肺癌

世界癌症基金2007年报告的建议二是要增加身体活动（运动，劳动），建议三提出限制高能含量食物，避免含糖饮料。
增加身体活动和运动可以降低癌症风险吗？
关于增加体力活动降低癌症风险的实验很多。在评价之后这个报告的专家组给出评级如下：
通过体力活动和运动
1）降低结肠癌风险--------------------------评级“确信”，
2）降低乳腺癌风险--------------------------评级“很可能”，
3）降低子宫内膜癌风险--------------------评级“很可能”。
给出的机理如下：适当的身体活动和运动可以
1）降低胰岛素抵抗；
2）消耗热量避免肥胖；
3）影响类固醇代谢；
4）缩短结肠转运时间。
不过，身体活动和运动对于其他各种类型的癌症，似乎没有明显的预防作用，虽然为了求证这个问题的答案，科学家相当认真地做了很多实验研究。
世界癌症基金和世界卫生组织，都在强调随收入增加人类日趋怠惰。开车不走路，长时间看电视已经成为一种不健康的生活方式，必须改变。但是，能够自觉改变的人，恐怕很少。如今，我们预防癌症的手段非常有限，中国人的结肠癌，乳腺癌，子宫癌的发病人数并不少，如果未来不运动、不活动、不劳动的人口增加，离走到下降的拐点的距离就会更远了。
需要节制高能量密度食物和避免含糖饮料吗？
说实话，当我第一次读到这份报告的建议三，我很疑惑。难道有谁证明了高能量密度食物和含糖饮料与癌症有直接的关系？
我对细胞能量一向持正面的态度，相信凡是积极向上的生活方式都需要大量的能量，生活也才有活力。特别是抗衰老，我主张强化中老年人的细胞能量代谢功能。这是我的研究主题之一。所以急急切切查阅这个537页的大部头报告。结果发现，这份报告并没有说摄入高能量密度食物和含糖饮料会直接引发癌症，而是说可能增加体重和肥胖度，而过重过胖会增加6种癌症的风险（见癌症能预防吗?(3)）。
所谓高能量密度食物，是指每100克食物提供225-275大卡热量的食物。美国式快餐当仁不让，位列榜首。高脂肪高淀粉食物都是。含糖饮料不包括人工糖精之类的甜味饮料，可口可乐也是代表。今天，一部分中国人的饮食正在西化。尤其是富裕家庭的儿童多肥仔，大城市学校里到处是小胖子，国内美式快餐店有人满之患。不过，外国快餐业巨头不会理睬你什么癌症基金会的报告而放慢在中国的扩张。
这个节制高能量密度食物和含糖饮料的建议，有逻辑不周延的缺点。因为只要能够保持体重和肥胖度不超标，摄入较高的能量来应对沉重的工作负担重，或者把摄入能量耗能在激烈的活动中，这个建议就没有意义。这份报告甚至认为需要瞄准125大卡/100克的目标，作为公共卫生策略。恐怕很难吧。我们一天需要的热量会这样少吗？如果一个人天的食物重1000克，按照这个能量密度标准，就只能摄取1250大卡，等于一般人平均需要量的一半而已，这人的生活就完全谈不上生龙活虎了。由于不同的个人的饮食热量需求差异很大（年龄，体质，工作要求，生活习惯不同），这个一刀切的标准就不适当了。当然，那些不忌口而日益肥胖的人，从预防癌症的角度，还是要有所节制。另外，在美式快餐之外，健康的高能量密度食物有的是。关键是不要摄入多于支出。
我相信读者很少有人知道自己和子女每天能量摄取和支出的数字。也许你该计算一下，关心一下了。下一个帖子谈谈建议四，看看植物性食物与预防癌症有关的实验信息。

==== 汉译英 ====
World Cancer Fund, in 2007 the recommendations of the second is to increase physical activity (sports, labor), it is recommended three proposed restrictions on high-energy content of foods, avoid sugary drinks.
To increase physical activity and exercise can reduce cancer risk?
On increasing physical activity to reduce the risk of cancer of the experiment a lot. In evaluating the report of the expert group is given after the ratings are as follows:
Through physical activity and sports
1) To lower the risk of colon cancer -------------------------- rating "confident",
2) reduce the risk of breast cancer -------------------------- rating "very likely",
3) Reduce the risk of endometrial cancer -------------------- rating "very likely."
The mechanism is given as follows: appropriate physical activity and sports can be
1) to reduce insulin resistance;
2) The consumption of calories to avoid obesity;
3) affect steroid metabolism;
4) shortening the colonic transit time.
However, physical activity and sports for the other types of cancer, seems to be no significant preventive effect, although in order to verify the answer to this question, scientists have done a lot of very careful experimental study.
World Cancer Fund and the World Health Organization, stressed that with the increase in income are becoming increasingly lazy humans. Drive not walk for a long time watching television has become an unhealthy way of life must be changed. However, people can consciously change, I am afraid very few. Today, we are very limited means of cancer prevention, the Chinese people's colon cancer, breast cancer, uterine cancer, and a lot of number of cases, if the future do not exercise, inactive, non-labor population, down from the turning point of the distance walked will be farther.
Moderation of high energy density required to avoid sugary food and drink?
To be honest, when I first read the report's recommendations three, I am very much puzzled. Can anyone prove that a high-energy density of food and sugary drinks have a direct relationship with cancer?
I have always adopted a positive cellular energy attitude, I believe that any positive and progressive way of life requires a lot of energy, vitality of life only. In particular, anti-aging, I advocated the strengthening of the elderly in cellular energy metabolism. This is one of the themes of my research. So, sadly for access to the 537 haste of the voluminous report. It was found that the report did not say that intake of high-energy-density foods and sugary drinks will be directly cause cancer, but that may increase the degree of weight and obesity, but obesity will be overweight increased by 6 types of cancer risk (see post 3 ).
The so-called high energy density of food refers to the provision of 225-275 per 100 grams of food calories food. American-style fast food doing my part and topping the list. High-fat, high-starch foods are. Sugary drinks do not include artificial sweeteners like sweet drinks, Coca-Cola is also a representative. Today, some Chinese people's diet is being Westernized. In particular, children from wealthy families more than fat boy, big city schools, is full of overweight children, the domestic American-style fast-food restaurant was overcrowded. However, foreign fast-food giant did you not pay attention to the report of the Cancer Foundation slow down the expansion in China.
The moderation of high energy density of food and sugary drinks suggested that there was logic undistributed shortcomings. Because as long as can be maintained without excessive weight and obesity degree, a higher intake of energy to cope with the heavy workload is heavy, or the energy intake of energy-intense activities, the proposal does not make sense. The report even the need to aim at 125 kcal / 100 g goals, as a public health strategy. I am afraid it is difficult bar. Every day we need to heat it so small? If a person-day food weight 1000 grams, according to the energy density of the standard, you can only intake of 1250 kcal, equivalent to half the requirements of ordinary people only, this man's life is completely not to mention a lively. Because different individuals very different dietary energy requirements (age, physical fitness, job requirements, different habits and customs), this broad-brush standard would be deemed inadequate. Of course, those who do not taboos and increasingly obese people, from the perspective of cancer prevention, still have to exercise some restraint. In addition, American-style fast food, the health, plenty of high-energy-density foods. The key is not to intake over expenditure.
I believe that very few people know their readers and their children daily energy intake and expenditure figures. Maybe you look at this calculation, care about the whole thing. The next post to talk about the proposed four to see if plant food and prevention of cancer-related experimental information.