'IMAX Movie of Body' Allows Stanford Geneticist To Stop Diabetes In Its Tracks

sciencehabit writes "Michael Snyder has taken 'know thyself' to the next level. Over a 14-month period, the molecular geneticist analyzed his blood 20 different times to pluck out a wide variety of biochemical data depicting the status of his body's immune system, metabolism, and gene activity. In yesterday's issue of Cell (abstract), Snyder and a team of 40 other researchers present the results of this extraordinarily detailed look at his body, which they call an integrative personal omics profile (iPOP) because it combines cutting-edge scientific fields such as genomics (study of one's DNA), metabolomics (study of metabolism), and proteomics (study of proteins). Instead of seeing a snapshot of the body taken during the typical visit to a doctor's office, iPOP effectively offers an IMAX movie, which in Snyder's case had the added drama of charting his response to two viral infections and the emergence of type 2 diabetes."

Comments

Eh, Type 2

[Anonymous Coward]

Let me know when they can stop, and reverse, Type 1.

Re:Eh, Type 2

[MobyDisk]

You know, Michael Snyder doesn't look like the extreme cheeseburger eating type. A Google search for him shows some full body shots. From the article, it sounds like they have evidence of a viral + genetic cause for type 2 diabetes.

Re:Eh, Type 2

[LWATCDR]

Ahh... No. And take a look at this persons picture http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/assets/2012/03/16/sn-snyder.jpg for proof.

Too bad that with all the resources available today we still can not cure the stupid commenter on Slashdot.

Re:Eh, Type 2

[Anonymous Coward]

Type 1 is an autoimmune disease (or at least that's the most widely held belief) where the body's immune system attacks and destroys the insulin producing cells of the pancreas. As a result, the body stops production of insulin and without the administration of external insulin (primarily via injection), you die (quickly).

To reverse the disease, two things are required. One, the body must be trained to not attack the the insulin producing cells. They've experimented with this for quite a while with anti-rejection drugs and similar things, and have had some moderate success. Once this is done, though, it's necessary to get the body to begin producing insulin again. There's some research that indicates the body may be capable of doing this spontaneously once step one is complete (at least in mice). Otherwise, an external source (transplant from a donor or cloning or stem cells or...) of these insulin producing cells will have to be added to the body.

Re:Eh, Type 2

[Anonymous Coward]

Type 1 is autoimmune diabetes, Type 2 is "everything else". That can be reduced insulin sensitivity, not producing enough insulin to support your body mass (which is why we equate fat=diabetic), and gestational diabetes where an increase in hormones prevents insulin from entering cells. The sources of the diseases are vastly different, but both result in increased blood sugar.

The test to determine if you are type 1 or type 2 specifically looks for the immune system antibody (Islet of Langerhan antibody) in your blood stream. The part that is unknown is what 'triggers' a T1 diabetic to start producing this antibody. This most frequently happens when people are young, which gave it the name 'Juvenile Diabetes', but it's largely inaccurate. I was diagnosed at 27.

Re:Eh, Type 2

[symbolset]

Cheeseburgers and Twinkies don't cause Type 2 Diabetes, they only reveal it. The tendency to lose regulation of insulin on diet is the illness, and it's congenital.

Re:Eh, Type 2

[I_am_Jack]

Transplant patients routinely get Type 2 as a result of immunosupression. While it's primarily a lifestyle disease, it, like Type 1, can also be an immune disorder.

Re:Eh, Type 2

[glorybe]

Apparently for type 2 diabetics the pancreas may be producing enough insulin but the cells throughout the body do not except that insulin very well. It may be an auto immune disorder similar to arthritis where the body either resists or fails to recognise its own insulin. That may be why starvation offers some relief. When the body is really hungry the uptake of insulin may increase.

Re:Eh, Type 2

[Anonymous Coward]

From reading into this a bit (hadn't known of it)... post transplanet diabetes doesn't seem to be immune as much as the medications used for immunosuppression screwing up the bodies tolerances/handling.

