̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge - James Woodcock

Carbon-omics and global health

plc32 — Fri, 17 Nov 2023 12:05:53 +0000

Cambridge Zero to host two research symposia to discuss critical climate change challenges

Daily 11 minute brisk walk enough to reduce risk of early death

cjb250 — Wed, 01 Mar 2023 00:29:21 +0000

In a study published today in the British Journal of Sports Medicine, the researchers say that 11 minutes a day (75 minutes a week) of moderate-intensity physical activity – such as a brisk walk – would be sufficient to lower the risk of diseases such as heart disease, stroke and a number of cancers.

Cardiovascular diseases – such as heart disease and stroke – are the leading cause of death globally, responsible for 17.9 million deaths per year in 2019, while cancers were responsible for 9.6 million deaths in 2017. Physical activity – particularly when it is moderate-intensity – is known to reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease and cancer, and the NHS recommends that adults do at least 150 minutes of moderate-intensity activity or 75 minutes of vigorous-intensity activity a week.

To explore the amount of physical activity necessary to have a beneficial impact on several chronic diseases and premature death, researchers from the Medical Research Council (MRC) Epidemiology Unit at the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis, pooling and analysing cohort data from all of the published evidence. This approach allowed them to bring together studies that on their own did not provide sufficient evidence and sometimes disagreed with each other to provide more robust conclusions.

In total, they looked at results reported in 196 peer-reviewed articles, covering more than 30 million participants from 94 large study cohorts, to produce the largest analysis to date of the association between physical activity levels and risk of heart disease, cancer, and early death.

̽��ֱ��researchers found that, outside of work-related physical activity, two out of three people reported activity levels below 150 min per week of moderate-intensity activity and fewer than one in ten managed more than 300 min per week.

Broadly speaking, they found that beyond 150 min per week of moderate-intensity activity, the additional benefits in terms of reduced risk of disease or early death were marginal. But even half this amount came with significant benefits: accumulating 75 min per week of moderate-intensity activity brought with it a 23% lower risk of early death.

Dr Soren Brage from the MRC Epidemiology Unit said: “If you are someone who finds the idea of 150 minutes of moderate-intensity physical activity a week a bit daunting, then our findings should be good news. Doing some physical activity is better than doing none. This is also a good starting position – if you find that 75 minutes a week is manageable, then you could try stepping it up gradually to the full recommended amount.”

Seventy-five minutes per week of moderate activity was also enough to reduce the risk of developing cardiovascular disease by 17% and cancer by 7%. For some specific cancers, the reduction in risk was greater – head and neck, myeloid leukaemia, myeloma, and gastric cardia cancers were between 14-26% lower risk. For other cancers, such as lung, liver, endometrial, colon, and breast cancer, a 3-11% lower risk was observed.

Professor James Woodcock from the MRC Epidemiology Unit said: “We know that physical activity, such as walking or cycling, is good for you, especially if you feel it raises your heart rate. But what we’ve found is there are substantial benefits to heart health and reducing your risk of cancer even if you can only manage 10 minutes every day.”

̽��ֱ��researchers calculated that if everyone in the studies had done the equivalent of at least 150 min per week of moderate-intensity activity, around one in six (16%) early deaths would be prevented. One in nine (11%) cases of cardiovascular disease and one in 20 (5%) cases of cancer would be prevented.

However, even if everyone managed at least 75 min per week of moderate-intensity physical activity, around one in ten (10%) early deaths would be prevented. One in twenty (5%) cases of cardiovascular disease and nearly one in thirty (3%) cases of cancer would be prevented.

Dr Leandro Garcia from Queen’s ̽��ֱ�� Belfast said: “Moderate activity doesn’t have to involve what we normally think of exercise, such as sports or running. Sometimes, replacing some habits is all that is needed. For example, try to walk or cycle to your work or study place instead of using a car, or engage in active play with your kids or grand kids. Doing activities that you enjoy and that are easy to include in your weekly routine is an excellent way to become more active.”

̽��ֱ��research was funded by the Medical Research Council and the European Research Council.

What counts as moderate-intensity physical activity?

