14 ms·

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

122 points by sandebert 3y ago

amatecha 3y ago
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.
- RockCoach 3y ago
  What is it with this obnoxious 'alternative' frat bro attitude among indoor climbers?
  - throwawaaarrgh 3y ago
    Chillax bruh, homie was just asking for beta.
    - dspillett 3y ago
      En anglais, s'il vous plait?
  - saiya-jin 3y ago
    For most folks who are longer in sport, it is by far the best activity that can be done. I do in some form: hiking/camping in wilderness, swimming, biking, paragliding, climbing, via ferratas, alpinism, diving, skiing, ski touring/alpinism and few other things, on top just training with weights and running. Kids cut it significantly but I am still there. Climbing in non-winter conditions (or indoor) and ski touring are by far the best things for me. I come happy like a toddler after a session / trip on skis. I just don't get this from typical old school team sports, or even single/duo ones. The biggest thing isn't the physical effort part, not for me. Its exposition to your fear of death, fear of injury which are very strong emotions. You have to repeatedly overcome your biggest fear in whole life and push through, maybe 10x maybe 50x per evening. Do it for 1 or 2 decades at least 1x a week and your personality will change for the better. Also helps with various milder mental issues, not fixing them but improving (this can be said about every sport but its way more intense here). There are other sports where you expose yourself to similar fears, but in climbing its very easy in afterwork session, without the actual risk (valid for sport climbing).
    - markles 3y ago
      Does climbing really expose you to your fear of death? You're strapped in, and possibly wearing a helmet if outside, while either top roped or clipped in metal anchors. I can see that fear if you're free climbing, though. I've gone dozens of times, mostly because friends can't get enough of it, but I find it slow, boring and expensive. I've done mostly outdoor, but some indoor, and while sometimes I enjoy the technical aspect of it. Solo back country trekking and camping seems "scarier" to me. Personally, after work, the last thing I want is intense stimulation, or to be around a bunch of people pulling on plastic. I'd prefer a nice ride or to get outside, away from everything.
      - dspillett 3y ago
        > Does climbing really expose you to your fear of death? It depends how (de)sensitised your flinch/fear/other responses are to various things. I practice martial arts (swords, wrestling) and even when I know I can parry a hit, or that it'll be pulled before doing me any real damage if I don't (or the weapon is a light synthetic that I'll barely feel through the PPE), I sometimes find the natural “pointy thing heading towards my cranium” oh-shit reaction cannot be resisted. Same for a throw that I know I will land safely from. There are those who have less efficient self-preservation reactions, or more control to resist them as needed, or both, and there are those who are far more reactive, sometimes significantly overly so, than I. I assume⁰ climbing is the same: some don't get the natural fear response because their rational thinking combined with all the PPE damps it down, some very much do despite all that. -- [0] assuming as I've not done any myself so don't have a first-hand point of reference
      - amatecha 3y ago
        There's definitely a primal fear when you're 15-20m up on a rock where you feel like you have nothing to grip onto (or you're losing your strength) and you're going to fall -- even if you rationally know you'll be 100% fine, there's something you have to battle where it just "feels wrong" and you feel some kind of fundamental risk. The feeling tends to vary though, but it's quite common. Also, yeah, it's definitely not for everyone. I only tried it out at 39 and am finding it super fun and satisfying/rewarding, so I'm all-in, but a lot of people "nope out" due to total disinterest after trying it!
  - greenie_beans 3y ago
    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."
  - amatecha 3y ago
    Umm, what? I was just being a bit funny with my positive realization that my recent undertaking of a new sport has more benefits than I was previously aware. Why are you insulting me?
    - RockCoach 3y ago
      I didn't mean to insult you personally. It's this braggadocious attitude that I've encountered in a lot of bouldering gyms that I've visited, so often that I assume it must part of the subculture mentality. I love the sport and the physical challenge but I don't buy into the whole weed-smoking "I'm so counter-culture, bro" self-image. It's like Crossfit but for hipsters with shitty tattoos. More than once, it seems, I (as a noobie) have been in the way of some "bro", who took a date to the bouldering gym in order to show off in front of the woman and (pretending to assist) to feel her up. Maybe it's different where you train. Is it?
trash_cat 3y ago
Getting fitter as in working out, or losing weight...?
- linsomniac 3y ago
  "Boosting cardiorespiratory fitness by only 3%"
  - eterps 3y ago
    So, 45 minutes per day?
- shrimp-chimp 3y ago
  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.
  - danpalmer 3y ago
    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?
    - shrimp-chimp 3y ago
      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.
jgrahamc 3y ago