The immune system isn't causing it- the side effects of the meds are, basically.

Re:Eh, Type 2

[19thNervousBreakdown]

Some people genuinely enjoy explaining things, and if you don't want to answer it costs you nothing. Calm down.

Re:Eh, Type 2

[Anonymous Coward]

right.. and they developed insulin resistance because of the cheeseburgers and twinkies. stop trying to hide the ball.

Re:Eh, Type 2

[qwak23]

I'm sorry but carbs in general are not the enemy people make them out to be, nor is eliminating them from your diet a cure for type 2. There also are multiple factors that are linked as possible causes of type 2. In terms of type 2 caused by obesity (I have a family member dealing with this right now), the main goal is to increase exercise, improve diet and reduce weight. This does not require the elimination of carbs as a whole from the diet. Reducing or elimination of foods high in sugar content (especially soda) can greatly help, but there is no need to eliminate carbs sourced from grain. Additionally, there is the whole concept of thermodynamics in which consuming less than you use regardless of source will cause weight loss. Drinking soda is a good way to push your intake above your expenditure without even realizing it.

Re:Eh, Type 2

[Knutsi]

Causality is tricky, but not without answers. If avoiding cheeseburgers and twinkies causes you *not* to get T2D even if you are predisposed, I would say that both are causal factors and are right to blame. However, the *type* of environmental factor also plays in. If you feed a cat paracetamol, it will die. Does this simply "reveal" a underlying condition? Is the cat sick to start with? Feeding the cat the substance is what killed it, but the reason it died from it is biological and exposure to a substance it would not encounter in nature. If you happened uppon a cat that survived, THAT would be the oddity.

If you are born with relevant genes, you are, and need to look out. You carry one of many polymophisms in the gene pool, but you are not sick or nessearily abnormal. It just means that under a heavy diet with little exercise - an unnatural lifestyle - you might get sick faster than others. It's *multifactoral*, like most conditions we can get. If you are not very good at skydiving, you should not skydive even if everyone you know does. Cheeseburgers and sedentary lifestyle need to take the blame more than genetics.

Re:Eh, Type 2

[Knutsi]

Diabetics with type 2 first goes through a fase where insulin fails to control blood glucose levels (if you have allot of glucose in your blood, this is sensed by you pacreas and it secretes insulin - a stubstance that signal to the other cells of your body to start absorbing the glucose, and thus reduce how much is circulating). After enough time in this state, your pacreas gives up and stops producing insulin, much like in type 1. So it has two stages.

Autoimunity might be a hypothesis (does type 2 diabetes respond to immunosupressants? Do you have states where antibodies conversly increase uptake of glucose from the blood w/o insulin?), but I think the prevailing idea is that fat accumulation in muscle cells interferes with a signaling pathway that originates in cell membrane fats (the IP3/DAG pathway), making it less efficient. Think of it like wire that is loose and only occationally gets contact. The signal is supposed to convey the fact that insulin is present from the surface of the cell into the cell, where glucose transporter (GLUT4) is to be mobilized to the surface of the cell and start taking insulin out of ciculation and into the cell for storeage and burning. If the signaling pathway thus breaks, this manifests as less effect by insulin, and the body compencates with increased levels over time, and eventually burnout of the pacreas.

If accumulating fats are to blame, it might also explain why a negative energy balance (starvation) would help. Fat is the main energy store of the body, and it might get burned off, restoring normal insulin sensitivity.

Re:Eh, Type 2

[garaged]

I dont think that is correct, I hevent seen any diabetic to get normal by loosing weight, and most of them end up their lives much thinner than they were when diagnosed, even if they were already slim

Re:Eh, Type 2

[Knutsi]

I think you have it for life if you have aquired it, but for type 2 diabetes, loosing weight (and exercising) is the primary treatment, and according to the widely used Norwegian Electronic Doctor's Manual (NEL) almost all cases can be prevented by preventing obesity (: They reference an article here, amongst others, for this claim. The goals of therapy is stated to be to reduce the condition to a non-symptomatic one if possible, and this is what weight loss and exercise seems to achieve (but medicines might also help, and acute cases needs medical intervention).

