Diabetes Breakthrough!

[HeyLeroy]

http://www.citynews.ca/news/features_6170.aspx

Researchers at the Hospital for Sick Children and at the University of Calgary have discovered that the nervous system, and not just the immune system, plays an important role in the development of Type 1 diabetes.

This breakthrough could potentially lead to a cure for the disease, the researchers claim. Type 1 diabetes can lead to serious complications, including kidney failure, blindness and amputation. Many people who live with the ailment must inject themselves with insulin daily.

More.

 

[casebro]

Quote from the limnk above:

"Scientists around the world are excited by the breakthrough but warn it could be years before the experiments on mice produce similar results in humans."

Childhood onset diabetes (type 1) is only about 5% of diabetes. Most of us have adult onset, type 2, which has a huge metabolic link. And about 40 genetic links. So, one breakthrough in one genetic mouse model may be rather pathetic. Once more, science by press release?

 

[Eos of the Eons]

still better than this:

www.diabetescured.com

 

[HeyLeroy]

Quote from the limnk above:

"Scientists around the world are excited by the breakthrough but warn it could be years before the experiments on mice produce similar results in humans."

Childhood onset diabetes (type 1) is only about 5% of diabetes. Most of us have adult onset, type 2, which has a huge metabolic link. And about 40 genetic links. So, one breakthrough in one genetic mouse model may be rather pathetic. Once more, science by press release?

Y'know what? [rule 8] you. A breakthrough is a breakthrough, and it's showing promise. Five percent is a statistic unless someone you know is affected. Then it gets personal.

Take your bitterness somewhere else.

still better than this:

www.diabetescured.com

Mmm-hmm! Lots better. At least it's a scientific approach.

Long-time no chit-chat, Eos, hope you're well.

 

[Mercutio]

Hey, this news, preliminary as it is, made my son's day. He is a recently-diagnosed type 1, so even if it "could be years", this is very good news.

Pathetic? Bite me.

 

[Terry]

Speaking as someone with Type 2 diabetes, it has always seemed to me that those with Type 1 have a much more onerous burden. So even if this only helps the 5% with Type 1, I say Bravo! scientists and huzzah.

 

[fls]

Once more, science by press release?

What do you mean by "science by press release"? Scientific institutions shouldn't issue press releases about research studies? Or co-operate with journalists?

I admit that I kinda wish that was the case. Journalists never seem to get it right anyway, and there are better ways for people to get the information if they need it.

Linda

Abstract

 

[casebro]

Hey, this news, preliminary as it is, made my son's day. He is a recently-diagnosed type 1, so even if it "could be years", this is very good news.

Pathetic? Bite me.

Certainly. Just as soon as your son is cured.

 

[casebro]

Speaking as someone with Type 2 diabetes, it has always seemed to me that those with Type 1 have a much more onerous burden. So even if this only helps the 5% with Type 1, I say Bravo! scientists and huzzah.

I do disagree.

The child onset type is very well understood- The body attacks the pancreas cells, which then stop making insulin. So giving insulin is striking directly at the cause.

Type two, on the otherhand, is a much more complex disease. It's caused by the body's resistance to the function of insulin, so giving insulin (or other drugs) is only superficial treatment. The underlying metabolic probs are not helped. The obesity, with all that brings, is made worse by the treatment. Then later, most patients do need insulin anyhow.

 

[casebro]

What do you mean by "science by press release"?

Linda

I mean "Diabetes Breakthrough!" is an emotional charged headline. It was chosen to hook my eye. It worked, I'm here. A more truthful headline would have been "Neurological link to Type I Diabetes found in a mouse bred to catch the disease". Hmmm, lemme go scan the abstract for it's title..."TRPV1+ Sensory Neurons Control β Cell Stress and Islet Inflammation in Autoimmune Diabetes"

 

[casebro]

Y'know what? [rule 8] you. A breakthrough is a breakthrough, and it's showing promise. Five percent is a statistic unless someone you know is affected. Then it gets personal.

Take your bitterness somewhere else.

I've been diabetic for 27 years. Personal enough for you? Maternally inherited genetic cause of my type II. Now maybe you can make a mental leap to understanding my bitterness. Possbly over the false promise of a "Diabetes Breakthrough!" that even if it were applicable to humans, won't help 95% of the sufferers?

I guess journalists need to realise that there are two distinct diseases here. The root causes are so different. One is an autoimmune disease, the other is a metabolic disease. Too bad both are centered on insulin.

 

[switchtech]

casebro[/LEFT];2183764]I've been diabetic for 27 years. Personal enough for you? Maternally inherited genetic cause of my type II. Now maybe you can make a mental leap to understanding my bitterness.

Possbly​

over the false promise of a "Diabetes Breakthrough!" that even if it were applicable to humans, won't help 95% of the sufferers?

I guess journalists need to realise that there are two distinct diseases here. The root causes are so different. One is an autoimmune disease, the other is a metabolic disease. Too bad both are centered on insulin.

Bitterness isn't helpful - My mother has known she's Type II for forty plus years; I've known I am for several. I don't enjoy my medical regimen, I don't enjoy the

neuropathy​

, and I don't enjoy the struggle to fit in last year's clothing. But I'm not going to begrudge the Type I sufferers a cure just because a Type II cure won't necessarily follow.

As for journalists, I'm pretty sure there are Diabetic journalists, too. Perhaps it's only San Antonio, but the reporting here does report for both varieties, and are quite specific when reporting on research for one or the other. A headline can only fit so many words and are usually chosen specifically to get your attention. The story linked at the top of the thread immediately identifies the variety affected by this research. Any story that properly raises awareness for all Diabetes must be considered a good thing, even if the results discussed are for the less common Type I.

What I do begrudge are all those folks that still can eat Double Chocolate cake!

jbs

 

[jmercer]

Quote from the limnk above:

"Scientists around the world are excited by the breakthrough but warn it could be years before the experiments on mice produce similar results in humans."

Childhood onset diabetes (type 1) is only about 5% of diabetes. Most of us have adult onset, type 2, which has a huge metabolic link. And about 40 genetic links. So, one breakthrough in one genetic mouse model may be rather pathetic. Once more, science by press release?

With a few exceptions, scientific discovery and success is usually a result of a methodical and incremental process; this press release is exciting, because it represents a significant step forward in dealing with the disease. The fact that it's isn't a "instantaneous whiz-bang miracle cure" hardly detracts from its value; how many incremental steps were taken and announced before the most common cause of cervical cancer was identified and a vaccine was developed? Hope, too, has value - and it's clear to me that this announcement gives hope for a future cure.

Nothing wrong with that.

 

[fls]

What do you mean by "science by press release"?

I mean "Diabetes Breakthrough!" is an emotional charged headline. It was chosen to hook my eye. It worked, I'm here. A more truthful headline would have been "Neurological link to Type I Diabetes found in a mouse bred to catch the disease". Hmmm, lemme go scan the abstract for it's title..."TRPV1+ Sensory Neurons Control β Cell Stress and Islet Inflammation in Autoimmune Diabetes"

So "science by press release" as a criticism means "journalist and/or editor writes misleading headline"?

Linda

 

[Cuddles]

I've been diabetic for 27 years. Personal enough for you? Maternally inherited genetic cause of my type II. Now maybe you can make a mental leap to understanding my bitterness. Possbly over the false promise of a "Diabetes Breakthrough!" that even if it were applicable to humans, won't help 95% of the sufferers?

I guess journalists need to realise that there are two distinct diseases here. The root causes are so different. One is an autoimmune disease, the other is a metabolic disease. Too bad both are centered on insulin.

So because they've made a discovery that could help a lot of people, you're bitter they've announced it because you're not one of them? Kind of an odd attitude.

 

[Yahzi]

Speaking as someone with Type 2 diabetes, it has always seemed to me that those with Type 1 have a much more onerous burden. So even if this only helps the 5% with Type 1, I say Bravo! scientists and huzzah.

My thoughts exactly. I mean, for me, diabetes means I take a 15 cent pill, and I can't drink soda pop. It's hard to really whinge about that.

On the other hand, most of us with type II are gonna get type I someday... so ya, gangbusters on the curing type I please!

 

[pgwenthold]

Quote from the limnk above:

"Scientists around the world are excited by the breakthrough but warn it could be years before the experiments on mice produce similar results in humans."

Childhood onset diabetes (type 1) is only about 5% of diabetes. Most of us have adult onset, type 2, which has a huge metabolic link. And about 40 genetic links. So, one breakthrough in one genetic mouse model may be rather pathetic. Once more, science by press release?

No, it is promotion by press release.

The science is in the article in the journal, Cell.

 

[casebro]

Let me point out something:

This report says the a particular protein, in a particular strain of mice, with a particular genetic fault, has a particular effect on the neurological cause of type one diabetes. IT MAY NOT BE APPLICABLE TO HUMANS AT ALL.

BUT, what if the breakthrough is aplicable not just to diabetes, but to inflammation in general? Suppose all those degenerative diseases are caused by the one protein at the nerulogical level? How about Altzeimers, arthritis, heart disease, artery disease, skin maladies...

Now I wonder if the protein involved cold be related to a virus infection that, like chicken pox, gets into the nerves, and stays there dormant. Then, like shingles, whichever nerve it is in, can get an upsurge of viral activity, causing whatever to inflame and die?

 

[rjh01]

This is probably worth its own thread but it is relevant here
Animal studies 'of limited use'

The British Medical Journal research looked at studies in six areas and found animal studies agreed with human trials in just three.

 

[The Mad Hatter]

You may be interested in this NewScientist report too:

Biotech firm Horizon Science of Melbourne, Australia, claims to have developed a technique for producing cane sugar with a lower-than-usual glycaemic index (GI) of around 52 - about that of canned kidney beans. Normal sugar has a GI of around 60. The process involves retaining micronutrients that are usually removed in sugar refining and used for cattle feed.
....
High-GI foods are thought to increase the risk of diabetes because they trigger rapid increases in blood glucose, stressing the pancreas as it produces insulin in response.