Talk:Warburg effect (oncology)/Archives/2020
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Confused
The article claimed that "Warburg effect" is sometimes confused with the Warburg hypothesis in oncology. However, when I do a PubMed search for the phrase "Warburg effect", I get 91 hits including 17 review articles. Every single one of the review articles (dating from 1981 to 2007) uses "Warburg effect" for the observation that cancer cells predominantly produce energy by glycolysis followed by lactic acid fermentation, rather than by mitochondrial oxidation in mitochondria. I have thus changed the article. AxelBoldt (talk) 18:09, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Also confused...
This is just a mess the more I read. Perhaps I've misunderstood completely and it's correct, but at the very least it is poorly written in a confusing way. Glycolysis is an anaerobic process. Oxidative phosphorylation is a downstream step in aerobic respiration, not the alternative to glycolysis. I've made some clarifying changes. The figure from the referenced Vander Heiden et al. 2009 paper distinguishes between 'normal' anaerobic fermentation and the Warburg effect, but it's not my area and I don't fully understand the distinction. Nor has the current page endeavored to explain. Someone in this field who knows more should probably follow up.