Regarding weight loss as treatment, I'm not sure if this resource is available for free everywhere, but it's also clearly stated here and here. Wikipedia also references an article on this.

That's of course not to mention all those other things that a healthy diet and working out does for your body. Seems like an attractive package for just about everyone (:

Re:Eh, Type 2

[Anonymous Coward]

Except many people are able to reproduce prior to the disease's onset (even though it is often referred to as juvenile diabetes), and up until 100 years or so ago, there wasn't a treatment, so it had plenty of time to work its way out of the population.

Another aspect to the disease is the lack of a specific cause. It's believed to be partly genetic, and partly environment based, but no one really knows for certain. Even in identical twins, the chances of one developing it after the other has are only 50%.

Re:Eh, Type 2

[gnasher719]

Type 2 diabetes is caused by carbohydrate intake. Stop eating carbs, and the type 2 diabetes goes away.

It doesn't. It never goes away, once you have it.

And the "stop eating carbs" is nonsense. It is not carbohydrates per se, it is carbohydrates in very easily digestable form that transform into blood sugar very quickly and require massive amounts of insulin that are the problem. Sugar obviously, but also the fluffed up wheat "bread" that they are selling (in the USA they have a product called "Wonderbread" which manages to get 100 out of 100 points on the carb evilness scale).

And diet coke doesn't help. It doesn't contain sugar, but it contains stuff that makes the body _believe_ there is sugar. So you get the same insulin rush, except that when the body finally figures out there wasn't any actual sugar, it then _wants_ sugar.

Type 2 diabetes _never_ goes away. Stopping unhealthy food stops the illness from getting worse. It also helps reducing the damage (the actual damage is done by unprocessed blood sugar. Less sugar intake = less unprocessed blood sugar = less damage). Losing weight is good because excessive wait makes it harder for the body to process blood sugar.

Re:Eh, Type 2

[Knutsi]

Sorry if I offended you somehow or made my post seem redundant, that was never my intention /: I was trying to add to the discussion by saying that I think the overeating and lack of physical activity is more fair to see as the primary causes of type 2 diabetes rather than genetics, and that by blaming the genes we're ignoring the point that our bodies might not be build for our current way of life (: I would rather say that modern life has revealed that some people are not as well adapted as others to that lifestyle.

Re:Eh, Type 2

[hoggoth]

No, because they will have time to have kids before they die, therefore it will not be evolved out of the population.

Re:Eh, Type 2

[Artifakt]

1. I'm a type 2 Diabetic.
2. I stand 6'1", and currently weigh 211 lbs. I have a 32" waist and can (and regularly do) bench press 295. I run 9 miles a week.
3. Despite this, I still use pills to control my condition. I still have to have quarterly exams. including several hundred dollars in tests each time.
4. I have better than average response to the meds, see fewer side effects than the average user, and unlike many diabetics, can get by on just a couple of generic drugs that don't cost me much. I have not had to change up to any of the more espensive drugs since I started. Less than a third of the type 2 diabetics under treatment can make that claim. .

So on behalf of all the type 2's who have cut their weight, exercised, and stopped eating sugary foods but still have a serious medical condition, I'd like to offer a hearty "Fuck you, you ignorant idiot!" (I don't usually stoop to such language, but it's obvious that nothing less could possible get through to somebody like you). Really, you are spitting in the faces of thens or hundreds of thousands of people you never met, who have successfully fought a battle I doubt seriously you could win, and you are revealing you are unfamiliar with both the facts about a serious disease and fundamental human decency. I'm torn between being furious with you and pitying you.

Re:Eh, