A Tel-Aviv medical study has found that high-intensity exercise can reduce the risk of metastatic cancer by up to 72 per cent

Table S4 (the fourth Supplementary Table link) gives the characteristics of the 7 healthy recreationally active females [women] in their study. Calculating their percentage heart rate max (not given) using 220 - age:

79% @ 10km/h pace

89% @ 8.9km/h pace

82% @ 10.1km/h pace

96% @ 9.2km/h pace

87.5% @ 8.6km/h pace

92.5% @ 8.5km/h pace

81.5% @ 8.5km/h pace

ave 86.7% HRmax @ 9.1km/h pace

aacrjournals.org

Exercise-Induced Metabolic Shield in Distant Organs Blocks Cancer Progression and Metastatic Dissemination

Exercise protects against cancer progression and metastasis by inducing a high nutrient demand in internal organs, indicating that reducing nutrient availability to tumor cells represents a potential strategy to prevent metas...

Open link

So, using this reasoning, one would get the same benefits from eliminating most sugar from their diet (which they should) and take a moderate approach to exercise. The older one gets, the importance of proper diet outweighs amount of exercise. Stay active.

"Furthermore, Dr. Ames estimates that we consume 5,000 to 10,000 different natural pesticides every day, many of which cause cancer when tested in lab animals. Dr. Ames then pens quite possibly the best paragraph ever written in the scientific literature:
'[R]odent carcinogens are present in the following foods: anise, apple, apricot, banana, basil, broccoli, Brussels sprouts, cabbage, cantaloupe, caraway, carrot, cauliflower, celery, cherries, cinnamon, cloves, cocoa, coffee, collard greens, comfrey herb tea, currants, dill, eggplant, endive, fennel, grapefruit juice, grapes, guava, honey, honeydew melon, horseradish, kale, lentils, lettuce, mango, mushrooms, mustard, nutmeg, orange juice, parsley, parsnip, peach, pear, peas, black pepper, pineapple, plum, potato, radish, raspberries, rosemary, sesame seeds, tarragon, tea, tomato, and turnip. Thus, it is probable that almost every fruit and vegetable in the supermarket contains natural plant pesticides that are rodent carcinogens. The levels of these... rodent carcinogens in the above plants are commonly thousands of times higher than the levels of synthetic pesticides.' [Emphasis added]"

Thousands of different carcinogens, but we will just run harder, right?

Good for you that your keto religion works for you, but you’ve really crossed over to the other side, the side of the flat earth society.

The OP article is not in any manner advocating cutting carbs nor can any such inference be in good faith drawn from its findings.

Although not perfect, the study's authors did control for diet. So, no, not same effect. Related, synergistic, or additive perhaps.

"As our focus was on the relationship between exercise and cancer, we used a propensity score of multinomial logistic regression to control for key variables in the diet assessed using a validated questionnaire."

and

"Glycogen metabolism is upregulated in many tumor types, suggesting that it is an important aspect of cancer cell pathophysiology (56). Because muscle cells require a large amount of glycogen following bouts of prolonged or high-intensity exercise to return to preexercise glycogen concentrations, muscles may take up to 24 hours to replace
glycogen stores (57). This phenomenon, which is known as supercompensation, might protect muscles from metastatic dissemination because the muscle cells compete with the malignant cells for available glycogen resources. Further, the super-compensation process might also provide a metabolic shield again tumor seeding in internal organs (58). This should be further investigated. An additional way to generate competition between normal and cancerous cells is by decreasing the available glucose resources. For example, low carbohydrate diets, such as the ketogenic diet, have been proposed to starve malignant growth by inhibiting the availability of glycogen storage. Several long-term studies with large human cohorts and studies using animal models have shown a correlation between cancer risk and dietary composition (59). Several factors related to nutrition are associated with cancer incidence. For example, overfeeding leads to obesity (60), which is associated with impaired whole-body metabolism including a decreased ability to quickly clear and store excess calories. High levels of expression of the tumor progesterone receptor, as observed in obese humans and animals who are overfed, are associated with a glycolytic–lipogenic phenotype typical of aggressive tumors and with high metastatic rates (59). In addition, high-fat diets and consumption of high amounts of saturated fatty acids increase gut permeability and induce colonic inflammation and mesenteric fat inflammation, which increase overall cancer risk (59). Other factors that are correlated with cancer risk are alcohol consumption, which is detrimental, and fiber intake, which improves cancer immunosurveillance (59). In our human cohort analysis, we controlled for these key factors in the diet to determine the independent effect of the level of exercise on cancer risk; however, a future study should investigate the combination of both nutrition therapy and physical activity to limit metastatic growth."

