Archive for the ‘Sport and fitness’ Category

h1

Research mounts showing Vitamin D’s health benefits

November 19, 2009

Lynne Kiesling

Over the past year or so I’ve been following the debate and research on Vitamin D intake. Initially Vitamin D supplementation was recommended simply to reduce the incidence of rickets in children, but increasingly Vitamin D is associated with a wide range of health benefits, from reducing fatigue to improving metabolism to improving heart health. Vitamin D has become a particular challenge in the past 30 years, because we’ve gotten out of the stereotypical “spoonful of cod liver oil” that was popular in the early 20th century (fish oils are rich in Vitamin D and in omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids that are good for metabolism and for the heart). At the same time, we’ve increased our use of sunscreen, and since almost no foods are rich in Vitamin D, the primary way to get it is to expose your skin to sunlight for 10-60 minutes per day, depending on time of year (less in summer, more in winter). Sunscreen blocks Vitamin D absorption while protecting us from skin cancer.

This week a new study was released and presented at the American Heart Association meetings, as reported in this Yahoo/AP story and this longer New York Times story. As the NYT summarized the results:

In the study, researchers looked at tens of thousands of healthy adults 50 and older whose vitamin D levels had been measured during routine checkups. A majority, they found, were deficient in the vitamin. About two-thirds had less vitamin D in their bloodstreams than the authors considered healthy, and many were extremely deficient.

Less than two years later, the researchers found, those who had extremely low levels of the vitamin were almost twice as likely to have died or suffered a stroke than those with adequate amounts. They also had more coronary artery disease and were twice as likely to have developed heart failure.

The findings, which are being presented today at an American Heart Association conference in Orlando, don’t prove that lack of vitamin D causes heart disease; they only suggest a link between the two. But cardiologists are starting to pay increasing attention because of what they’re learning about vitamin D’s roles in regulating blood pressure, inflammation and glucose control — all critical body processes in cardiovascular health.

The article goes into much more detail about the study, and is a very worthy read.

The sports nutrition community have also been paying attention to Vitamin D for a while, and these new results reinforce the idea that Vitamin D levels are an important factor in athletic performance, in addition to overall health. This article from Competitor discusses the role of Vitamin D in fatigue in endurance athletes, something that we frequently attribute to iron deficiency instead (especially in women), but it may be that Vitamin D is a culprit too. The author, a dietitian, summarizes some sports research on Vitamin D levels:

This was my very first experience with vitamin D deficiency and I have since learned that vitamin D deficiency is becoming an epidemic worldwide, not only in geographic regions where sun exposure is limited.  And my discussions with fellow dietitians working with college runners and professional athletes in generally sunny states (Texas and Florida) confirmed the alarming prevalence of vitamin D deficiency across ethnicity and gender.

Athletes who live in northern latitudes (north of 35 degrees), or use sunscreen consistently, perform their sport indoors, or keep their skin covered are at the greatest risk.  Melanin affects the production of vitamin D.  So those with more melanin or darker skin produce less vitamin D.  Since vitamin D is a fat-soluble vitamin, athletes with fat malabsorption problems such as cystic fibrosis, Crohn’s disease, and celiac disease are at risk for deficiency.  Those who have normal levels typically (around 50 ng/ml) live in sub-equatorial Africa and work outdoors for most of the summer.

Once thought of as being primarily involved in bone development, activated vitamin D (calcitriol), a steroid hormone, is responsible for regulating more than 1000 human genes.  Almost every cell in the human body has receptors for vitamin D.  Recent research shows that vitamin D deficiency increases the risk of different types of cancer (such as breast cancer and prostate cancer), as well as heart disease, diabetes, depression, autoimmune diseases, hypertension, obesity, gum disease, chronic pain, muscle wasting, inflammation, birth defects, osteoporosis, influenza and colds, etc.