Moderate-intensity physical activity raises your heart rate and makes you breathe faster, but you would still be able to speak during the activity. Examples include:

Brisk walking
Dancing
Riding a bike
Playing tennis
Hiking

Reference
Garcia, L, Pearce, M, Abbas, A, Mok, A & Strain, T et al. Non-occupational physical activity and risk of cardiovascular disease, cancer, and mortality outcomes: a dose response meta-analysis of large prospective studies. British Journal of Sports Medicine; 28 Feb 2023; DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2022-105669

One in ten early deaths could be prevented if everyone managed at least half the recommended level of physical activity, say a team led by researchers at the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge.

If you are someone who finds the idea of 150 minutes of moderate-intensity physical activity a week a bit daunting, then our findings should be good news. Doing some physical activity is better than doing none

Soren Brage

PublicDomainArchive (Pixabay)

Feet walking on gravel

̽��ֱ��text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Images, including our videos, are Copyright © ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge and licensors/contributors as identified. All rights reserved. We make our image and video content available in a number of ways – as here, on our main website under its Terms and conditions, and on a range of channels including social media that permit your use and sharing of our content under their respective Terms.

Yes

Licence type:

Public Domain

Planning for action

jg533 — Thu, 17 Feb 2022 09:14:18 +0000

Free online tools built by Cambridge researchers are helping planners design exercise into our towns and cities.

Walking and cycling good for health even in cities with higher levels of air pollution

cjb250 — Wed, 04 May 2016 23:01:08 +0000

Regular physical activity reduces the risk of diseases such as diabetes, heart disease, and several cancers. One way for people to increase their levels of physical activity is through ‘active travel’ – for example walking and cycling; however, concern has been raised about the potential risk due to air pollution while walking and cycling in urban environments.

Air pollution is one of the leading environmental risk factors for people’s health. A recent report from the Royal Colleges of Physicians and of Paediatrics and Child Health suggested that it contributes to around 40,000 early deaths a year in the UK. One of the main sources of air pollution in cities is transport and a shift from cars, motorbikes and buses to active travel would help to reduce emissions. However, people who walk or cycle in such environments will inhale more pollution, which could be detrimental to their health.

Previous studies conducted in Europe, the USA and several other developed countries found that the health benefits of active travel are greater than the risks, but these were undertaken in areas of relatively low air pollution, and the applicability of their results to more polluted cities in emerging economies has been uncertain.

Researchers from CEDAR, a partnership between the Universities of Cambridge and East Anglia, and the Medical Research Council, used computer simulations to compare the risks and benefits for different levels of intensity and duration of active travel and of air pollution in different locations around the world, using information from international epidemiological studies and meta-analyses. ̽��ֱ��study, published in Preventive Medicine, is the first to model the risks and benefits of walking and cycling across a range of air pollution concentrations around the world.

Using this data, the researchers calculated that in practical terms, air pollution risks will not negate the health benefits of active travel in the vast majority of urban areas worldwide. Only 1% of cities in the World Health Organization’s Ambient Air Pollution Database had pollution levels high enough that the risks of air pollution could start to overcome the benefits of physical activity after half an hour of cycling every day.

Dr Marko Tainio from the MRC Epidemiology Unit at the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge, who led the study, says: “Our model indicates that in London health benefits of active travel always outweigh the risk from pollution. Even in Delhi, one of the most polluted cities in the world – with pollution levels ten times those in London – people would need to cycle over five hours per week before the pollution risks outweigh the health benefits.

“We should remember, though, that a small minority of workers in the most polluted cities, such as bike messengers, may be exposed to levels of air pollution high enough to cancel out the health benefits of physical activity.”

Senior author Dr James Woodcock, also from CEDAR, says: “Whilst this research demonstrates the benefits of physical activity in spite of air quality, it is not an argument for inaction in combatting pollution. It provides further support for investment in infrastructure to get people out of their cars and onto their feet or their bikes – which can itself reduce pollution levels at the same time as supporting physical activity.”

̽��ֱ��authors caution that their model does not take into account detailed information on conditions within different localities in individual cities, the impact of short-term episodes of increased air pollution, or information on the background physical activity or disease history of individuals. For individuals who are highly active in non-transport settings, for example recreational sports, the marginal health benefits from active travel will be smaller, and vice versa for those who are less active than average in other settings.

̽��ֱ��research was undertaken by the Centre for Diet and Activity Research, a UKCRC Public Health Research Centre of Excellence. ̽��ֱ��work was also supported by the project Physical Activity through Sustainable Transportation Approaches, funded by the European Union.

