Less driving, more cycling: How you commute to work impacts your health | Health

The alarm clock rings at the same time five days a week. You wake up, have breakfast, shower and get dressed. It’s a routine that repeats itself almost every day of the year, with slight variations. You leave the house like an automaton. And that’s when you’re faced with different choices that will affect your physical and mental health in the long run. The important thing is not so much where you’re going, but how you get there.

A recent study from the University of Glasgow analyzed the daily routines of 82,297 Scottish commuters over 18 years and divided them into groups based on their commuting habits: cyclists, pedestrians, drivers, and public transport users. It then analyzed their hospitalization, death, and prescription records during that time. The results were pretty clear. According to the study, pedestrians and cyclists—especially the latter group—had a lower risk of mortality and hospitalization, cardiovascular disease and cancer, and even of being prescribed medication for mental health problems. Those who chose to use public transport or drive to work fared worse in all of these areas.

“There have been previous studies that have looked at this relationship,” Bruce Whyte, director of the University of Glasgow’s Public Health Program and one of the study’s authors, said in an email. “But few have done such a large sample size and followed their medical records for such a long time.”

Regular exercise reduces the incidence of cardiovascular events and reduces the risk of obesity and related diseases. It also has positive effects on physical and mental health. However, almost half of Europeans — 45% according to the 2022 Eurobarometer — say they never exercise. When asked why, the most common reason (41%) is lack of time. After working eight hours, it can be difficult to get to the gym to do indoor cycling. But if cycling becomes a means of transportation, people are much more likely to stick with it. Cycling or walking to work is a way to incorporate exercise into your daily routine without investing a lot of extra time. It also encourages consistency: you can skip the gym out of laziness, but you can’t do the same with work.

Whyte suspects that public transport users may have better health outcomes than drivers, since it usually involves a short walk to the train or bus stop. But his study did not differentiate between the two groups, who fall into the generic “not active” category. As for cyclists, there was only one area in which they did not fare better than the other groups: hospitalisations due to traffic accidents.

“It’s a relatively rare occurrence, but it shows the need to build safer bike lanes,” explains the author. Whyte argues that these numbers are conditioned, above all, by public policies. “There are many studies that corroborate this,” he emphasizes. “If you invest exclusively in roads, you encourage car use; if, on the other hand, you invest in public transport, bike lanes and good pedestrian infrastructure, you will make many more people move around actively and sustainably.”

Driving on the rise

In a companion analysis, the study notes that in Scotland, walking to work levels have fallen significantly over the past 50 years, while driving levels have increased exponentially. “This is obviously not an isolated case,” notes Whyte. There are exceptions, such as Copenhagen or Amsterdam, but in most major Western cities, car use is on the rise.

In Spain, for example, the number of cars per capita has increased by 10% in the last 10 years. And more than half of Spaniards (61.3%) drive to work, according to data from the National Statistics Institute (INE). The INE data found that the distance between home and work is the main factor determining car commuting. But there is also a class component: the more money a person has, the more likely they are to drive to work.

In a place like Amsterdam, where cycling is more widespread, a recent study suggested that the relationship between income and car ownership is not clear. It depends on the city model. As Enrique Peñalosa, the former mayor of Bogotá, put it: “The characteristic of an advanced society is not that the poor drive, but that the rich use public transport.”

Jeff Speck, director of urban design consultancy Speck Dempsey and author of the book Walkable city, has spent years explaining to mayors of U.S. cities the advantages of the European urban model. In an email exchange, he explains that he often cites Madrid and Barcelona as examples. “I am aware that they may have their problems and challenges, but for an American urban planner they are a dream,” he says.

Speck contrasts the European urban model—defined by a highly concentrated population and tall buildings—with the suburban model that predominates in the United States (and on the outskirts of European cities): neighborhoods with wide avenues, single-family homes, and housing developments, which are much more spread out.

“Urban life is about shared space, shared transport, shared services and embracing diversity,” he explains. “By contrast, suburban life is about privatising what belongs to everyone in the city: for example, the public park and swimming pool are replaced by the large courtyard and the private pool.” In this scenario, the car (which replaces public transport with private transport) plays a central role. For this reason, he acknowledges, car use has come to be seen as a question of identity and politics. “It takes a certain faith in your neighbour to live a more urban life, and the growing political divide can make this a harder sell,” he says. “But one thing is certain: being stuck in a traffic jam is not freedom.”

Driving Rage

Ultimately, Speck says that traveling by car is simply less enjoyable. And there’s a reason for that. “Humans are social primates, and nothing interests us more than other humans. We like to occupy places that allow us to meet each other, and it’s much better to do that by walking than by driving.” The urban planner jokingly admits that he has some bias when it comes to the subject: “I met my wife on the platform while I was waiting for the train.”

It would have been hard for Speck to find his wife in a city traffic jam or driving on the highway. Cars are, at their core, antisocial. They separate us into metal bubbles. A gathering of pedestrians might be a protest or a party, but a gathering of drivers will always be a traffic jam. According to Speck, this is because all drivers are competing for limited space on the road, with other cars seen as a risk and a threat. They are not company, but competition. “To be clear: Have you ever flipped someone off while walking because they wouldn’t let you pass?”

Road rage is neither new nor surprising. Behind the wheel, people who would otherwise be polite and shy become screaming hydras. But aggressive behavior can extend beyond the car and have wider-ranging effects. A 2018 analysis published in Journal of Public Economicsfound that in Los Angeles, “extreme traffic increases the incidence of domestic violence by approximately 9 percent.” He explained that this link was due to the fact that domestic violence is sensitive to emotional cues.

The link between physical well-being and active commuting is well documented, but there are fewer studies on how it affects mental health. One of the most comprehensive was a 2014 longitudinal study involving Marc Suhrcke, a professor in the Health Economics Group at the School of Medicine in Norwich, England. “Active commuting, such as walking or cycling, involves physical activity, which improves mood and reduces stress,” he says in a message exchange. “Public transport often involves some walking and provides time to relax, read or socialise, which contrasts with the stress and isolation associated with driving.” Cycling, walking and taking the bus are very different, but they all share elements of reducing stress, increasing movement and providing the opportunity for social interaction.

Commuting can be a time to disconnect, even from work-related issues, says the expert. More and more studies support this idea. “Since we published our study, the benefits of active travel for mental health have been increasingly recognized. More attention has been paid to the role of urban design and the policy interventions that promote it.”

Social perceptions of cars and densely populated cities have also changed. Popular culture has reflected this paradigm shift. Speck, for example, doesn’t cite urban planners as references when explaining his argument. Instead, he highlights an interview with singer Taylor Swift, who explained why she loved New York as opposed to a city designed for cars, like Los Angeles.

But to understand this shift in mindset, it’s best to look back. Economist Chris Leinberger analyzed TV shows to understand our relationship with roads. He highlighted how children in the 1960s grew up watching suburban TV shows like The Brady Familywhile subsequent generations were fascinated by series like Friends, Seinfeld and Sex and the Citysitcoms that glorified urban living. “In this way,” Speck explains, “they were able to learn about the freedom, convenience, and pleasure of living in a place where every social space is not separated from the others by a car ride.”

Sign up for our weekly newsletter for more English news coverage from EL PAÍS USA Edition