Exercise, exercise & exercise

[Nusch]

papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers...

Besides medical therapies the strongest lever to survive cancer is exercise. Here comes more info.

[street-air]

its an interesting finding and a simple data source however one wonders if the people with low physical movement are the ones with a more dangerous disease. in other words does checking for movement inadvertently select the people who feel physically better (and are happier, optimistic, social) because the cancer they have has less symptoms? And of course those people will have better survival stats 9 years later. (Of course I do believe exercise is the most powerful drug available that is free. Just a tricky thing to prove).

[Nusch in reply to street-air]

I completely agree—it’s always the same story with these studies, and your questions are not only valid but essential. I tend to see things holistically: it’s never just one factor that can heal someone, extend their lifespan, or enhance their quality of life. Instead, it’s a carefully curated bouquet of elements that, when brought together, can achieve remarkable results. For me, some of these “flowers” include a balanced diet, effective stress management, a deep appreciation for life, and more. But like you, I firmly believe that exercise is the most powerful medicine of all—and the best part? It’s completely free.

[MarkS in reply to street-air]

Potential covariates were allowed for in the statistical analysis. These included "age (years between birth date and start of wearing accelerometer), gender (male or female), Townsend deprivation score, ethnicity (White, Asian, Blacks, mixed, or other), smoking status (current smoker, former smoker, or never), alcohol intake frequency (daily, 3-4 times/week, 1-2 times/week, 1-3 times/month, social drinking or never), body mass index (BMI, kg/m2, calculated based on the ratio of weight in kilograms to height in meters squared), waist circumference (cm), self-reported general health (excellent, good, fair, or poor), cancer duration (years between first cancer diagnosis date and start of wearing accelerometer), cancer biological behaviour (defined as malignant if cancer diagnosis in C00-C97), cardiovascular disease history (including heart attack, angina, stroke or hypertension), diabetes history, long-standing illness, disability or infirmity, grip strength (kg, defined as average grip strength of both hands), forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1, filter) and wear season (based on start of wearing accelerometer and classified as spring, summer, autumn, or winter)."

So you can be pretty sure the results are valid and do actually relate to exercise and not anything else.

[RMontana in reply to street-air]

You make a good point and there are men with prostate cancer who discovered it so late that they suffer physical symptoms making it impossible for them to exercise. But I don’t think this is the norm. Also, the study specifically looks at men who have motility and cancer. That’s the important part of this study.

Of course researchers can’t put accelerometers on men that are bedridden with advanced stage four PCa; those men were not part of this 11,000+ man cohort and so therefore that subset of results is excluded from the hazard ratios which are generated.

Exercise works. Exercise will extend your life. Moderate to intense exercise of one hour a day, four days a week will nearly half the chance of all calls mortality. I am also reminded that a good majority of men with prostate cancer die of something other than prostate cancer. so stop fighting it. Find some other excuse not to exercise, but come to grips with the fact that it is a treatment available to you at no cost that you can take advantage of, or choose to avoid. It’s OK either way and it’s everyone’s choice. But the data for me is overwhelming.

[RMontana]

Wow. Well, I was very proud of myself exercising Four days a week with weights and biking for a total of 300 minutes, but this is nowhere near enough. Reading the study is a little bit deflating. The levels of exercise you need to reach hazard ratios of a 50% reduction are in the order of 9 to 10 hours a week. That’s one hell of a commitment. But something is better than nothing and for me the 300 minute per week level produces a 46% reduction in all cause mortality. I’ll take that.



 From the study.”Hazard ratios (HRs) for all-cause mortality were 0.64 (95% CI, 0.54-0.76), 0.61 (95% CI, 0.51-0.74) and 0.52 (95% CI, 0.42-0.66) in participants with MVPA time of 272-407, 407-579 and ≥579 minutes/week”



PS looking at this another way, the spread between the bottom and top cohort in minutes per week of exercise reveal that you get very little additional benefit for a tremendous amount of additional effort. From bottom to top if you spend 113% more effort you get 19% reduction and hazard ratio. So from a La-Z-Boy analysis of the results you don’t have to kill yourself to get a lot of benefit from exercise. My routine is half an hour of biking at 10 to 12 mph followed by 45 minutes of weightlifting with dumbbells, or weight bands. I do that, four days a week. That is sustainable.



 I have said it, and others have said it, and it needs to be restated; Get out there and exercise. Doctors have stated it many times in many different venues that if exercise were a pill they would force you to take it. Church is over.

[Nusch in reply to RMontana]

Couldn’t agree more. My exercise so far: One day weight lifting for around 45 minutes and running between 60 and 100 minutes, the other day 30 minutes Pilates plus running 60 to 100 minutes. Rarely taking a day off.

[NanoMRI]

Very interesting discussion. My strategy is simplistic: adjusting as I age, (I cannot do what I once did), as long as I am maintaining/gaining muscle size and strength and VO2 capability, I know my exercise program is what I need and want. When these decline ahead of my age adjustments, I get after them.

[Nusch in reply to NanoMRI]

It’s true that maintaining the same level of performance becomes more challenging with age. I follow the ‘10 kilometers in the minutes of your age’ guideline, which means, for example, running 10 kilometers in 70 minutes (or less) at the age 70.

[NanoMRI]

Agreed, with emphasis on less - (without revealing how little less ;). Can I deadlift more than I weigh? Can I hang from bar for more than one minute? Can I do thirty pushups? Can I get up from a prone position without using my arms or other assistance.

[Nusch in reply to NanoMRI]

These are great exercises, I’m sure you are beating me on those.

[j-o-h-n]

Unfortunately we all do wait training......we wait for Mr. Weepers knock..........

Good Luck, Good Health and Good Humor.

j-o-h-n