Reference
Tainio et al. Can air pollution negate the health benefits of cycling and walking? Preventive Medicine; 5 May 2016; DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2016.02.002

̽��ֱ��health benefits of walking and cycling outweigh the negative effects on health of air pollution, even in cities with high levels of air pollution, according to a study led by researchers from the Centre for Diet and Activity Research (CEDAR) and Medical Research Council Epidemiology Unit at the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge. This new evidence strengthens the case for supporting cycling even in polluted cities – an effort that in turn can help reduce vehicle emissions.

Our model indicates that in London health benefits of active travel always outweigh the risk from pollution

Marko Tainio

Ed Yourdon

Jogging on a bright November morning (cropped)

̽��ֱ��text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. For image use please see separate credits above.

Yes

Licence type:

Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike

On yer bike!

sj387 — Wed, 30 Oct 2013 09:58:33 +0000

Motorised transport is the fastest-rising cause of energy-related greenhouse gas emissions and there’s a strong imperative to address this by moving towards a low-carbon transport system. Moreover, as Woodcock, from the Centre for Diet and Activity Research, explained: “It’s possible to benefit public health at the same time.”

But which approaches to achieving a low-carbon transport system would provide the biggest health benefits?

“We can think about the problem in two ways,” he said. “We can evaluate the impacts of an intervention such as new cycling infrastructure, or we can develop scenarios around what a healthy, low-carbon future transport system would look like, and then we think about how to achieve major changes in how people travel. We often see quite small effects from the interventions happening now, whereas potentially large things are possible.”

“Cycling could have a big role to play,” he said. “But to achieve this you’d have to start thinking about changes in land use to reduce trip distances, and cultural and infrastructural changes to make cycling an everyday mass activity for short- and medium-length trips.”

Woodcock has led the development of an Integrated Transport and Health Impact Modelling (ITHIM) tool, which models the health impacts of travel behaviours on both population health and greenhouse gas emissions.

“We’re seeing different effects in different populations,” said Woodcock. “In health terms, switching from driving to cycling consistently shows a net benefit, and the greatest benefit comes from getting older people more active. However, a complicated web of other problems arises. In some contexts, such as inner London, cyclists seem to face notably higher injury risk than users of other travel modes,” he said. “They also breathe harder so are inhaling more air pollution, which is bad for health.But on the other hand, they are not in a car putting other road users at injury risk or producing pollution for everyone else. We need this model to tell us which is the more important effect.”

There are also rebound effects to consider. “If I sell my car and buy a bike, I’ll have money left over, and where do I then spend that money?” he asked. “I may end up causing greenhouse gas emissions somewhere else, and it’s complicated to account for these second-order factors.”

ITHIM has now been taken up in California to evaluate transport plans in the San Francisco Bay area. It showed that a shift from driving to walking and cycling on short trips reduced the burden of cardiovascular disease and diabetes by 14% and reduced emissions by around 14%. By contrast, low-carbon driving reduced emissions by 33.5% but cardiorespiratory disease burden by less than 1%.

̽��ֱ��results are feeding into new policy in which a combination of active transport and low-carbon driving could meet legislative emissions mandates. Meanwhile, working with the Greater London Authority, Woodcock is also evaluating the impact of achieving the Mayor’s cycling targets and has also separately modelled the impacts of the Barclay’s Cycle Hire Scheme.

With funding from the Economic and Social Research Council and the Medical Research Council, Woodcock is leading two additional projects to address the problem of how to achieve the necessary behaviour change. By focusing on the development of cycling cultures through social learning and social influence, and by understanding the unintended outcomes that policies might bring about, these projects are attempting a different approach from those used in traditional transport modelling.

“Our research brings out a potential good news story,” he added. “Health benefits link transport and environment problems, and we need to be sure of the best route to achieving the biggest benefits.”

CEDAR is a partnership between the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge, the ̽��ֱ�� of East Anglia and Medical Research Council Units in Cambridge. Visit www.cedar.iph.cam.ac.uk for more information.

With governments around the world under increasing pressure to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, transport systems are under scrutiny. Dr James Woodcock has introduced another factor into the equation: population health.

Health benefits link transport and environment problems, and we need to be sure of the best route to achieving the biggest benefits

James Woodcock

Amir Kuckovic

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Licence. If you use this content on your site please link back to this page.

Yes