter distances to shift to cycle commutes," the University of Edinburgh researchers concluded.
Later in the same month, new research by the Swedish School of Sport and Health Sciences in Stockholm, and published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine, found that boosting cardiorespiratory fitness by three per cent in a year was linked to a 35 per cent lower risk of developing prostate cancer.
Dan is the road.cc news editor and joined in 2020 having previously written about nearly every other sport under the sun for the Express, and the weird and wonderful world of non-league football for The Non-League Paper. Dan has been at road.cc for four years and mainly writes news and tech articles as well as the occasional feature. He has hopefully kept you entertained on the live blog too.
Never fast enough to take things on the bike too seriously, when he's not working you'll find him exploring the south of England by two wheels at a leisurely weekend pace, or enjoying his favourite Scottish roads when visiting family. Sometimes he'll even load up the bags and ride up the whole way, he's a bit strange like that.
Latest Comments
- panda 9 sec ago
I know it's not really what the article is about (i.e. minority interest groups trying to exert disproportional influence over planning decisions -...
- ubercurmudgeon 14 min 48 sec ago
The outcome would not be true justice, because that would've entailed the driver being suspended from Tower Bridge by his balls for a week, and...
- Seagull2 47 min 41 sec ago
I have an almost 20 yr old Brompton, the best "toy" i ever bought. Of course , i covet a new G line, but likely will have to wait for a roundy...
- Rendel Harris 1 hour 13 min ago
For £3.50 more on Amazon you can get the earlier version of this light which doesn't have the white light option or magnetic fixing but does have a...
- mark1a 1 hour 14 min ago
I think one of the main differences with the real Rapha site is that there, the kit you order is actually supplied to you in exchange for your...
- FionaJJ 1 hour 32 min ago
It's so frustrating, and as you say, there is the potential for the police to get a lot of bang for their buck by taking advantage of the work done...
- Miller 1 hour 43 min ago
I have done a lot of road riding with my Ekar-equipped bike, normally set up as 40 x 9-42. My conclusion is that 13 speeds is indeed enough for...
- David9694 3 hours 20 min ago
Whitley Bay pub suffers bad start to 2025 after car crashes into it on New Year's Day...
Add new comment
163 comments
I suspect that the only way to get people to read the Highway Code is to make them take the driving theory test again (or the first time for some).
I've ridden and driven on roads with 20mph limits and I think they are more dangerous for cyclists. Cars can't overtake, cyclists are exceeding 20mph, bikes are drafting cars, and everyone just gets bunched up.
As usual it's looking for answers in the wrong places. Where I live in Berlin you will be hard pushed to find a single road that doesn't have a separate bike lane. Roads are treated as places for cars, not people and bikes, and everyone is taught that from an early age. Cars can't always take all the responsibility for hitting someone, unless they are clearly in the wrong. At the same time cyclists deserve to be protected in a way that doesn't just penalise and put more responsibility on another party. Trouble is proper bike lanes cost more money - speeding fines make money, so it's pretty simple maths.
And yes, I cycle but also occassionaly drive a car.
"Trouble is proper bike lanes cost more money"
Wait till you hear how much a road costs !
That wasn't the point, but I'm happy to explain it a little bit simpler.
Bike lanes cost a lot of money so the Government looks at speeding fines instead as a replacement, which generate money instead.
Bike lanes: costy money
Speeding fines: makey money
I see what you are saying, but if where I live is anything to go by, there is no enforcement of the speed limits
Even if drivers keep to the limit, how does that make cycling safer or encourage active travel ?
I was overtaken on my way home last night as I approached a speed table for the entry into my village's 20mph speed limit. The van driver moved out to overtake me but then slowed significantly down as he went onto the table.
I didn't slow down at all, and he hadn't had room to get past me before the speed table, so we ended up going over the speed table side by side and he had to overtake me again on the other side of the table*.
*On the approach to a blind right-hand bend, instead
That makes no sense. If cars can't overtake, that makes it safer for cyclists.
Not really. From experience it means that you have a car's bumper a few feet from your back wheel before they see an opportunity to overtake at 21mph, which takes a very long time. I would highly recommend trying it out on some roads in West London with 20mph, you'll see what I mean!
Well, I try it frequently in the 20mph zones of South West London, and my experience is that me riding at 20mph (or even over that) in a 20mph zone is that cars continue to overtake me. (This is also my experience of driving at 20mph in a 20mph zone).
Almost everywhere in London is now a 20 mph limit, it is indisputably safer for cyclists than it was when the limit was 30 mph. In what world is "cars can't overtake" a bad thing? I'm a lot happier with a car staying behind me at 20mph rather than trying to squeeze through on a narrow road (most roads in London are narrow, or rather they have been made narrow by the outrageous size of modern cars) at 30mph. I've been riding +/- 10,000 km a year in London for many years and the 20 mph limit has been one of the best things to have happened for cyclists, in my opinion.
My only disagreement with your post is I'd like to know where you ride that the drivers take any notice of the 20mph limit!
When they're stuck behind me and I'm pointing down at the roundels on the road!
Oh and where there are speed cameras.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who points at the roundels!
I also point at the roundels and my radar tells me how fast they are going !
Hopefully nowhere
Are you saying drivers should ignore 20mph speed limits?
A couple of years back when spending a few weeks riding around SW and central London for first time since the 20mph limits became widespread, it was very noticeable how rarely I got overtaken when riding at 20mph.
This is exactly my experience in south east Wales since 20 mph was introduced here.
Majority of drivers comply with the 20mph limit and will stay a safe distance behind me until it is safe to overtake, usually when we reach a 30mph or higher speed limit road to overtake, which despite what you may have heard does not take long as 20mph is not everwhere.
No way I would want to go back to the way it was before. I even made a 20mph sign out of felt and sewed it to the back of my cycling jacket at first, but have found it is not necessary as most people do not appear to want to break the law, so have removed it.
20mph is a big improvement here all around and my house has even stopped shaking and vibrating like it used to when the big HGV's and buses flew past during the day.
When you say "more dangerous" you have to say what it is more dangerous than.
In the UK the current choices are "...than a 30 or 40 mph road". I don't think they're more dangerous than that. The other current UK alternatives are "are they more dangerous than riding on the pavement (illegally) or waiting a few years for some really crap cycle infra (possibly a paint cycle lane)". I think we can say no, not more dangerous than that either.
You may be very lucky in the UK and have the alternative of "wait 10-20 years and get a sub-Dutch standard genuine separate cycle path" but it won't be part of a network and currently it's likely it won't do anything for you at junctions (which are the most dangerous parts).
It's also worth noting that in places like London when the speed limit was 30mph, it wasn't like vehicles could maintain that speed anyway. They were always stopping and starting for traffic lights, some vainly hoping that they'd beat the next red, so what happened was people would accelerate madly, then brake heavily. Some would do it even knowing they were stopping again soon, because they can't help iterpreting the speed limit as a target, or a good given right.
Reducing the speed limit means drivers are predisposed to a smoother journeys, and I'd like to think less self-imposed pressure to over-take anything not accelerating away from lights at the same rate.
Separate cycle infra (mostly not shared with pedestrians) and lower speed limits / calmed streets / traffic reduction - we need both.
You make some points about human nature (driving inconsiderately) and perception (cycle infra will cost us money!) which are fair.
However - as far as I'm aware and I'm conscious my knowledge is poor here - while Germany has some cycle infra which is certainly the envy of the UK that's not a great statement. Modal share rates are the key measure. I hope to be wrong soon - but I believe that compared to NL or even parts of Scandinavia Germany doesn't have particularly great figures here (yes - there are certainly exceptions [Bremen]!). Cycle infra is not as good but more importantly cars are still prioritised. [Berlin 1] [Berlin 2] [Leipzig]. Germany seems to remain a very car-happy country. Perhaps not surprising given the imporance of the industry
Further - as far as "drivers don't share" in the UK you can be on a road with a higher speed limit but if drivers can't immediately pass some will still bunch up on your back wheel. On the other side - in NL the majority of the "cycling infra" is actually on streets shared with vehicles, not completely separate. While people are definitely killed by drivers of cars there the numbers are low given the volume of cycling.
