All of the replies here support the correlation as obvious. While most of the traffic on good.is is either attacking the hypothesis (extra factors etc.) or finds no correlation in the data.

I typed all the data from their infographic into excel and looked at the correlation coefficients… Biking was 34% and Biking + Foot was 35%. For data found in the wild these are REALLY high correlation rates.

Of course there are many factors left off any analysis of any real world problem, this is still a strong correlation result. Confirms my behavior!

http://policy.rutgers.edu/faculty/pucher/JPAH08.pdf

One interesting and probably significant limitation to the findings is this:

“Another limitation is that we were not able to control for other factors that
could influence obesity rates. For instance, international differences in diet could
contribute to obesity disparities. Unfortunately, energy intake cannot be readily
compared among nations because of differences in the surveys and methods of
analysis, as well as the subjective nature of dietary recall. However, there is
some evidence of differences in portion sizes between countries. For example,
Rozin et al found larger portion sizes in the United States compared with France.
In our view, international differences in energy intake probably do exist, and this
might be another factor contributing to disparities in obesity rates.”

-DUH!

The way we do it NOW has led to the flabbergasting opinion on the part of many motorists that we shouldn’t “waste” transportation money, at all levels, providing for the safety of bicyclists and pedestrians on “their” roads.

For a jaw-dropping example of this, read the anti-bicycle/anti-pedestrian manifesto “Out of Gas” by Senators Tom Coburn, M.D. (R-OK) and John McCain (R-AZ).

This was extensively analysed by John Pucher (one of my heroes!) in his article “Why Canadians cycle more than Americans.”

This article may be found at:

http://policy.rutgers.edu/faculty/pucher/TransportPolicyArticle.pdf

From the abstract:

“In spite of their colder climate, Canadians cycle about three times more than Americans. The main reasons for this difference are Canada’s higher urban densities and mixed-use development, shorter trip distances, lower incomes, higher costs of owning, driving and parking a car, safer cycling conditions, and more extensive cycling infrastructure and training programs. Most of these factors result from differences between Canada
and the United States in their transport and land-use policies, and not from intrinsic differences in history, culture or resource availability. That is good news, since it suggests the possibility of significantly increasing cycling levels in the United States by adopting some of the Canadian
policies that have so effectively promoted cycling and enhanced its safety.

I wonder if Canadian cities are plagued by suburban sprawl, poorly-designed (read: unwalkable/unrideable) neighborhoods and an overwhelming demand for convenience like many U.S. cities?

I attended a public health conference sponsored by Univ. of North Carolina a number of years ago, and the focus was this real kicker — urban/suburban sprawl forcing EVERYONE to drive just to get around and out of their neighborhoods…no sidewalks in sight, no provisions for traffic calming, direct road routes and everything else that goes with a poorly-designed community.

But all is not that great, when I go running, sometimes woman look at me like.. I’m a piece of meat… Oh, I can run much farther and faster with all the biking…

Ride and ride safe!!