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

Getting fitter can reduce prostate cancer risk by 35%, study finds

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 145 posts

Re: Getting fitter can reduce prostate cancer risk by 35%, study finds

#111

Post by Etheryte »

rafaelero wrote: post #100
Etheryte wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd say this is intentionally missing the point. Where you draw the line between homo sapiens and the previous predecessor is subjective and largely arbitrary. The point is that we and our evolutionary ancestors have been eating most edible things we could get our hands on for as long as we go back.

EDIT

You're fighting some pretty hard core straw men here. I haven't mentioned cardiovascular disease nor actually anything related to the good or the bad of consuming meat anywhere in my comment. HN is not the right place for flamebait.

Re: Getting fitter can reduce prostate cancer risk by 35%, study finds

#112

Post by greenie_beans »

RockCoach wrote: post #21
amatecha wrote: post #2

Huh, 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.

What is it with this obnoxious 'alternative' frat bro attitude among indoor climbers?

idk maybe you fall in that category too. if you're a climber i'm sure a stranger has looked at you with disgust and thought, "i can't believe that alternative frat bro climber exists."

Re: Getting fitter can reduce prostate cancer risk by 35%, study finds

#113

Post by rafaelero »

Etheryte wrote: post #111
rafaelero wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EDIT

You're fighting some pretty hard core straw men here. I haven't mentioned cardiovascular disease nor actually anything related to the good or the bad of consuming meat anywhere in my comment. HN is not the right place for flamebait.

Oops, replied to the wrong comment.

Re: Getting fitter can reduce prostate cancer risk by 35%, study finds

#114

Post by rafaelero »

pauln99 wrote: post #72
eggdaft wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d roll back a bit on meat. It can be very fatty, particularly red meat. And it does significantly raise risks of various diseases, including cancer. If you’re going to eat it, I’d be very selective about the types and sources you consume. Humans didn’t exist millions of years ago…

> I’d roll back a bit on meat. It can be very fatty, particularly red meat. Fat is not bad. We decided it was on the flimsiest of evidence and suspect "plausbility" arguments (eating fat makes you fat, obvs) and the subsequent attempts to prove the hypothesis in large scales studies have come up empty-handed. > And it does significantly raise risks of various diseases, including cancer. I significantly doubt that, th…

Saturated fat (the most prevalent fat in meat) is causally connected to cardiovascular disease. This is based on a huge amount of evidence and, if you are going to discount it, I suggest you also should discount the whole field of nutrition, because this is the close to a scientific fact as we can get.

Re: Getting fitter can reduce prostate cancer risk by 35%, study finds

#115

Post by greenie_beans »

sod wrote: post #57
Attummm wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The statement, although true, is missing nuance. For example, a balanced diet is ambiguous. Does a balanced diet include fast food? How much ultra-processed food? How many carbs? Do we need to change the above answers with age or when someone is diabetic or has high blood pressure? Thus, even though almost everyone will agree with the balanced diet statement from the outset, what constitutes a balanced diet will yiel…

IMHO the base framework can and must be simple and unnuanced and easy to remember: * eat as little and never drink: sugar, alcohol * seek: stuff that feeds you and your gut biome and doesn't cause diarrhea (aka avoid ultra-processed food) * bonus: at least once a week: fish, salad, nuts, fruits Sure, thats not nuanced. But the message is simple: If you eat/drink sugar, alcohol or processed foods, then your body will…

> bonus: at least once a week: fish, salad, nuts, fruits

i thought you want to eat nuts and fruits daily?

Re: Getting fitter can reduce prostate cancer risk by 35%, study finds

#116

Post by brodouevencode »

matsemann wrote: post #104
brodouevencode wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> hide all the complexities Does it? There are some things that are obvious to anyone paying attention. We can tease out details ad nauseum but what is the point in that if you can get 95% of the way there just by being sensible.

Paying attention to who? Instagram influencers? Podcast hosts? What's sensible? How many workouts per week? What kind? What food to eat? How much of each?

There is a standard of reasonableness - i.e. if the diet and exercise program results are reasonably good.