So here’s my public service announcement for the day: at your next annual checkup when you order your blood work, ask to have your Vitamin D levels tested. And think about the sunscreen-Vitamin D tradeoff; getting 30 minutes of unobstructed sun is unlikely to increase skin cancer risk enough to outweigh the Vitamin D benefits from the sun absorption. Vitamin D supplementation is also low-risk; I figure between my multi and my fish oil and my Vitamin D I get about 800 IU, and I have noticed decreases in my fatigue levels.

h1

Roads and paths as common-pool resources, and the problem of governing them

October 19, 2009

Lynne Kiesling

Yesterday at Reason’s Hit & Run Tim Cavanaugh wrote about something that I’ve been thinking about for a long time: the institutions we use for governing the shared use of paths between cyclists and motorists on roads, and among cyclists, walkers, runners, rollerbladers, etc. on multi-use paths. Tim’s starting point was Christopher Beam’s article in Slate on the same topic. Beam frames the question as “How do we get bikers to obey traffic laws?”, and classifies cyclists into two categories: vehicularists and facilitators:

What to do? Today’s cycling activists generally split into two groups: “vehicularists” and “facilitators.” Proponents of “vehicular cycling” believe bikes should act as cars: occupy full lanes, stop at red lights, use a hand signal at least 100 feet ahead of a turn. That’s the best way to make cars—and policymakers—aware of bicycles and to respect them as equals on the road. When it comes to making roads safe for bikes, vehicularists tend to favor training, education (most cities offer bike safety classes), and enforcement. Cyclists should not grouse about moving violations, the vehicularists argue. It is a sign that they’re being treated as equals.

Facilitators, meanwhile, say we should change the laws and the environment to recognize the innate differences between bikes and cars. That means special facilities like bike lanes, bike paths (elevated trails separate from the road), and even Copenhagen-style traffic lights for bikes. It would also mean changing car-centric laws that don’t make sense for bikes, like the rule that says you need to come to a complete stop at a stop sign.

I agree with Tim that the best response is to be part vehicularist and part facilitator; I figure my split is about 80/20. When I am on my bike I am a vehicle. I think that when I am on my bike I am dangerous to pedestrians and they are dangerous to me because their behavior can be unpredictable, and thus I should be on the road and not on the sidewalk. On the road I ride single file with other cyclists (I generally don’t do group rides), I stop at red lights, I don’t weave in and out of traffic, and I use hand signals. I do not, though, stop at stop signs unless there are other vehicles approaching the intersection; as both Tim and Christopher note, keeping your inertia up is really important on the bike, and stopping at stop signs when there aren’t any other vehicles present is an unnecessary reduction in my inertia that does nothing to improve safety. In other words, I adhere to the Idaho stop law, under which Idaho cyclists are allowed by law to treat stop signs as yield signs in the absence of other vehicles. I am a “facilitator” to the extent that I believe we should amend existing traffic laws to enact the Idaho stop law more widely. In general, I behave the same way, and for the same practical and philosophical (i.e., anarchist) reasons as squarooticus voiced in his/her comment on Tim’s post:

Anyone who advocates that bikes (or all cars!) obey every traffic law has bought into the modern statist notion that laws are ends in themselves. The rest of us (especially the anarchists, who hate unnatural laws) understand that laws are a means to an end. In this case, that end is safety.

How many of you come to complete stops in a car when you get to an intersection in which you have 100% visibility in all directions and there is nothing coming? I certainly don’t, and I don’t know many people who do.

When I’m riding my bike, have perfect visibility, and am not in a position to surprise a driver, I will slow down at a stop sign or light, look in all directions, and proceed through if it is safe to so. I would actually be in favor of car drivers doing this as well, eliminating the need for most traffic control devices, if I felt that most car drivers were capable of doing so safely. Since half of them are yakking on a cellphone wedged between their shoulder and ear, smoking a cigarette with one hand, holding a coffee with the other, and driving with the left knee while the right foot actuates the velocitator and deceleratrix, it seems pretty clear that this isn’t the case.

