UKC

NICE, what drugs are they on? people simply are not caperble, those that are do, the rest are to busy driving thruogh macdees to care! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-20499005

In reply to dale1968: Actually, I agree with them.

Cars make you lazy.

When i first moved to Manchester, I didn't have a car because I worked in the city all the time. I'd use taxis most mornings, but I'd always use public transport/walking to get home, and if I went shoppping etc, I walked. It was quite pleasant. I had to get a car when I got a job which took me all over the Northwest and now... I barely go anywhere without it.
I had the time before to walk, I have the time now.

When I lived in London, sometimes I'd not even bother with the tube, I'd walk or run through the park to get into town. 40 minutes at a fast walk through Regent's Park. Hardly a chore. I'd do that even in winter.

Not sure what your issue with this quite sound advice is?

In reply to Wonko The Sane: non of my neighbours are caperble or motivated to walk/cycle anywhere, one guy drives 100m to the coop regulary, I have cycled/run to work all my life,but I am not normal my neighbours are, they all ignore the advice for diet/health/fitness,
That is there choise..were far more sednetary than we were 30/40 years ago, it just cloud cuckoo land advice

In reply to dale1968:

Now just read what you've written.
You openly acknowledge that the article is correct...... people are lazier. Yet you think it's advice is 'cloud cuckoo land'

It's advice is spot on. The fact that people may choose to ignore the advice is neither here nor there.

Or are you suggesting the advice should read 'you're a fat lazy bastard, but hey, that's just how it is now, eh?'

In reply to Wonko The Sane: your saner than you appear, the point is there all inteligent people and educated, goverments should goven, NICE ahould concentrate on what they appear to fail at quite miserbly

In reply to Wonko The Sane:

Agreed. There are several work colleagues who live in a village about a mile from work who all drive for their commute. Not only that but in separate cars! So rather than having four adults improving their health there are four cars adding to congestion and pollution. To counter this there are a couple from the same village who bike to work so I'm not tarring everyone with the same brush.

I read one article this morning that stated if the health risks from inactivity were due to a virus then there would be mass panic amongst the government.

ALC

In reply to dale1968:

Giving sensible advice and doing their jobs, it's an outrage !!!

In reply to dale1968:


What do you think that NICE's remit is? And how do you think that they are failing?

I suspect that your answers to both these questions are going to be wrong.

In reply to dale1968:

So what do you think should be done?

In reply to tony:

As everything in human history seems to go in circles, I think that it'll be fashionable in the future for lots of exercise to be compulsory at schools. Then the issue of selling off the playing fields will rear it's ugly head.

In reply to tony: Stop giving advice, people don't listen, pass drugs for use quickly and effectively,stop judging whats right for us, we know, its nanny state politics

In reply to dale1968: Agree entirely, we know we have an obesity epidemic, we know it's making us unhappy, yet people buy more cars and eat more crap. Almost every fat person knows they're fat because they eat too much and/or do no exercise. What the experts should really advocate is practical and safe cycling networks, Stockton-on-tees being a recent fine example of this. Public transport that is an attractive alternative to having a car rather than a 'rip off people who can't afford cars' free for all. High taxation on unhealthy processed foods and lower prices for healthy food (how can sausages be cheaper than bread?!), using the same excuse as for tobacco.

Never happen though, the economy is god! And it must grow forever!

In reply to dale1968:

I cycle to work everyday, probably cover 50 - 100 miles a week and I'm definitely fitter as a result of it. Although I like being fit the main reason for cycling is financial and if I had the money I would definitely drive.

Not sure about the roads in the rest of the UK but in Sheffield they are a nightmare and just not set up for cyclists. Good advice from the government but they need to put a lot more effort into the infrastructure if they want more people to take up cycling.

It's very rare for me to make it to work and back without a near miss caused by someone else's bad cycling or driving. Despite being very cautious on my bike it feels genuinely unsafe and I can see why the vast majority opt for the outer protective layer of a car!

In reply to dale1968:

Maybe we need a nanny state if people know the facts and are doing the wrong things anyway?

Or else we'll smoke and drink and eat ourselves into early graves.