Good health doesn't have to be an exact science. Forgoing processed foods, forgoing too many calories, and taking a daily walk is sufficient for the average person. The questions you are asking here only matter at the extremes (professional athletes, et. al.), not to the average person.

Re: Getting fitter can reduce prostate cancer risk by 35%, study finds

#117

Post by greenie_beans »

Attummm wrote: post #49
jgrahamc wrote: post #8

Here'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.

The statement, although true, is missing nuance. For example, a balanced diet is ambiguous. Does a balanced diet include fast food? How much ultra-processed food? How many carbs? Do we need to change the above answers with age or when someone is diabetic or has high blood pressure? Thus, even though almost everyone will agree with the balanced diet statement from the outset, what constitutes a balanced diet will yiel…

> Does a balanced diet include fast food? How much ultra-processed food?

omg shut up, this sort of contrarian semantic shit doesn't make you look smart like you intend. everybody knows that fast food isn't a good component of diet. everybody knows how they can improve their very unique and individualized diet. it's like telling a smoker that cigarettes are bad for you.

Re: Getting fitter can reduce prostate cancer risk by 35%, study finds

#118

Post by Attummm »

greenie_beans wrote: post #117
Attummm wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The statement, although true, is missing nuance. For example, a balanced diet is ambiguous. Does a balanced diet include fast food? How much ultra-processed food? How many carbs? Do we need to change the above answers with age or when someone is diabetic or has high blood pressure? Thus, even though almost everyone will agree with the balanced diet statement from the outset, what constitutes a balanced diet will yiel…

> Does a balanced diet include fast food? How much ultra-processed food? omg shut up, this sort of contrarian semantic shit doesn't make you look smart like you intend. everybody knows that fast food isn't a good component of diet. everybody knows how they can improve their very unique and individualized diet. it's like telling a smoker that cigarettes are bad for you.

Lets keep it civil, food and nutrition are one of my hobbies next to software. As such I'm quite interested in what you would describe as balanced diet.

Some call a balanced diet 80% healthy and 20% unhealthy.

For example the link below is saying that fastfood could be part of a healthy diet.

https://www.canr.msu.edu/news/fast_food_can_be_healthy

Edit: Healthy/balanced those terms are quite loaded are not specified as such we could both agree that healthy and balanced diet is good. Yet both us could have a wildy different interpretations on what that would entail.

The goal was to start a discussion and get different viewpoints. And they could all be true.

Re: Getting fitter can reduce prostate cancer risk by 35%, study finds

#119

Post by matsemann »

brodouevencode wrote: post #116
matsemann wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Paying attention to who? Instagram influencers? Podcast hosts? What's sensible? How many workouts per week? What kind? What food to eat? How much of each?

There is a standard of reasonableness - i.e. if the diet and exercise program results are reasonably good. Good health doesn't have to be an exact science. Forgoing processed foods, forgoing too many calories, and taking a daily walk is sufficient for the average person. The questions you are asking here only matter at the extremes (professional athletes, et. al.), not to the average person.

No, that's my point. You're projecting your definitions of "sane", when there are thousands of choices to make. Avoiding processed foods isn't "simple", and who has decided a daily walk is sufficient?

Re: Getting fitter can reduce prostate cancer risk by 35%, study finds

#120

Post by greenie_beans »

Attummm wrote: post #118
greenie_beans wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Does a balanced diet include fast food? How much ultra-processed food? omg shut up, this sort of contrarian semantic shit doesn't make you look smart like you intend. everybody knows that fast food isn't a good component of diet. everybody knows how they can improve their very unique and individualized diet. it's like telling a smoker that cigarettes are bad for you.

Lets keep it civil, food and nutrition are one of my hobbies next to software. As such I'm quite interested in what you would describe as balanced diet. Some call a balanced diet 80% healthy and 20% unhealthy. For example the link below is saying that fastfood could be part of a healthy diet. https://www.canr.msu.edu/news/fast_food_can_be_healthy Edit: Healthy/balanced those terms are quite loaded are not specified a…

i encourage you to read that article with a more critical mindset.
Post reply on HN