SAFETY. That’s the point. Not blindly following rules for the sake of following rules. Follow the rules during situations in which predictability is integral to safety, but bend the rules when safety would not be an issue.

Similarly, when I am on the bike path in Lincoln Park I am constantly saying “on your left!” and making sure that the other users of the path are aware of my presence, since as a cyclist I am the fastest and most dangerous type of user on the path. But I avoid paths whenever possible, because the way I ride is more incompatible with paths than it is with roads.

I do find the hostility between motorists and cyclists disturbing, and the anger and attitude on both parts in the comments to Tim’s post show some examples of why it’s so disturbing. But it’s not as one-sided as Beam’s “how do we get cyclists to obey traffic laws?” headline suggests. Not surprisingly, I think of the cyclist’s dilemma on both roads and paths as a problem of common-pool resource governance similar to those that Elinor Ostrom and other new institutional economists study.

Let’s start with the path. This, for example, is my path, downtown near Ohio Street beach, although I spend most of my time on it up north, between Belmont and Foster, where I run. Note the ease of access and many multiple uses of the scarce common-pool resource (and if you look carefully you’ll see a swimmer there too!):

chicago_lakefront_path_dburden_large

Moreover, when the path is congested, these uses can conflict. In particular, rollerblading and cycling conflict the most, because a rollerblader’s leg stroke is wide and his/her speed can vary widely, while a cyclist takes up less width, but is moving quickly. The potential for a serious accident is high. The institutions used to govern our shared use of this resource are mostly informal and grounded in common sense — cyclists are expected to have a bell and/or say “on your left”, pedestrians are expected to look both ways and yield to cyclists and rollerbladers before crossing the path, and runners are expected to run on the gravel path where there is one (and runners who love their knees are going to benefit from doing that anyway!). Path users generally evolve patterns that serve as a compromise with the other users; for example, cyclists doing fast (>16m.p.h.) training rides know not to expect to do so after 10 AM on summer weekends, and rollerbladers learn that they should coast when they hear “on your left”. It’s not perfect, and things happen that inject noise into the system (such as having a toddler dart out unexpectedly from a beach onto the path, or a volleyball bouncing in front of you, or a cyclist or rollerblader with earphones in when they should not be), but in general, the informal institutions that have grown on top of the formal legal requirement that it be a multi-use path keep things both safe and civil.

The economic logic of governing the commons also applies to the road as a common-pool resource shared by motorists and cyclists. It’s really only when there is congestion of traffic among the two types of users that their use rights come into conflict, although in some situations congestion kicks in early — for example, some of the smaller “B” roads I’ve been on in England would hit congestion with one car and one bike and a curve in the road! The institutions used to govern the uses of the shared resource here are a mix of formal (traffic laws) and informal (courtesy).

More so on the road than on the path, the formal institutions and the informal institutions interact. Here’s an example of what I mean: cyclists weave in and out of traffic and generally ignore stop lights, which angers motorists and makes them more disinclined to treat cyclists with courtesy, which angers cyclists and makes them more disinclined to obey traffic laws or to treat motorists with courtesy, etc. etc. Or let’s start from the other side: some motorists don’t like having to share the road with cyclists, even those who ride safely and generally obey traffic laws, so they don’t treat cyclists with courtesy (drive too close to them, honk at them, etc.), which angers cyclists and makes them more disinclined to obey traffic laws or to treat motorists with courtesy, which reinforces the motorists’ preconceptions and angers them further, etc. etc.

My view of the road as a common-pool resource governed by a combination of formal and informal institutions is why I’m 80% vehicularist/20% facilitator. The stop sign law for cyclists is excessively costly without increasing safety for either cyclists or motorists, and its stringency induces cyclists to ignore that law, which erodes the respect for bike laws more generally. However, it’s also true that most motorists don’t understand the physics and the dynamics of cycling. That’s why my general recommendation about formal governance in this case is two-pronged:

  1. Implement the Idaho stop law.
  2. Require all drivers to undergo bicycle training and pass a cycling test in order to get a driver’s license.