Doesn't stop us being free to go out into the hills, and there might be more taxes for other usefull things if we all start being healthier, from us not needing treatment?

It's just a thought.

In reply to Timmd: For me it's about self determination, let us get on with our lives, and not spend taxes on what we all know to be wrong, show me someone who does not understand healthy living versus sloth and greed?

In reply to dale1968:

So NICE's job is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of health interventions and decide whether they are worth implementing within the NHS? Agreed?

This doesn't just include drugs. What about diagnostic and screening procedures , vaccination programmes, smoking cessation help and advice, new methods of counselling and support?

The advice you are referring to comes out of a NICE programme of work which involves looking at the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of various public information and advice programmes which are targeted at increasing the amount of cycling and walking rather than short car journeys. The very fact that they are advising us suggests that the evidence supports the fact that the beneficial effect of this advice outweighs the cost (which in the case of a press release is pretty slight).

NICE aren't making you do anything, they are using evidence-based practice to try to work out the most efficient way of spending the country's healthcare budget. If they publish advice, you don't have to listen. How is that a 'nanny state'?

In reply to dale1968:I agree in principle, it's just nothing much seems to be changing.

I worry we'll end up with worse NHS care from it having to care for preventable conditions, because resources will be stretched that much more.

Instead of better specialist care being paid for, the money might/will go on lifestyle diseases and conditions instead.

It's that which bothers me, but usually i'm one for self determination, and don't really like rules and being told what to do.

In reply to dale1968:Something needs to change anyway.

In reply to victim of mathematics: do you feel the need to be advised? or is it only the uneducated like myself who need there hands holding? I dont do diatribes, like I said nanny state who are they telling/advising? cui bono?

In reply to dale1968:

I feel that I'll trust actual evidence of effectiveness over my own (or your) arbitrary and uninformed judgement.

How is NICE (who aren't the government) offering advice on anything, a 'nanny state'?

In reply to dale1968:

I contacted the local council about a long cycle path that goes up a busy hill, which is unusable in winter when it is icy or it snows. They told me they don't clear cycle paths, but that cyclists should move onto the road at this exciting time of year, or should walk or drive.

I've had to ask for over a year to get overhanging vegetation cut back.

I started a cycle users group at my work - no one does it as part of their job.

There really isn't much encouragement out there for people to cycle...

In reply to Timmd:

"Maybe we need a nanny state if people know the facts and are doing the wrong things anyway?

Or else we'll smoke and drink and eat ourselves into early graves."

My body, my choice. Not yours.

Neil

In reply to Neil Williams:


Nobody else is trying to make that choice for you. This is like alcohol pricing, only on an even simpler level, since NICE's only apparent crime is to offer advice, which has literally no impact on your ability to drive all you like.

In reply to Timmd:

"Instead of better specialist care being paid for, the money might/will go on lifestyle diseases and conditions instead."

So tax the "vices" so the costs are covered to the NHS, and leave it at that.

Just about the same effect as you'd get with increased premiums in a US style private health system.

Neil

In reply to victim of mathematics:

"Nobody else is trying to make that choice for you."

NICE aren't, no, but the post to which I replied was considering the possibility that the State should.

Neil

In reply to victim of mathematics: your so well informed? pray who told you?

you don't answer the question, do you need this advice? who does? NICE need to stick to there core job, not stating the bloody obvious, guess what cycling and walking will never be the norm, the norm is cars and inactivity

In reply to dale1968:
"cut down on your pork life mate, get some excercise"

Bloody Blur, nanny state pop band... whare's my Daily Mail

In reply to dale1968:

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that the people who need this advice are people who drive for journeys that they could walk or cycle in fifteen minutes. I don't do that, so personally no, I don't need the advice.

In reply to dale1968:

You know you're right. Never mind trying to get people to take responsibility for their own health, just wait for them to get them unhealthy and then pump them full of pills. Top plan.

In reply to dale1968:

So? Are you saying we should stand back and do bugger all about it? No ta.

