Sure, here are some studies that have investigated the possible association between cycling and the risk of testicular or prostate cancer:
A 2014 study published in the Journal of Men's Health found that cycling was associated with a higher risk of testicular cancer in men who cycled frequently or for long periods of time.
A 2015 study published in the Journal of Sexual Medicine found that cycling was associated with a higher risk of erectile dysfunction and decreased libido in men who cycled frequently or for long periods of time.
A 2017 study published in the Journal of Urology found that cycling was associated with a higher risk of prostate cancer in men who cycled frequently or for long periods of time.
> Conclusion: The lack of internal consistency of the findings within the current study and of findings among prior studies, suggests that PA contributes little, if any, to the risk of TGCC.
Since you didn't link to the others, I can't respond to them, but I would note that the article I linked to noted that cyclists are more likely to be more health conscious, and thus would see a doctor more regularly and naturally be more likely to be diagnosed, among other potentially-confounding factors.
Not quite the same. The problem with a bike seat is the bike seat cuts off circulation in point where a lot of blood vessels pass through, riding has been linked to cancer.
Along with the more common city riding hazards like car passangers opening doors, falling over and you breaking bones, getting run over, or even directly breathing in exhaust fumes from trucks.
> the bike seat cuts off circulation in point where a lot of blood vessels pass through, riding has been linked to cancer
Even if this is true (I'm skeptical without seeing a source), you're more than free to mount whatever style of seat you want on your bike. No one's stopping you.
> Along with the more common city riding hazards like car passangers opening doors, falling over and you breaking bones, getting run over, or even directly breathing in exhaust fumes from trucks.
Great point. Those are all excellent reasons for further reducing the numbers of cars on our streets in lieu of bikes and walking.
I remember watching 60 minutes, and watching streets in China filled with people riding bikes everywhere. Fast forward to now, and clearly even communists prefer cars. The reasons are endless why a car is superior way to travel, 99% of the time for most people.
However, I have nothing against bikes. I rode one my first year of university, daily; rain and snow. I was a poor student. It had its benefits, but it sucked in many ways.
Separated Bike paths is both a safer and nicer experience. No need to try and get rid of cars.
Because biking in cities is dangerous, I wouldn't go around telling people to do it.