Unfortunately, I don’t have a good answer for cyclists weaving through traffic or people in cars throwing things at cyclists other than more strict enforcement and penalties …

As for the issue of separate bike lanes, I’m not sure that the costs outweigh the benefits in all cases, so in the spirit of Ostrom’s polycentric and organic institutions, I would recommend continuing to evaluate them on a local basis. If the combination of amending the traffic laws and taking measures that will increase the likelihood of courtesy makes both cyclists and motorists happier and safer without the expense, that would be a good thing.

h1

Did prediction markets miss the call on Chicago’s Olympic bid?

October 6, 2009

Michael Giberson

The IOC recently selected Rio de Janerio over three competing bids to host the 2016 summer Olympic games.  The Chicago bid was favored in public prediction markets, with prices at Intrade between 50 and 60 at the time of decision and prices at Betfair implying about a 50 percent chance.  Did the prediction markets fail to predict well?

At Midas Oracle, Chris Masse has been asserting that prediction markets for IOC selections are fundamentally flawed, saying that the IOC is a small, secretive committee that doesn’t leak information and therefore no information is “out there” available to be aggregated by a prediction market. He was saying this before the IOC vote, too; this is not just after-the-fact speculation, it was his before-the-fact speculation. (Also posts here, here, here, here, here, here and, from April 2007, this post.)

I think the “small, secretive committee” explanation is weak, so I’ve been poking back a little in the comments. Chris, as is his style, has been elevating my comments into new posts in order to re-assert his views.

But a more fundamental question is whether or not it can be said that the prediction markets got it wrong.  At Sabernomics, J.C. Bradbury reports watching Intrade closely the morning of the IOC decision:

Around 9 AM … the odds show Chicago to be the favorite with a 53% chance of winning, closely followed by Rio at 46%, Tokyo at 3%, and Madrid at 2%. Like all the pundits following the selection were saying, it was a race between Chicago and Rio, but was very close to call. These odds also show something else, Chicago was trending down and Rio was trending up. The trend would continue for the next few hours.

… Looks like useful information was leaking out from knowledgeable parties just before the vote. This is evidence for, not against, the strong-form of efficient markets hypothesis.

Bradbury does an excellent job sifting through the shifting coalitions revealed in the three rounds of IOC voting.  Neither Madrid nor Toyko showed any significant ability to attract votes as the rounds proceeded.  It was going to be Rio or Chicago all along, but Chicago was weakest in the four-way vote and lost early, leaving the games to go to Brazil.

Based on Bradbury’s analyis, I’m convinced that the decision was pretty much a toss up between Chicago and Rio.  That conclusion was also implied in the prediction market prices just before the decision.  Sure, the prediction markets favored Chicago, slightly, over Rio; I don’t think you can call it a miss given the closeness of the decision.

[Related: Market Design and Marginal Revolution both have brief notes; Infectious Greed provides related discussion.]

UPDATE: Chris Masse doesn’t like my analysis: Who has the best analysis for Chicago’s failed bid for the Olympics?; neither does Paul Hewitt: “Michael Giberson is wrong to imply that the prediction was accurate on the basis that Chicago and Rio were fairly close.” See also here.

h1

Is bicycling “bad to the bone”?

August 28, 2009

Michael Giberson

Research studying competitive cyclists suggests that cycling can reduce bone density.

… most recreational cyclists probably don’t need to worry too much about their bones. “The studies to date have looked primarily at racers,” [researcher Aaron] Smathers says. “That’s a very specialized demographic. These guys train for hours at a very high intensity. They sweat a lot. They never go for runs. They don’t usually do much weight-lifting,” to avoid adding bulk. “They’re strange.”

