Getting fitter can reduce prostate cancer risk by 35%, study finds
1–10 of 145 posts
Re: Getting fitter can reduce prostate cancer risk by 35%, study finds
#2Huh, so going indoor climbing 2-3x a week has not only boosted my strength and endurance, but is also apparently reducing my chance of prostate cancer?? Sweeeeet.
Re: Getting fitter can reduce prostate cancer risk by 35%, study finds
#3Getting fitter as in working out, or losing weight...?
Re: Getting fitter can reduce prostate cancer risk by 35%, study finds
#4Getting fitter as in working out, or losing weight...?
"Boosting cardiorespiratory fitness by only 3%"
Re: Getting fitter can reduce prostate cancer risk by 35%, study finds
#5Re: Getting fitter can reduce prostate cancer risk by 35%, study finds
#6Getting fitter as in working out, or losing weight...?
As in improving cardiorespiratory fitness. According to the article, a Swedish study suggests that, for men, an improvement in cardiorespiratory fitness of 3% annually may reduce risk of prostate cancer by as much as 35%. From how I understand the statements made in the article, they (the researchers) seem to emphasize regularity and intensity; that is, regularity is key, and higher intensity as substitute for duration. They also seem to primarily focus on lower-body activity (i.e. use your legs) while making it clear that activities that involve movement of both legs and arms are preferable.
Re: Getting fitter can reduce prostate cancer risk by 35%, study finds
#7Getting fitter as in working out, or losing weight...?
As in improving cardiorespiratory fitness. According to the article, a Swedish study suggests that, for men, an improvement in cardiorespiratory fitness of 3% annually may reduce risk of prostate cancer by as much as 35%. From how I understand the statements made in the article, they (the researchers) seem to emphasize regularity and intensity; that is, regularity is key, and higher intensity as substitute for durati…
So it's the act of getting fitter, i.e. there must be a constant improvement of 3% a year, it's not good enough to get "fit" and then maintain it? Doesn't that take a huge amount of effort after the first few years?
Re: Getting fitter can reduce prostate cancer risk by 35%, study finds
#8Here's what seems blindingly obvious to me from everything I've read: eating a balanced diet, staying fit (strength and cardio), having a healthy social life, are vital for staying healthy as you age.
Re: Getting fitter can reduce prostate cancer risk by 35%, study finds
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
As in improving cardiorespiratory fitness. According to the article, a Swedish study suggests that, for men, an improvement in cardiorespiratory fitness of 3% annually may reduce risk of prostate cancer by as much as 35%. From how I understand the statements made in the article, they (the researchers) seem to emphasize regularity and intensity; that is, regularity is key, and higher intensity as substitute for durati…
So it's the act of getting fitter, i.e. there must be a constant improvement of 3% a year, it's not good enough to get "fit" and then maintain it? Doesn't that take a huge amount of effort after the first few years?
Yeah, I thought of the same, a 3% year-on-year improvement must necessarily hit some ceiling at some point. The study didn't get into _how_ to achieve a 3% improvement, but from how I understand it, looked at the average year-on-year decline, stability, or improvement, over a period of 7 years.
My own take-away is that there's even more data that confirms "being fit" is about a continuous effort, and that putting in an effort (even quite minimal) to stay fit comes with a whole range of positive health benefits.
Re: Getting fitter can reduce prostate cancer risk by 35%, study finds
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
So it's the act of getting fitter, i.e. there must be a constant improvement of 3% a year, it's not good enough to get "fit" and then maintain it? Doesn't that take a huge amount of effort after the first few years?
Yeah, I thought of the same, a 3% year-on-year improvement must necessarily hit some ceiling at some point. The study didn't get into _how_ to achieve a 3% improvement, but from how I understand it, looked at the average year-on-year decline, stability, or improvement, over a period of 7 years. My own take-away is that there's even more data that confirms "being fit" is about a continuous effort, and that putting in…
I wouldn't extrapolate too far like that.