"Using six subjects from a cohort of healthy, routinely active people (3 female and 3 male), we collected blood samples before (following 48 hours of rest) and after they ran on a treadmill at a high intensity (75% heart rate) for 30 minutes (Fig. 2A; Supplementary Fig. S5B). GO analysis of the upregulated proteins following the exercise session revealed a significant enrichment in the IGF-1 [Insulin-like Growth Factor One] pathway in all subjects (Fig. 2B and C; Supplementary Fig. S2A). Like insulin, IGF-I promotes glucose uptake via the translocation of glucose transporters such as GLUT1 and GLUT4 to the cell membrane (38, 41). Further, in a separate cohort of 14 subjects who ran at RER [Respirator Exchange Ratio] above 0.95 (high-intensity [An RER near 0.7 indicates that fat is the predominant fuel source, a value of 1.0 is indicative of carbohydrate being the predominant fuel source, and a value between 0.7 and 1.0 suggests a mix of both fat and carbohydrate]), we found that fat-to-carbohydrate turnover (i.e., the ratio between glucose and fat utilization during exercise) is affected by exercise intensity, with glucose utilization rising in prominence as the intensity of exercise increases (Fig. 2D; Supplementary Fig. S5C). Therefore, the IGF-related pathway regulating glucose homeostasis (41) from the first cohort is supported by the increased usage of carbohydrates (11) following high-intensity exercise in the second cohort."

The subjects in this study, Table 2, had aerobic capacities just over 3 METs (max oxygen consumption ~10.5 mL/kg/min). That's barely in the moderate intensity zone, if defined by METs. Being that many cancer patients are older, sedentary, and over weight/obese, for them, walking is probably high relative intensity.

mdpi.com

Redox Status Response of Physical Exercise Training in Women with Breast Cancer during Trastuzumab Therapy

Trastuzumab is indicated in the adjuvant setting for the early and intermediate stages of breast cancer (BC) positive for epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). Although HER2 in BC patients tends to disrupt pro-oxidant an...

Open link

Related to this study post by rojo, there's a hint that starting exercise upon diagnosis may still be beneficial, thus the possible benefit of walking for deconditioned patients:

"Because we and others (3) found that the primary tumor is smaller upon exercise, we
reasoned that there will be fewer circulating tumor cells and therefore fewer metastases; therefore, we bypass this hurdle, and we injected the same amount of melanoma cells intercarotid. However, our intercardiac injections also showed less growth and does not uncouple the proliferation defects from metastatic seeding defects."

I present research, you present beliefs. Who really the "flat-Earther"?

I do not follow beliefs with my diet, but facts and results.

Cancer is very rare in an evolutionary context compared to modern conditions, and species-inappropriate diet is a massive influence on that. Despite the hope of addicted runners with carb and junk addictions, you cannot outrun a bad diet for long. I learned that lesson the hard way decades ago. As a result, I now am experiencing the best health and fitness of my life at a relatively late age.

This is a strange study design. (They link to the actual study in the article, so I read it).
Usually, a study is either ‘bench science’ (i.e. animal study),or a clinical study (there are a bunch of different types). This study is three different studies in one.
They first studied the effect of exercise on mice, and showed that it made the tissues more metabolically active. Then they gave the mice cancer (in this case melanoma), and the exercise seemed to decrease the likelihood of it spreading.
The way they transferred that to an assumption in people is odd. Normally, the study would stop with the mice portion. Here, they brought in 6 people to do high intensity exercise (75% of heart rate max for 30 minutes) and did plasma studies on them to show that they may have the same responses they saw in the mice.
The they took data from a cancer registry spanning 20 years, with questionnaires that people filled out describing their exercise habits. The ones who exercised had less metastases.
Their conclusion was that exercise caused the improved cancer outcomes, and then drew parallels from the mice to people. As far as clinical evidence, it’s pretty weak. You don’t take mice data, then exercise data in a lab from 6 people, then a registry with forms filled out and draw sweeping conclusions. “72% reduction in metastases” is VERY specific. Combining mice data and a registry is too vague.

Oh no it was the plants all along!!! Someone tell the monkeys!!!

Good grief.

Eatings fruits and vegetables may to some degree lower cancer risks, actually, though other studies don't see that effect, but they definitely do not in any way raise cancer risks.

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Fruit and vegetables and cancer risk

The possibility that fruit and vegetables may help to reduce the risk of cancer has been studied for over 30 years, but no protective effects have been firmly established. For cancers of the upper gastrointestinal tract, epid...