I never “train for hours at a very high intensity,” so I’m probably safe.

h1

Share the road …

August 11, 2009

Lynne Kiesling

OK, this comic hits a leeeetle too close to home!

h1

My own private Idaho Stop Law

August 6, 2009

Michael Giberson

Danny Morris at Common Tragedies explains and advocates for wider adoption of the Idaho Stop Law:

The law, named after the clever state that instituted it in 1982, says that cyclists may treat stop signs as yield signs (they must stop for those w/ the right of way, but can proceed w/o stopping if the coast is clear) and may treat stop lights as stop signs (they must stop, but can proceed when the coast is clear, even if the light is still red).

Morris links to a report at The Athletes Lawyer that said:

Meanwhile, in the past 27 years, Idaho motorists and police have grown to accept the legislation as sensible public policy, said Jason Meggs, a UC-Berkeley researcher who spent last summer crunching years of traffic data, conducting interviews and observing cyclist behavior in the state. Boise, home to Idaho’s biggest bike population, “has actually become safer for bicyclists than other cities which don’t have the law,” Meggs said.”

I guess I’ve been operating under my own private Idaho Stop Law, the description fits my usual riding habits pretty well.

Casual observation suggests the Idaho Stop is widely practiced by cyclists.  (See, for example, this article from The Oregonian where the author came up with the same Gus Van Sant movie reference that I’m using.) Perhaps one reason that the law improves safety is that it helps coordinate expectations of cyclists and motor vehicle operators.

h1

Race report: Trek Women’s Triathlon Wisconsin

July 13, 2009

Lynne Kiesling

I took some time off from triathlon in 2008, largely due to my cycling focus in preparation for and in the wake of our mondo Lewis & Clark bike ride. But this year I’m back, and today was my first race of the summer. It was a gorgeous day for a race! Punch line: I had a very good race, which gives me lots of insight into my training.

Trek2009 swim

Race: Trek Women’s Triathlon, Pleasant Prairie, Wisconsin

Bib ClockTime Overall DivPl Swim Swimrank Trans1 Bike Bikerank Mph Trans2 Runrank Run Pace
975 01:28:39 344 74 00:16:05 526 00:04:01 00:37:10 161 19.3 00:02:51 650 00:28:30 00:09:11

[Note: ranks are out of the 2544 total participants]

More details below the break …

Read the rest of this entry ?

h1

A bikey bikey weekend!

June 12, 2009

Lynne Kiesling

Will soon be outta here, headed west to lovely Bettendorf, Iowa, for this weekend’s Tour of the Mississippi River Valley (TOMRV) bike ride. 106 miles on Saturday, 90 on Sunday. I intend to be back on Sunday to report that I did ride every.dang.mile. There’s a slight chance of rain both days, with temperatures in the mid-70s.

Please send me your good endurance vibes!

h1

Independence Pass!

May 20, 2009

Lynne Kiesling

I’ve been out in Colorado since Friday teaching at this year’s Institute for Regulatory Law & Economics annual workshop for state regulators. Yesterday we had a free afternoon and today we wrap up and travel home, so my post for the day is this picture from yesterday’s free afternoon: three of us rode from Aspen up to the top of Independence Pass. 20.5 miles out and up, a 4000-foot elevation gain … and 2000 of those feet of elevation gain come in the last two miles before the summit. Ouch!

It was breathtaking in many ways — lack of oxygen at 12,000 feet, gorgeous scenery, riding on a road that’s little more than a paved mountain goat trail clinging to the side of a mountain in some places — and it was a good challenge and good fun. I wouldn’t have stuck with it without my riding buddies Ray and Brian, so thanks to them I got to have this spectacular experience!

h1

A triathlete’s favorite New Yorker cartoon

May 15, 2009

Lynne Kiesling


The winning caption:  “You’re in trouble when we get to the bicycles!”

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 50 other followers