Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Aerobic exercise can reduce the risk of metastatic cancer in mice: study

english.tau.ac.il

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 112 posts

Re: Aerobic exercise can reduce the risk of metastatic cancer in mice: study

#81

Post by adamredwoods »

canucker2016 wrote: post #38

This method is attacking the Warburg effect - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warburg_effect_(oncology) and https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26778478/ Some cancers are glucose-sensitive which use glucose to grow. Some cancer patients go on a keto diet instead of/as well as aerobic activity (a keto diet is probably better tolerated than lots of aerobic activity for many cancer patients). from https://www.sciencedaily.com…

Cancer needs fuel, it is after all a patient's cell gone rogue. A patient could starve themselves and the cancer would stop growing-- but so would all the other cells. My personal discussions with trained professionals is that patients should eat what they need to stay healthy and content.

BTW-- Derek Lowe discusses some of this and how cold temperature / brown-fat could be researched to find usefulness to slow cancer: https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/cancer-cold

>> And like any notable differences between tumor cells and regular ones, there have been attempts to exploit this metabolic change for cancer therapy, but that's been difficult to realize. It can be tricky to throw a wrench into glycolysis without messing up energy homeostasis in general, for one thing, and some of the more indirect attempts have not had clinical success. As that last linked paper outlines, even the reasons behind the Warburg effect are not completely clear - the low-oxygen story makes sense, sure, but there are tumors that don't seem to be oxygen-deprived that also show it.

Re: Aerobic exercise can reduce the risk of metastatic cancer in mice: study

#82

Post by m463 »

pedrosorio wrote: post #9
imnotlost wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For 80-85% of maximum pulse rate... If your lungs are burning and you're about to collapse after 30 seconds of activity the intensity is about right. Do 30 seconds high intensity, then 90 seconds low intensity (don't sit down or stand still), repeat 8 times. Rowing and sprinting works really well.

How does one determine maximum pulse rate? I do workouts where I'm constantly at 160-170 bpm for 15 minutes and my lungs aren't burning nor am I about to collapse (aged mid-30s, if that matters)

carefully...

"Since HRmax varies by individual, the most accurate way of measuring any single person's HRmax is via a cardiac stress test. In this test, a person is subjected to controlled physiologic stress (generally by treadmill or bicycle ergometer) while being monitored by an electrocardiogram (ECG). The intensity of exercise is periodically increased until certain changes in heart function are detected on the ECG monitor, at which point the subject is directed to stop. Typical duration of the test ranges ten to twenty minutes."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_rate#Maximum_heart_rate

I think it might be dangerous for some people to seek out max heart rate without a doctor present.

Re: Aerobic exercise can reduce the risk of metastatic cancer in mice: study

#83

Post by rollo »

sushisource wrote: post #62
rollo wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't sound right. Even 95% of max heart rate is sustainable for a long, long time. Intervals one can only sustain for 30s are way above VO2max intensity deep in the anaerobic zone. Heart rate pretty much maxes out on those.

This really isn't accurate at all. I'm in very strong aerobic shape and 95% of my max heart rate is not at all sustainable for more than a few minutes, and it is also a deeply anaerobic activity. VO2Max != max heart rate. Your heartrate @ VO2 max is typically much lower than your max heartrate. Max genuinely means max in this case, as in, literally the highest you can get your heartrate up. By definition, you are way…

You might be right and my 95% was a bit off. But the main point is that 80-85% being sustainable for only 30s might only be the case for someone who is in absolutely terrible shape.

Re: Aerobic exercise can reduce the risk of metastatic cancer in mice: study

#84

Post by adamredwoods »

boplicity wrote: post #2

Note, this isn't for all types of aerobic activity. They're specifically saying that high-intensity aerobics, such as sprinting, are beneficial. > "Our results indicate that unlike fat-burning exercise, which is relatively moderate, it is a high-intensity aerobic activity that helps in cancer prevention," adds Dr. Gepner. "If the optimal intensity range for burning fat is 65-70% of the maximum pulse rate, sugar burni…

Derek Lowe has discussed possibilities of brown-fat and cold temperatures: https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/cancer-cold

Re: Aerobic exercise can reduce the risk of metastatic cancer in mice: study

#85

Post by m463 »

AtlasBarfed wrote: post #40
mftb wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One issue with the intensity thing. In my experience, as you age, it gets harder, and harder to up the intensity without incurring injury, and if you're injured it's harder to exercise at all.

As an aging (50-something) fitness nazi, the key to this is having several different activities of varying impact levels that you can use to attain high intensity. Spinning classes, running, swimming, HIIT / Crossfit derivatives (man be careful with that though), or the elliptical machines. Even aqua aerobics can work well. And I don't think you need a 40 minute zone 4 workout. You can probably do intervals in zone 4…

I found with the pandemic slowing down, used exercise equipment is plentiful.

Elyptical, rowing machines, stairmasters, all types of weights...

breaks things up and helps to easily get exercise into your schedule.

Re: Aerobic exercise can reduce the risk of metastatic cancer in mice: study

#86

Post by wazoox »

imnotlost wrote: post #6
zagrebian wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is a daily 7-minute workout enough? I perform it at a very high intensity (40 jumping jacks, 16 push ups). https://archive.nytimes.com/well.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/0...

For 80-85% of maximum pulse rate... If your lungs are burning and you're about to collapse after 30 seconds of activity the intensity is about right. Do 30 seconds high intensity, then 90 seconds low intensity (don't sit down or stand still), repeat 8 times. Rowing and sprinting works really well.

Nope. A rough estimate of my old fart MHR is 169. 85% of which is 143. I run literally for several hours at this heart rate every week. The burning intensity you're talking about is at 100-110% of max HR.

Re: Aerobic exercise can reduce the risk of metastatic cancer in mice: study

#87

Post by plorkyeran »

rollo wrote: post #47
imnotlost wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For 80-85% of maximum pulse rate... If your lungs are burning and you're about to collapse after 30 seconds of activity the intensity is about right. Do 30 seconds high intensity, then 90 seconds low intensity (don't sit down or stand still), repeat 8 times. Rowing and sprinting works really well.

That doesn't sound right. Even 95% of max heart rate is sustainable for a long, long time. Intervals one can only sustain for 30s are way above VO2max intensity deep in the anaerobic zone. Heart rate pretty much maxes out on those.

90% of maximum heart rate is the start of the anaerobic zone, and maintaining it for multiple minutes requires intense training. If you think you're sustaining 95% for any sort of time then that means you've failed to measure your maximum heart rate correctly.

Re: Aerobic exercise can reduce the risk of metastatic cancer in mice: study

#88

Post by msie »

I get mixed feelings whenever I see one of these reports. It's nice to get more data in the fight against cancer but it doesn't look like any progress in directly attacking cancer. And there's doubt about the data too. I wonder about how much money and effort is going into such studies which is not being invested into novel techniques for attacking cancer.

Re: Aerobic exercise can reduce the risk of metastatic cancer in mice: study

#89

Post by [deleted] »

marricks wrote: post #41

Pretty great thing to read coming back from a tempo run! I just go into it this year, and I'd like to say, it's more fun than I thought. Every aspect. If you get a heart rate monitor and dive into what you're doing even difficult high intensity runs are enjoyable. It's all about expectations and if you go into it thinking - "I'm going to run at 75% of my max heart rate" you know you're going to be winded, but at the…

[deleted]

Re: Aerobic exercise can reduce the risk of metastatic cancer in mice: study

#90

Post by throwaway290 »

marricks wrote: post #41

Pretty great thing to read coming back from a tempo run! I just go into it this year, and I'd like to say, it's more fun than I thought. Every aspect. If you get a heart rate monitor and dive into what you're doing even difficult high intensity runs are enjoyable. It's all about expectations and if you go into it thinking - "I'm going to run at 75% of my max heart rate" you know you're going to be winded, but at the…

It might be individual but to me running is just unbearably boring either way (as is most repetitive exercise), it just gets real old real fast. Spending a lot of energy bicycling is a bit more fun though.
Post reply on HN