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.
- upofadown 3y ago
  The study only considered cardiorespiratory fitness. So from what we know from the study, eating a balanced diet, being strong, and having a healthy social life might all cause prostate cancer.
  - _dark_matter_ 3y ago
    Anyone who regularly lifts weights enough to "be strong" will have far above average cardiorespitory fitness. For example, cardio became my limiting factor deadlifting, and I had to start incorporating more running in order to lift more. Heavy weights can work out your cardio system to a surprising degree!
- vasco 3y ago
  Social life is good for a healthy brain but there's other ways. The main benefit of "social" is not living alone so someone calls an ambulance for you when you have a stroke or a bad fall at home.
- frereubu 3y ago
  A friend of mine is a cardiac nurse and get massively frustrated by the overly complex regimens that people follow while ignoring the obvious stuff. e.g. going for low-gluten diets while drinking too much alcohol and not exercising enough. In terms of food I've always loved Michael Pollen's description of healthy eating as opposed to fad diets: "Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants."
  - pauln99 3y ago
    I think Pollen should have said "Eat real food", and stopped there. Then our appetite will take care of itself, and won't require conscious - and ultimately - futile endeavour. And eating meat's fine (from a health perspective, if not ethical necessarily). We've been eating it for a couple of millions of years.
kashunstva 3y ago
Original study: https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/bjsports/early/2024/01/03/bjsports-2023-107007.full.pdf https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/bjsports/early/2024/01/03/bjspo...
world2vec 3y ago
I would guess that getting fitter can reduce pretty much all health risks by similar percentages.
isaacfrond 3y ago
The absolute first thing you should think with articles like this: is the journalist confusing correlation and causation??? And sure enough, the main finding according the scientific paper [1] In this cohort of 177 709 men followed up for a mean of 9.6 years, higher cardiorespiratory fitness was associated with a lower risk of colon cancer incidence. A lower risk of death from lung and prostate cancer was also noted. Keyword being associated. So one needs to wonder, could the causation run the other way? Perhaps, people with cancer are apt to exercise less. In fact you only need to exercise a little bit less to get to a level of 3% less fitness. Seems an entirely reasonable explanation. If so, this means that exercising more would not reduce the chance of getting cancer. Since cancer is a bit of a dice gamble, that does not seem impossible to me. Yet a further alternative, maybe exercise and lower cancer risk are both caused by something else. Some adjustments were made for various factors, but maybe if you are well-off, you tend to live better, leading to higher fitness and to lower cancer. So, good to know, but the Guardian article reads way to much in this. [1]: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2806585%20 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle...
- benmmurphy 3y ago
  I think a lot of 'good' habits are often correlated together so it's always suspect when there is a claim that a 'good' habit has some positive health outcome. it could even be worse where the 'good' habits have no effect and the 'good' habits are just a side effect of a 'good' package of genes which is what really produces the positive health outcome.
- yread 3y ago
  Especially for prostate cancer which has relatively low death rate. It's not the prostate cancer that kills old men, it's the complications around it
qweqwe14 3y ago
Having a healthy lifestyle reduces the risk of diseases. Who knew!
xyst 3y ago
I lost 30+ lbs recently. Feeling great. More energetic and focused. My journey involved: - opting to exercise more. I adopted a dog to help motivate to go on daily walks. No gym membership required. - opting to use public transportation where necessary and use a car when only necessary (prefer biking or walking now). Helps me stay fit and active without having to go to a gym. - significant changes in diet. Reduced consumption of meat. Reduced consumption of sugar and artificially sweetened foods and replacing with fruits. Increased consumption of more leafy vegetables and opting for more healthier options such as salmon (omega-3s, ”healthy fats”). - intermittent fasting. Very difficult at first but was able to find my groove after a couple of weeks - added a few OTC supplements as part of routine as recommended by doc (vitamin d3 , fish oil) I am fortunate enough to have been able to do this without any supplemental Rx medications like off label usage of “ozempic”. I will admit it did take some time. Maybe 2-3 months to begin to reap the fruits of my labor but it was definitely worth it.
- bhpm 3y ago
  > Maybe 2-3 months to begin to reap the fruits of my labor but it was definitely worth it. I’m glad you wrote this part. I think many people get discouraged because they see ads where people lose x lbs in y days. But, it’s important to remember that change is hard. You didn’t get to where you are in a few days and you won’t change yourself sustainably in a few days.
- sandebert 3y ago
  30 lbs = 13.6 kg

122 points by sandebert 3y ago

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.

RockCoach 3y ago
What is it with this obnoxious 'alternative' frat bro attitude among indoor climbers?
- throwawaaarrgh 3y ago
  Chillax bruh, homie was just asking for beta.
  - dspillett 3y ago
    En anglais, s'il vous plait?
- saiya-jin 3y ago
  For most folks who are longer in sport, it is by far the best activity that can be done. I do in some form: hiking/camping in wilderness, swimming, biking, paragliding, climbing, via ferratas, alpinism, diving, skiing, ski touring/alpinism and few other things, on top just training with weights and running. Kids cut it significantly but I am still there. Climbing in non-winter conditions (or indoor) and ski touring are by far the best things for me. I come happy like a toddler after a session / trip on skis. I just don't get this from typical old school team sports, or even single/duo ones. The biggest thing isn't the physical effort part, not for me. Its exposition to your fear of death, fear of injury which are very strong emotions. You have to repeatedly overcome your biggest fear in whole life and push through, maybe 10x maybe 50x per evening. Do it for 1 or 2 decades at least 1x a week and your personality will change for the better. Also helps with various milder mental issues, not fixing them but improving (this can be said about every sport but its way more intense here). There are other sports where you expose yourself to similar fears, but in climbing its very easy in afterwork session, without the actual risk (valid for sport climbing).
  - markles 3y ago
    Does climbing really expose you to your fear of death? You're strapped in, and possibly wearing a helmet if outside, while either top roped or clipped in metal anchors. I can see that fear if you're free climbing, though. I've gone dozens of times, mostly because friends can't get enough of it, but I find it slow, boring and expensive. I've done mostly outdoor, but some indoor, and while sometimes I enjoy the technical aspect of it. Solo back country trekking and camping seems "scarier" to me. Personally, after work, the last thing I want is intense stimulation, or to be around a bunch of people pulling on plastic. I'd prefer a nice ride or to get outside, away from everything.
    - dspillett 3y ago
      > Does climbing really expose you to your fear of death? It depends how (de)sensitised your flinch/fear/other responses are to various things. I practice martial arts (swords, wrestling) and even when I know I can parry a hit, or that it'll be pulled before doing me any real damage if I don't (or the weapon is a light synthetic that I'll barely feel through the PPE), I sometimes find the natural “pointy thing heading towards my cranium” oh-shit reaction cannot be resisted. Same for a throw that I know I will land safely from. There are those who have less efficient self-preservation reactions, or more control to resist them as needed, or both, and there are those who are far more reactive, sometimes significantly overly so, than I. I assume⁰ climbing is the same: some don't get the natural fear response because their rational thinking combined with all the PPE damps it down, some very much do despite all that. -- [0] assuming as I've not done any myself so don't have a first-hand point of reference
    - amatecha 3y ago
      There's definitely a primal fear when you're 15-20m up on a rock where you feel like you have nothing to grip onto (or you're losing your strength) and you're going to fall -- even if you rationally know you'll be 100% fine, there's something you have to battle where it just "feels wrong" and you feel some kind of fundamental risk. The feeling tends to vary though, but it's quite common. Also, yeah, it's definitely not for everyone. I only tried it out at 39 and am finding it super fun and satisfying/rewarding, so I'm all-in, but a lot of people "nope out" due to total disinterest after trying it!
- greenie_beans 3y ago
  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."
- amatecha 3y ago
  Umm, what? I was just being a bit funny with my positive realization that my recent undertaking of a new sport has more benefits than I was previously aware. Why are you insulting me?
  - RockCoach 3y ago
    I didn't mean to insult you personally. It's this braggadocious attitude that I've encountered in a lot of bouldering gyms that I've visited, so often that I assume it must part of the subculture mentality. I love the sport and the physical challenge but I don't buy into the whole weed-smoking "I'm so counter-culture, bro" self-image. It's like Crossfit but for hipsters with shitty tattoos. More than once, it seems, I (as a noobie) have been in the way of some "bro", who took a date to the bouldering gym in order to show off in front of the woman and (pretending to assist) to feel her up. Maybe it's different where you train. Is it?

trash_cat 3y ago

Getting fitter as in working out, or losing weight...?

linsomniac 3y ago
"Boosting cardiorespiratory fitness by only 3%"
- eterps 3y ago
  So, 45 minutes per day?
shrimp-chimp 3y ago
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.
- danpalmer 3y ago
  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?
  - shrimp-chimp 3y ago
    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.

jgrahamc 3y ago

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.

upofadown 3y ago
The study only considered cardiorespiratory fitness. So from what we know from the study, eating a balanced diet, being strong, and having a healthy social life might all cause prostate cancer.
- _dark_matter_ 3y ago
  Anyone who regularly lifts weights enough to "be strong" will have far above average cardiorespitory fitness. For example, cardio became my limiting factor deadlifting, and I had to start incorporating more running in order to lift more. Heavy weights can work out your cardio system to a surprising degree!
vasco 3y ago
Social life is good for a healthy brain but there's other ways. The main benefit of "social" is not living alone so someone calls an ambulance for you when you have a stroke or a bad fall at home.
frereubu 3y ago
A friend of mine is a cardiac nurse and get massively frustrated by the overly complex regimens that people follow while ignoring the obvious stuff. e.g. going for low-gluten diets while drinking too much alcohol and not exercising enough. In terms of food I've always loved Michael Pollen's description of healthy eating as opposed to fad diets: "Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants."
- pauln99 3y ago
  I think Pollen should have said "Eat real food", and stopped there. Then our appetite will take care of itself, and won't require conscious - and ultimately - futile endeavour. And eating meat's fine (from a health perspective, if not ethical necessarily). We've been eating it for a couple of millions of years.

kashunstva 3y ago

Original study: https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/bjsports/early/2024/01/03/bjsports-2023-107007.full.pdf https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/bjsports/early/2024/01/03/bjspo...

world2vec 3y ago

I would guess that getting fitter can reduce pretty much all health risks by similar percentages.

isaacfrond 3y ago

The absolute first thing you should think with articles like this: is the journalist confusing correlation and causation??? And sure enough, the main finding according the scientific paper [1] In this cohort of 177 709 men followed up for a mean of 9.6 years, higher cardiorespiratory fitness was associated with a lower risk of colon cancer incidence. A lower risk of death from lung and prostate cancer was also noted. Keyword being associated. So one needs to wonder, could the causation run the other way? Perhaps, people with cancer are apt to exercise less. In fact you only need to exercise a little bit less to get to a level of 3% less fitness. Seems an entirely reasonable explanation. If so, this means that exercising more would not reduce the chance of getting cancer. Since cancer is a bit of a dice gamble, that does not seem impossible to me. Yet a further alternative, maybe exercise and lower cancer risk are both caused by something else. Some adjustments were made for various factors, but maybe if you are well-off, you tend to live better, leading to higher fitness and to lower cancer. So, good to know, but the Guardian article reads way to much in this. [1]: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2806585%20 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle...

benmmurphy 3y ago
I think a lot of 'good' habits are often correlated together so it's always suspect when there is a claim that a 'good' habit has some positive health outcome. it could even be worse where the 'good' habits have no effect and the 'good' habits are just a side effect of a 'good' package of genes which is what really produces the positive health outcome.
yread 3y ago
Especially for prostate cancer which has relatively low death rate. It's not the prostate cancer that kills old men, it's the complications around it

qweqwe14 3y ago

Having a healthy lifestyle reduces the risk of diseases. Who knew!

xyst 3y ago

I lost 30+ lbs recently. Feeling great. More energetic and focused. My journey involved: - opting to exercise more. I adopted a dog to help motivate to go on daily walks. No gym membership required. - opting to use public transportation where necessary and use a car when only necessary (prefer biking or walking now). Helps me stay fit and active without having to go to a gym. - significant changes in diet. Reduced consumption of meat. Reduced consumption of sugar and artificially sweetened foods and replacing with fruits. Increased consumption of more leafy vegetables and opting for more healthier options such as salmon (omega-3s, ”healthy fats”). - intermittent fasting. Very difficult at first but was able to find my groove after a couple of weeks - added a few OTC supplements as part of routine as recommended by doc (vitamin d3 , fish oil) I am fortunate enough to have been able to do this without any supplemental Rx medications like off label usage of “ozempic”. I will admit it did take some time. Maybe 2-3 months to begin to reap the fruits of my labor but it was definitely worth it.

bhpm 3y ago
> Maybe 2-3 months to begin to reap the fruits of my labor but it was definitely worth it. I’m glad you wrote this part. I think many people get discouraged because they see ads where people lose x lbs in y days. But, it’s important to remember that change is hard. You didn’t get to where you are in a few days and you won’t change yourself sustainably in a few days.
sandebert 3y ago
30 lbs = 13.6 kg