Slashdot Mirror


Researchers May Have Found Cause of Type 2 Diabetes

ozmanjusri writes "Scientists at Sydney's Garvan Institute have identified an enzyme called PKCepsilon as the active agent that blocks the production of insulin in diabetics. Insulin injections and implants try to control levels but do not address the reasons why insulin production is failing. This discovery may allow pharmaceutical companies to develop a drug to block the enzyme, allowing cells in the pancreas to function normally, though the team's leader, Trevor Biden, says 'What we've identified is a target that we can now latch onto to get therapy, but the journey from target to tablet of course is a long one ... It's probably going to take another 10 years at least to get something that's effective in humans.'"

18 of 181 comments (clear)

  1. Nice by rbochan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...This discovery may allow pharmaceutical companies to develop a drug to block the enzyme, allowing cells in the pancreas to function normally...

    Yes, but would they actually do that? There's a hell of a lot more money to be made by treating the symptoms, rather than curing the disease.

    --
    ...Rob
    The American Dream isn't an SUV and a house in the suburbs; it's Don't Tread On Me.
    1. Re:Nice by moosehooey · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This probably would be a treatment. If you stop blocking the enzyme, it probably comes back.

      Also, it would be a new drug that could be patented, as opposed to insulin, which is no longer patented (if it ever was).

    2. Re:Nice by techpawn · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A treatment means that you can prolong it. At least street dealers give you the first one for free... Wait, don't drug reps give doctors offices free samples to hand their patients?

      Maybe I'm just cynical that the medication to keep me aloft costs 2k a month so the prospect of a cure for my illness won't come till after that gravy train derails...

      --
      Ask not what you can do for your country. Ask what your country did to you
    3. Re:Nice by binaryspiral · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, but would they actually do that? There's a hell of a lot more money to be made by treating the symptoms, rather than curing the disease.

      Sure they would.

      The pharmaco would patent the cure and price it at about 50-70% the average cost of lifelong diabetes care today so the insurance companies would more likely pay for it.

      With obesity rates climbing like they are today, there will be no lack of profit.

    4. Re:Nice by djasbestos · · Score: 2, Insightful

      All the more reason to nationalize pharmaceuticals, or at the very least reform the drug patent system.

  2. Said one researcher to the other... by SterlingSylver · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "We need 5L of patent applications, stat! Can you imagine the dough we'll make when we lock up this discovery so that no one else can cure diabetes but us?"

    1. Re:Said one researcher to the other... by paulpach · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "We need 5L of patent applications, stat! Can you imagine the dough we'll make when we lock up this discovery so that no one else can cure diabetes but us?" The choices are:
      1. Current patent system: Someone discovers this, protects it with patents, and locks it up for a few years
      2. No patents for medical advances: Why would anybody spend any money on research if someone can come along and reproduce the formula? Philanthropy money is very limited. You really need the big capitalist bucks to back research or nothing significant will ever be discovered. You need to provide some sort of economic incentive if you want people to invest in research, and that is why patents exist
      3. Goverment sponsored research: The problem with this system is that the government has no incentive whatsoever to be efficient. If they used the money to give away medicine rather than research, they would get more votes. Moreover, some of the most promising research like steam cell, are so controversial that most politicians would steer clear from it. This also opens the door for religion to influence research since the vast majority of voters belong to some religion.
      The absolute best system is one where helping people and researching is in your best economic interest. A system where by healing someone you make a profit. This way money will naturally flow towards health care. Of the three alternatives, patents is the one that is closer to that. If you can come up with another system, I would love to hear about it.
  3. Hmm... by DiannaoChong · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seems like whenever the thought of "a Cure" or extremely important treatment comes up, its always 10 years away. When I first got type 1 diabetes they estimated that a cure would be ready in 10 years (This is 10 years ago), and my doctor also promptly told me that that is what they had said 10 years earlier. Every year now or so if I bother to try and keep up on whats new with diabetes, all I see is "d00dz 10 years till we got us a cure!". Diabetes, keeping funding and grants in pockets of people 10 years at a time, for the past 40 years.

  4. No No No... by LaRoach · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's not from being a fat-ass, it's from being a victim of food! The food is leaping off the plate...

  5. Step 1 : Remove tinfoil hat. by Shivetya · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You do realize that there is a lot of money to be made in preventive medicines of which this would be one. I doubt that they could cure it but removing the need for insulin would be a major benefit to both consumer and drug companies. My mom receives her insulin via overnight shipment - the packaging weighs many multiples compared to what was shipped. If its delivered improperly someone else eats the cost... meaning you and me. If the pharms could elminate medicines that require special handling it saves them money too.

