The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
if we can demonstrate in a larger study that exercise lowers the risk of recurrence he said that would change the game he says you know what it costs when a breast cancer patient has a recurrence a million dollars so that's the estimate that the Health Care system is going to be in for when someone has a recurrence of cancer
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
the cost of chemotherapy seems like it'd be much more than the cost of an exercise program obviously we're not talking about exercise as a monotherapy for every Cancer type and every diagnosis because some people are Advanced but it it seems like a drop in the pool of when you're comparing it to the cost of a lot of these treatments these chemotherapies can be very expensive these newer imuno therapies can be very expensive
but these these these treat exercise treatments have been shown to lower recurrence is it just not a large enough study or more studies are needed to convince so most of the stuff linking exercise to lower risk of recurrence has been observational studies epidemiological studies so these are always viewed with a a healthy