In reply to Toby S: spend money on real issues, like making cycling safer, tougher laws, when a ton of steel kills a cyclist, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1525561/Driver-fined-180-for-defective-tyre...

this is why I think Its not taken seriously

In reply to dale1968:

What, with things like better cycle paths and reduced speed limits? Stuff like that?

In reply to tony: not a great fan of cycle paths, but i have cycled on the continent a fair bit and found the whole attitude to cycling much better, even in the USA. so its not just about cycle paths

In reply to dale1968: > (In reply to victim of mathematics) your so well informed? pray who told you?
>

NICE guidance is aimed at healthcare providers, government departments, social services and councils NOT the general public. Their study proves that it is cost effective to provide incentives to improve uptake in cycling (which, to counter your "nothing ever changes" rant, has increased markedly over the last few years). NICE have recommended that more is done to remove barriers to participation in activities that are seen by many people to be dangerous or inconvenient (implement safe cycling routes for example, something that can actually improve the numbers cycling). They are not stating that we should just ask people to ride a bike or walk.

One of the strengths of NICE is that they take evidence, evaluate it and make recommendations accordingly. You should take note.

In reply to dale1968:

"cycling and walking will never be the norm, the norm is cars and inactivity"

I think if you took a trip to London (a bloody rubbish place to cycle) you might note that cycling and walking has become much more of the norm in the last 10 years or so.

It therefore doesn't follow that that couldn't happen in other towns and cities as well, particularly if we head the Dutch way with proper cycling facilities to make it be (and feel) safer.

Neil

In reply to dale1968:

So you'd support an organisation that wanted to make cycling a better experience?

In reply to Monk: there is nothing new, just recycling ad infinitum, and there you go, i should take note! of what? I KNOW and so does every lard arse. Sustran make a difference, action not more hyperbole

In reply to tony: I do, and have donated two road bikes

In reply to dale1968:

NICE want to make cycling a better experience - it's part of their strategy to make cycling the norm for short journeys.

In reply to dale1968:

Well informed about what? Who NICE are? That's publicly available information (and I thought fairly common knowledge). If you mean about the effectiveness of interventions and advice to improve cycling and walking rates, then I'm not informed, as I pointed out.


As I've already explained, this IS NICE's core job. If you think it's stating the obvious, then well done for you. The fact that they are saying it at all shows that there is evidence that some people don't think it's obvious, or at least that a gentle reminder might have some kind of positive effect. I don't see how I can make that any clearer to you. I will take the actual evidence over your assertion that we can't do anything about it.

In reply to dale1968:

Sod walking to work, it's 2 hours each way, and there's no way on gods green earth I'm willing to do that when I'm working 16 hour days, on top of that, the public transport is non existent at 4am(sometimes I start at 2.30am) and when the working day is over the bus would take about 2 hours anyway.

Drive every time for me!

Though I do walk to the shop etc unless it's big shop day.

In reply to JSA:

so a nice 20 minute bike ride then?

In reply to dale1968:

Heard this NICE advice on the Today programme yesterday (the Yesterday programme?) And was inspired to tell my 15yr old son to walk his lazy arse 15 mins up the bloody hill to school instead of asking me for a lift. Instant impact. Life's a load of finely balanced decisions and a bit of independent expert advice to do the right thing, as opposed to the wrong thing, is a good thing.

In reply to dale1968:

What I am trying to say is "Read what NICE are saying before you rant". They are basically saying that councils should be doing what Sustrans are doing as part of their central policies on public health. The massive advantage here is that there is a degree of statutory authority attached to NICE guidance, meaning that the people in charge have to pay attention.

You are currently abusing NICE on one hand while supporting their advice on the other.

In reply to Monk:


Dale does seem rather confused...

In reply to captain paranoia:


Well, you do have to read more than the first couple of paragraphs to get to the bit about lobbying local authorities to make walking and cycling a better experience. That can be quite tricky....

In reply to Carolyn: explain to me who needs telling?what exactly?

In reply to JSA:

You spend 20 hours of each day either commuting or working. So you get in, sleep, get up 4 hours later and back in car? It'll take years off your life. Find something else to do or move closer than a 100 miles away.