I read articles tonight about top calibre fitness people who are relatively young (20's) being diagnosed with cancer despite checking off all of the marks for a healthy lifestyle.
What could be causing the cancers in their cases?
I read articles tonight about top calibre fitness people who are relatively young (20's) being diagnosed with cancer despite checking off all of the marks for a healthy lifestyle.
What could be causing the cancers in their cases?
the runners I know have no such problem.. so far:)
Everyone dies of something.
If you live a healthy life through exercise then theoretically you may live longer. The longer you live the more exposure you have to environmental causes of cancers. Genetic causes of cancer will have more time to fester and grow in your body. So, basically, living longer will increase your chances of getting cancer.
Exercise is not something many oncologists discuss with their patients, and many cancer patients are reluctant to exercise, particularly if they didn't engage in regular exercise before they developed their condition.
Do you think that something that excessively stresses the body can lead to cancer?
Huh??
Being an idiot causes cancer.
Michelleers wrote:
Exercise is not something many oncologists discuss with their patients, and many cancer patients are reluctant to exercise, particularly if they didn't engage in regular exercise before they developed their condition.
Just brilliant !
Keep enlightening us sweetheart !
markschultz2018k wrote:
I read articles tonight about top calibre fitness people who are relatively young (20's) being diagnosed with cancer despite checking off all of the marks for a healthy lifestyle.
What could be causing the cancers in their cases?
The answer is no, and there is no data that suggests it that I'm aware of. Someone getting cancer in their 20's is likely caused by a strong genetic predisposition, unless of course they were continually exposed to cancer causing chemicals since childhood. Most cancers crop up later on in life, and can be attributed to lifestyle, genetics and exposure to a lifetime of carcinogens. Interesting study was done quite a while ago in LA..............those living on the western side of the 405 had a higher rate of cancer than those living on the eastern side.............as the prevailing winds blew the carcinogens from the car exhaust, brake lining dust etc to the western side of the freeway.
Correct, above. Got my directions screwed up. My GPS appears yo be on the fritz.
Could excessive exercise cause an increase in free radicals? Could exercise increase acidity, does cancer thrive in an acidic environment?
coach wrote:
Could excessive exercise cause an increase in free radicals? Could exercise increase acidity, does cancer thrive in an acidic environment?
Sure, and its been shown to. However there is no link between exercise induced free radical formation and an enhancement of tumor promoting activity. And while cancer cells tend to thrive in an acidic environment, there also is no evidence that the environment precipitated by exercise promotes accelerated tumor development. Exercise as a total % of time spent doing it during a lifetime, even for a highly trained endurance athlete.
OLD SMTC SOB wrote:
coach wrote:
Could excessive exercise cause an increase in free radicals? Could exercise increase acidity, does cancer thrive in an acidic environment?
Sure, and its been shown to. However there is no link between exercise induced free radical formation and an enhancement of tumor promoting activity. And while cancer cells tend to thrive in an acidic environment, there also is no evidence that the environment precipitated by exercise promotes accelerated tumor development. Exercise as a total % of time spent doing it during a lifetime, even for a highly trained endurance athlete is pretty low.
Correction, above.
What this guy said, but also could be due to doping. Doping can give you performance edge by unnaturally speeding up cell replication process, which maybe too much for the body. Ask Lance
San Diego hobby jogger wrote:
What this guy said, but also could be due to doping. Doping can give you performance edge by unnaturally speeding up cell replication process, which maybe too much for the body. Ask Lance
Okay...lets ask Lance. He sure looks good at age 46! (better than I Iook).
https://youtu.be/MCbN6-nrZYcI averaged 110 running miles a week from 1970-1976. Top mileage was 175 miles. This January at age 67 I was disagnosed with follicular lymphoma 3a and I am currently undergoing treatment. Although I could see how there could be a correlation between my earlier activities, I was a moderate runner most of the years since. I tend to feel my diagnosis is more of a random event. I will say that my general better health today has put me in a position where I tolerate the onerous therapy well.
Igy
Lance looks like a worn out rag that is 55 years old
Moo Goo wrote:
Lance looks like a worn out rag that is 55 years old
No he doesn't! ☝️ You're just jealous that he looks so good for his age despite the chronic use of PEDs for most of his career.
I believe running is associated with an decrease of every cancer except skin cancer, which runners are at a higher risk than the regular population.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
I averaged 110 running miles a week from 1970-1976. Top mileage was 175 miles. This January at age 67 I was disagnosed with follicular lymphoma 3a and I am currently undergoing treatment. Although I could see how there could be a correlation between my earlier activities, I was a moderate runner most of the years since. I tend to feel my diagnosis is more of a random event.
I believe it's less random than you think. So many toxics in our food, water & air, vaccine damage & overuse of prescription meds, CT & PET scan radiation exposure damage - all of which weaken the immune system causing so many chronic disease pathologies it's unbelievable.
A few years ago I lost my wife to complications from a vaccine-induced autoimmune disease. The toxic poisons used to treat her condition ultimately caused massive organ failure and that was the end. Iatrogenic damage at it's worst!
And medical error is now the *3rd* leading cause of death in the U.S.! The only one that wins out in this is Big Pharma as they churn out more & more toxic drugs accommodating the ever increasingly number of sick people in this country. The more the sick...the more the drugs...the more the profit.
https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/news/media/releases/study_suggests_medical_errors_now_third_leading_cause_of_death_in_the_ushttps://catalyst.nejm.org/medical-errors-preventable-deaths/https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2015/04/19/the-medical-cartel-too-big-to-fail-too-evil-to-expose-2/Ghost of Igloi wrote:
I averaged 110 running miles a week from 1970-1976. Top mileage was 175 miles. This January at age 67 I was disagnosed with follicular lymphoma 3a and I am currently undergoing treatment. Although I could see how there could be a correlation between my earlier activities, I was a moderate runner most of the years since. I tend to feel my diagnosis is more of a random event. I will say that my general better health today has put me in a position where I tolerate the onerous therapy well.
Igy
Good luck Igy.
I had treatment for AML 3 years ago.
You fitness will definitely help. Try going for short walks. Just like a hangover it helps. I did walking reps up and down the hospital corridor then later would walk round a local park. It really helped especially mentally
Largely of course it's down to the treatment they give
I worked as a fibreglass laminator when younger and that may have caused it. Other than that it's luck or lack of it.
Main controllable factors generally are
Smoking
Weight
Genetics
Bad luck
Something like 1 in 2 will get it at some time. Largely it's uncontrollable.
Exercise is not really a factor over than you are likely to be slimmer.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
I averaged 110 running miles a week from 1970-1976. Top mileage was 175 miles. This January at age 67 I was disagnosed with follicular lymphoma 3a and I am currently undergoing treatment. Although I could see how there could be a correlation between my earlier activities, I was a moderate runner most of the years since. I tend to feel my diagnosis is more of a random event. I will say that my general better health today has put me in a position where I tolerate the onerous therapy well.
Igy
Quite unfortunate, the diagnosis. I'm sure you will do quite well, however. And yes it is likely random, particularly the lymphoma. As opposed to the "lifestyle" related cancers that account for the bulk of them in the US, IE breast, colon, lung and a few others.