    Besides, giving a choice between paying for insulin, needles, blood test kits, or just a pill I know which I would take. I'd also be thankful someone is making it then going all tinfoil over their supposed real goals of keeping me sick - sick people die and don't buy more drugs - get over that

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
  6. Re:Researchers just don't get it by CorporalKlinger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Unfortunately, you've got this wrong. Type II Diabetes is a failure of equilibrium functionality, not a case of hyperactivity of equilibrium mechanisms in the body. The body works to maintain equilibrium by releasing insulin following consumption of a meal, which in turn tells the cells of the body (primarily skeletal muscle cells) to take up glucose from the bloodstream. Type II diabetes, at its core, is a syndrome of insulin resistance, not a syndrome in insulin insufficiency. The skeletal muscle cells become less attentive to insulin signalling and refuse to take up glucose from the bloodstream in response to normal insulin levels within the body. The pancreas attempts to compensate by up-regulating the insulin thermostat, producing more and more insulin to try to get the muscles to respond by taking up the glucose. Glucose, if not taken up rapidly by the body's cells, can be harmful as it results in glycosylation of proteins all over the body (including in hemoglobin, in the form of HbA1C, which is a useful marker for long-term diabetes management analysis). The muscles become less willing to respond to the increased doses of insulin produced by the pancreas. Eventually, if not managed carefully, the pancreas may "burn itself out" - producing sub-normal levels of insulin, causing a type II diabetic to become insulin-injection dependent.
     
    This research is incredibly interesting since it may reverse the burn-out syndrome and alleviate the need for poorly managed type II diabetics to inject insulin. It will not, however, reverse the insulin resistance present in insulin-sensitive cells within the body.

  7. There is a bit of insightfulness in your comment. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    It's not from being a fat-ass, it's from being a victim of food!

    You may think you were only being funny there... but the sad truth is that the producers of fast food, processed foods, and the way they overwhelm American society with their marketing tactics -- we are indeed "victims" of food (from the makers of such "foods") to at least some degree.

    (How fitting also, is that the captcha I had to type to post this is "humorous")

  8. Doctors != Evil by Cedric+Tsui · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Ok. So Doctors are people too. People with consciences. If a Doctor comes up with a promising cure to Diabetes, there is no corporate ethos in the world that will stop him from developing it.

    One of my professors is a radiologist. One day at a banquet, he was seated next to a woman who was DEAD certain that there was a very simple cure to cancer that had already been discovered and that people like him were keeping it hidden so that they could make boatloads of money. After holding his tongue for half an hour, he replied "My mother died of Cancer."

  9. Shouldn't competition produce a cure? by tepples · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A treatment means that you can prolong it. A cure for the price of two years' treatment means you can keep your competitor from selling two decades of treatment.
  10. Re:Huh. by Guidii · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I understand that there are those who get Type II through no fault of their own, and this makes me happy for them...But they're the minority, and I don't have as much sympathy for the rest.

    Yikes!!!

    You're happy for some diabetics, and unsympathetic to the rest?

    Although I really, really, really hope you're just trolling, I suspect you honestly feel this way. This kind of opinion (bias, prejudice) seems to run pretty rampant these days, and it's one of the reasons that I rarely feel comfortable telling people I'm diabetic.

  11. Although you make a good point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The OP accurately describes probably 95% or more of Type-2 diabetics.

  12. The Real Cause of type 2 diabetes by The+Mighty+Gerkin · · Score: 2, Insightful

    is overconsumption of refined carbohydrates. This causes an insulin overproduction and consequential insulin resistance and tiring of the pancreas. If type II diabetes were not caused by diet, then why does it respond so well to a low carbohydrate diet? All symptoms disappear. This indicates that it is not a permanent condition but one brought on by the sufferers own dietary habits. See the following: "the Cure for Diabetes" in Men's Health http://www.menshealth.com/cda/article.do?site=MensHealth&channel=health&category=other.diseases.ailments&conitem=4a935e4e40fae010VgnVCM20000012281eac____

    1. Re:The Real Cause of type 2 diabetes by Major+Blud · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As someone who has Type 1, I can tell you that there is no difference between "refined" cabs and "regular" carbs. Carbohydrates are carbohydrates, no matter if they come from bread, rice, ice cream, or a big ole' bucket of sugar. The only thing to keep in mind is that you're limited to a certain amount of carbs a day, and you have to decide on what food you will eat to get those carbs....would it be more beneficial to get carbs from a wheat bread sandwich or a twinkie? I think that's what you're getting at.

      --
      If you post as Anonymous Coward, don't expect a reply.