10 ms·

Also smaller stature. Large and tall people have more cells, and higher chance of cancer.

by pcurve 4y ago

baal80spam 4y ago
> Large and tall people have more cells, and higher chance of cancer. I've never looked at it like that. Is it true?
- pcurve 4y ago
  sadly data seems to indicate so. :-/ https://www.wcrf.org/why-taller-people-are-at-greater-risk-of-cancer/ https://www.wcrf.org/why-taller-people-are-at-greater-risk-o... https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/taller-people-more-prone-to-cancer-64995 https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/taller-people-mor...
- samscully 4y ago
  It does appear to be true for humans. Though interestingly there isn't a correlation between species size and cancer risk [1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peto%27s_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peto%27s_paradox
  - pcurve 4y ago
    Just to clarify: Across different species, there's no correlation. Within the same species though, there is correlation.
steve_adams_86 4y ago
Interesting correlation: Eating more meat seems to cause people to grow larger, but there is no strong evidence that being physically larger has intrinsic benefits outside of physical strength (which is arguably not very important). You do however need to eat more, you're more likely to get cancer, heart disease, suffer from chronic inflammation, etc. Interestingly, statistics about growing larger are often used to support more meat eating by meat advocates. There is a lot of talk about protein quality, and the implication is that smaller people are disadvantaged – as though they must be growing less by all measures, not just stature. It isn't so clear that this is true though, and there's plenty of evidence to suggest we shouldn't strive to grow larger (either in stature or in lean mass). I'm not saying there is a certain truth in there at all. I do find the correlations fascinating though. It defies a lot of what I understood about nutrition for most of my life so it's definitely something I'd like to see more data on. I'm open to a meat-based diet being superior overall (or any tasty diet, really).
- _vdpp 4y ago
  How is physical strength unimportant? Stronger people are harder to kill (h/t Rippetoe) and improved strength also helps to avoid carpal tunnel syndrome and neck/back pain for those of us at a computer all day.
  - zacharycohn 4y ago
    Speaking as a fellow Starting Strength fan: this is only true in the modern era to the extent that being healthy is better than being unhealthy. If you look at the top X causes of death in humans, very very few of them could have been avoided "if only the deceased were stronger."
    - kzrdude 4y ago
      Falling and then breaking bones or getting ill otherwise is a common cause of death, and muscle mass and fitness helps avoid it. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5899404/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5899404/
      - steve_adams_86 4y ago
        Although it would help if they were stronger, this isn't the result of them needing to begin a Starting Strength program. My original point was more so that stature and muscle mass might not benefit you beyond a certain point – I don't doubt at all that being fit is still tremendously beneficial. It's also pure speculation. I read about this stuff for fun and I know just about nothing about anything. Maybe being larger really is a net positive and I just need to be pointed to the right data.
    - spfzero 4y ago
      It helps avoid frailty and it allows you to continue exercising well into old age, for two things. It delays the downward spiral of poor fitness and weak bones that eventually does most of us in.
    - DoreenMichele 4y ago
jjtheblunt 4y ago
that conjecture is famously contradicted by elephants, and it's a topic of research why that is.
- Ardon 4y ago
  No it isn't? Elephants develop cancerous cells at the same rate per cell as every other animal, but have better biological methods of destroying them when those cells do turn cancerous.
  - jjtheblunt 4y ago
    Is there a citation for that assertion? It's possible elephants induce apoptosis for aberrant non-cancerous cells, for instance, earlier. super interesting

Also smaller stature. Large and tall people have more cells, and higher chance of cancer.

by pcurve 4y ago

Also smaller stature. Large and tall people have more cells, and higher chance of cancer.

baal80spam 4y ago

> Large and tall people have more cells, and higher chance of cancer. I've never looked at it like that. Is it true?

pcurve 4y ago
sadly data seems to indicate so. :-/ https://www.wcrf.org/why-taller-people-are-at-greater-risk-of-cancer/ https://www.wcrf.org/why-taller-people-are-at-greater-risk-o... https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/taller-people-more-prone-to-cancer-64995 https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/taller-people-mor...
samscully 4y ago
It does appear to be true for humans. Though interestingly there isn't a correlation between species size and cancer risk [1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peto%27s_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peto%27s_paradox
- pcurve 4y ago
  Just to clarify: Across different species, there's no correlation. Within the same species though, there is correlation.

steve_adams_86 4y ago

Interesting correlation: Eating more meat seems to cause people to grow larger, but there is no strong evidence that being physically larger has intrinsic benefits outside of physical strength (which is arguably not very important). You do however need to eat more, you're more likely to get cancer, heart disease, suffer from chronic inflammation, etc. Interestingly, statistics about growing larger are often used to support more meat eating by meat advocates. There is a lot of talk about protein quality, and the implication is that smaller people are disadvantaged – as though they must be growing less by all measures, not just stature. It isn't so clear that this is true though, and there's plenty of evidence to suggest we shouldn't strive to grow larger (either in stature or in lean mass). I'm not saying there is a certain truth in there at all. I do find the correlations fascinating though. It defies a lot of what I understood about nutrition for most of my life so it's definitely something I'd like to see more data on. I'm open to a meat-based diet being superior overall (or any tasty diet, really).

_vdpp 4y ago
How is physical strength unimportant? Stronger people are harder to kill (h/t Rippetoe) and improved strength also helps to avoid carpal tunnel syndrome and neck/back pain for those of us at a computer all day.
- zacharycohn 4y ago
  Speaking as a fellow Starting Strength fan: this is only true in the modern era to the extent that being healthy is better than being unhealthy. If you look at the top X causes of death in humans, very very few of them could have been avoided "if only the deceased were stronger."
  - kzrdude 4y ago
    Falling and then breaking bones or getting ill otherwise is a common cause of death, and muscle mass and fitness helps avoid it. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5899404/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5899404/
    - steve_adams_86 4y ago
      Although it would help if they were stronger, this isn't the result of them needing to begin a Starting Strength program. My original point was more so that stature and muscle mass might not benefit you beyond a certain point – I don't doubt at all that being fit is still tremendously beneficial. It's also pure speculation. I read about this stuff for fun and I know just about nothing about anything. Maybe being larger really is a net positive and I just need to be pointed to the right data.
  - spfzero 4y ago
    It helps avoid frailty and it allows you to continue exercising well into old age, for two things. It delays the downward spiral of poor fitness and weak bones that eventually does most of us in.
  - DoreenMichele 4y ago

jjtheblunt 4y ago

that conjecture is famously contradicted by elephants, and it's a topic of research why that is.

Ardon 4y ago
No it isn't? Elephants develop cancerous cells at the same rate per cell as every other animal, but have better biological methods of destroying them when those cells do turn cancerous.
- jjtheblunt 4y ago
  Is there a citation for that assertion? It's possible elephants induce apoptosis for aberrant non-cancerous cells, for instance, earlier. super interesting