First - glad to hear you benefit from cycle infra. Is it the law that you are required to use it where it exists?
Misconceptions - but cycle infra costs money! Yes, yes it does - and good infra costs a lot more than (UK) paint and signs. However overall providing good quality cycling infra saves / is a return on money for everyone - including drivers!
As for responsibilities - while not total when you get into a car you have made a choice. (In our society we do not feel we have, but it's true). So you inherently bear more responsibility - not necessarily all, but more. This is partly recognised by having training, testing, licencing and insurance...
...but driving is normalised, if not trivialised. In practice it's not treated as a dangerous activity with a high level of responsibility. It's more a club almost anyone can and will join (training and testing only once in a lifetime for most - a "right of passage"). It's also a club many consider it's fine if you sneak in (large numbers with no insurance and a surprisingly large number who have no licence / are banned). By and large no-one checks if you're following the rules (due to minimal policing). Indeed indeed some rules are broken by the majority - speeding for example.
I'd like to reply to everyone but I think I'll sum it up by saying that just focusing on speed limits rather than keeping riders actually out of the roads in my opinion is the wrong approach. Germany seems to do this better and in perhaps an oversimplified way, give roads to cars and bike lanes to cyclists, at least in Berlin where I live.
Both needed - more proper infra and lower speed limits on some roads (along with traffic reduction).
It's definitely not "keeping riders out of roads" - or at least that needs rephrasing.
As noted - even in NL cyclists are sharing space with streets people can drive on for a lot of the time.
If a "road" should actually be a "street" e.g. people are going to be walking and cycling there, it's a destination (residential, shopping) then lower speed limits should apply. (There also should be less than the typical volumes of traffic we see in the UK in these spaces).
Drivers can change behaviour if incentivised (see NL, to a certain extent) so mixing can happen - under certain conditions. Motor vehicles always present a danger to vulnerable road users however so only "under certain conditions" (even with "careful, considerate drivers" - an aspiration!)
Agreed. And yes I should have phrased that differently. It's not about keeping riders off roads, it's about keeping them safe and away from the danger of cars but also in a good, rideable environment. As a cyclist I'm on the side of riders first and foremost - I've been hit by a car myself while on a bike - but I try to keep an open mind in any debate. My comment about 20mph seeming dangerous was just from my experience, and not supposed to be an anti-speed control sentiment.
London, since the widespread adoption of 20mph speed limits is way safer to cycle in. It's fairly easy to maintian 20mph if you are a regular cyclist and when doing so cars do not overtake. Or very rarely. Of course if going slower than 20mph, then yes cars can overtake. Drivers overtaking and too often close passing is what makes cycling feel dangerous which prevents folk from riding.
Bike lanes do not cost money, because they actually save money. They are an investment which benefits society, so reduces costs overall. Public transport does the same. Driving however creates a large cost to society that they do not pay for. Despite all the whinging about the 'war on motorists' or the mythical 'road tax'.
I think the cycle lobby needs to lean more towards the "God save the king, GREAT Britain, I jerk off to a picture of margaret thatcher" frothing moron brigade. Everyone who cares about the environment and their own health would already cycle if it were safe and convenient to do so.
Cycling to work is the best thing someone who is a blind, angry patriot could do to improve the NHS and the state of the roads and so many other issues that matter to them. The bonus would be that currently a lot of those people are also football mini flag waving, close passing, phone drivers so moving them to bikes does a double service of giving their direct benefits and making cycling nicer for everyone else so can improve the numbers outside of that group.
"Cycle to work, for King and Country! Also, its super manly!"
Even for the ladies ?
But those people probably don't like bikes because they're made by foreigners* and the most commonly known places where people regularly cycle are in Evil Europe
*So are cars, but that's different (cos bikes).
Pages