Open link

That sounds really calming, i have a kind of phobia on cancer, and some tips like this, gives me feling of controle on my future health. So i also can tell that exercise like this csn reduse your anaxiety))

The word "definitely" can never be applied in regards epidemiological studies, which are brought with confounding variables and are the lowest standard of evidence above hearsay.

Personally, I consume a moderate amount of fruit, for taste and a moderate insulin spike anabolic effect, but vegetables are useless from an overall health effect, and often harmful (particularly oxalate-rich plants such as spinach, tea, nuts etc.: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjOpzAiAkZw). High carbs in the form of added sugar and starches produce a high-sugar metabolic environment which leads to insulin resistance and diabetes, and in combination with seed oils such as canola, safflower, soy, corn etc.. are obesogenic and likely carcinogenic.

On the other hand, animal foods provide low-carb, non-insulin spiking foods which are a healthy balance of saturated and monounsaturated fats and high quality protein, and animals offer a strong buffer against chemicals in our environment such as glyphosate, a strong carcinogen.

When I was 33 I was in the best shape of my post HS life and close to surpassing that even when I was diagnosed with leukemia. Wasn’t metastatic though, so I think this proves the study.

I ran my a** off most of my life. NCAA All-American multiple times. Still got cancer. I’m hoping for at least 5 more years of Letsrun trolling.

Reread the paper. The study's authors do not draw "sweeping conclusions". In fact, using a PDF search function, the words "caused" or "conclusion" are nowhere to be found in the paper.

"Our analysis revealed that exercise tends to lower the risk of developing cancer in both men and women, with a greater association with highly metastatic cancers (SEER 7; Fig. 2E). Specifically, high intensity exercise significantly reduced the incidence of highly metastatic cancers (73% risk reduction compared with the inactive group, P < 0.05; Fig. 2E and F). This implies that high-intensity exercise may prevent cancer dissemination to distant sites."

They also express the need for clinical application:

"As a final note, it will be important for clinical application to explore how long the exercise effect lasts and how long-term resting alters the dissemination of cancer cells."

I would also add the American Heart Association’s as well as mainstream medical science’s *current* recommendations that limiting saturated fats consumption and replacing with poly or monounsaturated fats is healthy, but the keto folks think it’s all a big coverup and AHA’s reluctance to this day to openly admit their original mistake going back all the way to Ancel Keys mid century.

“The American Heart Association recommends limiting saturated fats – which are found in butter, cheese, red meat and other animal-based foods, and tropical oils. Decades of sound science has proven it can raise your “bad” cholesterol and put you at higher risk for heart disease.

The more important thing to remember is the overall dietary picture. Saturated fats are just one piece of the puzzle. In general, you can’t go wrong eating more fruits, vegetables and whole grains – and taking in fewer calories.”

heart.org

Saturated Fat

Eating too much saturated fat can raise the level of LDL cholesterol in your blood.

Open link

"... there's a famous Keynes - attributed to Keynes at least - saying that, you know, when facts change, I change my mind; what do you do, sir?"

From: https://www.npr.org/transcripts/1137123838 ,

which is a very good read, or listen. He (Mukherjee) received a Pulitzer Prize for his previous book, Cancer: the emperor of all maladies. Plus, he's an oncologist. Listen or read about one question he'd like to know about cancer:

"[host] You're an oncologist. What is one of the questions about cancer you'd most like to know the answer to?
MUKHERJEE: I'm very interested in cancer metabolism. I'm interested in how cancers attract or take up metabolites - metabolites are things you eat, essentially fuel for the cell - and how it changes and differs from a normal cell to a cancer cell. We know that they're different. We know that normal cells have different metabolic requirements compared to cancer cells. And in fact, one of the big efforts in my laboratory, along with several other laboratories, is to see if those could be used, those vulnerabilities, those changes could be used to target to make a new kind of cancer diets, diets that would specifically inhibit or target cancer cells - really imagining diet as a kind of therapy."

His interest is what is important about the study that rojo linked when starting this post ... exercise significantly altered metabolism in a way that appears to reduce metastasis. That is potentially huge. HUGE. It's also related to what elite distance runners are trying to accomplish through training - shifting their lactate curve to the right by utilizing fats for a longer period of time and at faster velocities before carbohydrates dominate metabolism and produce more lactate than can be cleared/tolerated.

For cancer patients, reducing metastasis could be lifesaving, and if reduced through exercise and diet, also cheap and without side effects. If nothing else, reducing metastasis through exercise/diet might buy more time until better drugs are developed and approved.