48 Cycling Fitness Statistics

by

These cycling fitness figures cover the measurement periods and populations identified in the available source material. Estimates, surveys and forecasts retain their reported scope.

Key Cycling Fitness Statistics

The main findings are:

  • Indoor-cycling interventions in the review lasted from 8 to 24 weeks (Included interventions; Indoor-cycling studies).
  • The pooled association for combined cardiovascular incidence, mortality and physiological risk factors was 0.78 (95% CI 0.74–0.82) (Studies published through August 2017; General-population cycling studies).
  • In one indoor-cycling plus diet group, body mass fell close to 10% from baseline (Study intervention period; Participants in the combined indoor-cycling and diet group).
  • A cycling group reduced triglycerides by 6.56% in the reviewed comparison (Study intervention period; Indoor-cycling participants).
  • The e-cycling systematic review included 17 studies involving 300 participants (Evidence searched through November 2017; Adults using pedal-assisted e-bikes).
  • Cancer-related mortality was 30% lower among bike commuters in the summarized evidence (Evidence summarized in 2022; Bike commuters in summarized studies).
  • Indoor-cycling programs used 2, 5 or 6 sessions per week across the reviewed studies (Included interventions; Indoor-cycling studies).
  • The pooled relative risk for cardiovascular-disease incidence was 0.84 (95% CI 0.80–0.88) (Studies published through August 2017; General-population cycling studies).
  • A healthy indoor-cycling sample had mean BMI 26.8 kg/m² at baseline (Baseline study sample; Healthy indoor-cycling participants).
  • In the reviewed higher-baseline group, triglycerides fell by about 30 mg/dL from baseline above 240 mg/dL (Study intervention period; Participants with higher baseline triglycerides).
  • The e-cycling evidence base included 6 longitudinal interventions (Evidence searched through November 2017; Adult e-cycling studies).
  • About a 30% lower type 2 diabetes risk associated with active commuting (Evidence summarized in 2022; Active commuters in summarized studies).
  • Indoor-cycling session durations ranged from 30 to 100 minutes in the review (Included interventions; Indoor-cycling studies).
  • The pooled relative risk for cardiovascular-disease mortality was 0.83 (95% CI 0.76–0.90) (Studies published through August 2017; General-population cycling studies).
  • A sedentary indoor-cycling sample had mean BMI 25.2 kg/m² at baseline (Baseline study sample; Sedentary indoor-cycling participants).

Contents

Cycling fitness statistics: aerobic capacity and indoor training results

  • Indoor-cycling interventions in the review lasted from 8 to 24 weeks (Included interventions; Indoor-cycling studies). (Health Benefits of Indoor Cycling:…)
  • Indoor-cycling programs used 2, 5 or 6 sessions per week across the reviewed studies (Included interventions; Indoor-cycling studies). (Health Benefits of Indoor Cycling:…)
  • Indoor-cycling session durations ranged from 30 to 100 minutes in the review (Included interventions; Indoor-cycling studies). (Health Benefits of Indoor Cycling:…)
  • A premenopausal group increased VO2-related performance from 31.5 to 34.8 in the reported study (Study intervention period; Premenopausal indoor-cycling participants). (Health Benefits of Indoor Cycling:…)
  • A postmenopausal group increased the reported VO2-related measure from 30.4 to 33.5 (Study intervention period; Postmenopausal indoor-cycling participants). (Health Benefits of Indoor Cycling:…)
  • An indoor-cycling group with migraine increased the reported VO2-related measure from 32.9 to 36.2 (Study intervention period; Participants with migraine). (Health Benefits of Indoor Cycling:…)
  • In the review’s healthy young sample, indoor cycling plus strength training was studied in participants averaging 27.0 years of age (Baseline study sample; Young adults, 65% overweight in the reported sample). (Health Benefits of Indoor Cycling:…)
  • The review included six VO2max studies involving 135 participants (Studies published through January 2019; Indoor-cycling studies). (Health Benefits of Indoor Cycling:…)
  • One indoor-cycling study reported a 3.3-unit increase in the VO2-related measure for both premenopausal and postmenopausal groups (Study intervention period; Premenopausal and postmenopausal women). (Health Benefits of Indoor Cycling:…)

Intervention schedules were heterogeneous.

These are program frequencies, not a recommended regimen.

Protocols varied substantially.

The table reports the study’s measure without a common-unit conversion.

This was a small study subgroup and the table reports study units.

This describes a study population, not all young cyclists.

The six studies were not uniformly randomized or controlled.

The measure is reported as presented in the source table.

Cycling fitness statistics by blood pressure and cardiovascular risk

  • The pooled association for combined cardiovascular incidence, mortality and physiological risk factors was 0.78 (95% CI 0.74–0.82) (Studies published through August 2017; General-population cycling studies). (Cycling is associated with a…)
  • The pooled relative risk for cardiovascular-disease incidence was 0.84 (95% CI 0.80–0.88) (Studies published through August 2017; General-population cycling studies). (Cycling is associated with a…)
  • The pooled relative risk for cardiovascular-disease mortality was 0.83 (95% CI 0.76–0.90) (Studies published through August 2017; General-population cycling studies). (Cycling is associated with a…)
  • The pooled odds ratio for cardiovascular physiological risk factors was 0.75 (95% CI 0.69–0.82) (Studies published through August 2017; General-population cycling studies). (Cycling is associated with a…)
  • Indoor cycling plus strength training and liraglutide reduced systolic blood pressure from 136.2 to 130.8 mmHg (Study intervention period; Participants with type 2 diabetes or metabolic syndrome). (Health Benefits of Indoor Cycling:…)
  • In the same group, diastolic blood pressure changed from 82.1 to 81.5 mmHg (Study intervention period; Participants with type 2 diabetes or metabolic syndrome). (Health Benefits of Indoor Cycling:…)
  • An indoor-cycling group with fibromyalgia changed systolic blood pressure from 125 to 117 mmHg (Study intervention period; Women with fibromyalgia). (Health Benefits of Indoor Cycling:…)
  • Healthy indoor-cycling participants changed systolic blood pressure from 125.5 to 121.4 mmHg (Study intervention period). (Health Benefits of Indoor Cycling:…)
  • A home indoor-cycling intervention reduced systolic blood pressure from 174 to 172 mmHg (Study intervention period; Home indoor-cycling participants). (Health Benefits of Indoor Cycling:…)
  • The WHO reported at least a 10% lower mortality risk for cycling 20 minutes on most days (Evidence summarized in 2022; Evidence summarized for the WHO European Region). (Cycling and walking can help…)
  • WHO reported about a 10% lower cardiovascular-disease risk associated with active commuting (Evidence summarized in 2022; Evidence summarized for active commuters). (Cycling and walking can help…)

This is an association from cohort evidence, not proof of causation.

Adjusted observational estimates; cycling definitions differed by study.

Adjusted observational estimates; not a randomized trial.

Risk-factor outcomes were combined across studies.

Combined intervention; within-group result.

The within-group change was not statistically significant in the review table.

The reported within-group change was marked nonsignificant.

The review table marked the change nonsignificant.

WHO summarizes underlying studies; the statement is not a randomized dose-response trial.

Active commuting combines transport behavior and its observational confounders.

Cycling fitness statistics for body composition and weight

  • In one indoor-cycling plus diet group, body mass fell close to 10% from baseline (Study intervention period; Participants in the combined indoor-cycling and diet group). (Health Benefits of Indoor Cycling:…)
  • A healthy indoor-cycling sample had mean BMI 26.8 kg/m² at baseline (Baseline study sample; Healthy indoor-cycling participants). (Health Benefits of Indoor Cycling:…)
  • A sedentary indoor-cycling sample had mean BMI 25.2 kg/m² at baseline (Baseline study sample; Sedentary indoor-cycling participants). (Health Benefits of Indoor Cycling:…)
  • The diabetes/metabolic-syndrome indoor-cycling sample had mean BMI 30.4 kg/m² in one reported group (Baseline study sample; Participants with metabolic syndrome or type 2 diabetes). (Health Benefits of Indoor Cycling:…)
  • A healthy adolescent indoor-cycling sample had mean BMI 20.1 kg/m² in one group (Baseline study sample; Healthy girls around age 13). (Health Benefits of Indoor Cycling:…)

The review describes the result as close to 10%; combined diet and exercise.

Mean BMI describes one small study sample.

This is a subgroup baseline, not a population estimate.

Adolescent sample; not generalizable to adults.

Cycling fitness statistics for cholesterol and metabolic markers

  • A cycling group reduced triglycerides by 6.56% in the reviewed comparison (Study intervention period; Indoor-cycling participants). (Health Benefits of Indoor Cycling:…)
  • In the reviewed higher-baseline group, triglycerides fell by about 30 mg/dL from baseline above 240 mg/dL (Study intervention period; Participants with higher baseline triglycerides). (Health Benefits of Indoor Cycling:…)
  • In other reviewed studies with baseline triglycerides between 160 and 180 mg/dL, reductions were around 10 mg/dL (Study intervention period; Indoor-cycling study participants). (Health Benefits of Indoor Cycling:…)
  • The indoor-cycling review reported HDL increases around 8% in the cycling groups of one study (Study intervention period; Indoor-cycling groups). (Health Benefits of Indoor Cycling:…)
  • The non-exercise groups in the HDL comparison had changes below 2% and were nonsignificant (Study intervention period; Diet-only and control groups). (Health Benefits of Indoor Cycling:…)
  • The indoor-cycling lipid review covered six studies and 177 participants, including 120 women and 57 men (Studies published through January 2019; Indoor-cycling lipid studies). (Health Benefits of Indoor Cycling:…)
  • A combined indoor-cycling and diet group reduced triglycerides from 201 to 172.8 mg/dL in the reported table (Study intervention period; Metabolic-syndrome participants). (Health Benefits of Indoor Cycling:…)
  • The same combined group reduced total cholesterol from 246.3 to 212.5 mg/dL (Study intervention period; Metabolic-syndrome participants). (Health Benefits of Indoor Cycling:…)
  • An indoor-cycling plus strength-training and liraglutide group reduced LDL from 101 to 97.6 in the reported table (Study intervention period; Participants with type 2 diabetes or metabolic syndrome). (Health Benefits of Indoor Cycling:…)
  • The review states that about 50% of moderate-to-high-intensity aerobic studies improved HDL (Prior meta-analysis cited by the review; Aerobic-exercise studies). (Health Benefits of Indoor Cycling:…)

The source compares this with a bicycle-exercise group; not a pooled estimate.

The review describes this as approximately 12.5%; combined intervention context applies.

The review summarizes several studies; reductions were around 6%.

The comparison diet and control groups had nonsignificant changes below 2%.

This is one study comparison, not a general effect size.

This is the evidence base for lipid outcomes, not a population sample.

The table marks the change nonsignificant and reports a combined intervention.

The table reports a statistically significant within-group change; combined intervention.

The review table marks p<0.001; combined intervention and study units are retained.

This is a cited broader aerobic-exercise meta-analysis, not indoor cycling alone.

E-cycling fitness statistics and physical-activity intensity

The review included 11 acute experiments and 6 longitudinal interventions.

The review said longitudinal evidence was weakened by study design and quality.

Active commuting was observational and not limited to cycling alone in the cited comparison.

This repeats the cited evidence base’s scope; long-term study quality was limited.

This is a market forecast cited by a health review, not an observed fitness measure.

Cycling fitness statistics for population health and active commuting

  • WHO reported that cancer-related mortality was 30% lower among bike commuters in the summarized evidence (Evidence summarized in 2022; Bike commuters in summarized studies). (Cycling and walking can help…)
  • WHO reported about a 30% lower type 2 diabetes risk associated with active commuting (Evidence summarized in 2022; Active commuters in summarized studies). (Cycling and walking can help…)
  • Physical inactivity and obesity accounted for almost 86% of deaths and 77% of disease burden in the WHO European Region, as stated in the WHO release (Evidence cited in 2022). (Cycling and walking can help…)
  • A shift from car to active travel was described as possible for trips up to 16 km (Evidence summarized in 2022; Active-travel policy context). (Cycling and walking can help…)
  • Trips up to 16 km were reported to account for 40% of vehicle carbon emissions (Evidence summarized in 2022; Transport trips in the summarized policy evidence). (Cycling and walking can help…)
  • More than 20,000 pedestrians die from road injuries annually in the WHO European Region (Annual estimate cited in 2022). (Cycling and walking can help…)
  • More than 3,000 cyclists die from road injuries annually in the WHO European Region (Annual estimate cited in 2022). (Cycling and walking can help…)

Observational association; cancer outcomes and commuter definitions varied.

Active commuting is broader than cycling and the finding is observational.

The figures combine inactivity and obesity and are not attributable to cycling alone.

This is a transport-potential estimate, not a measured fitness outcome.

Environmental proxy; not a cycling-fitness measure.

Safety context, not a fitness outcome.

Safety context; the release does not identify cyclist exposure in this figure.

Table of contents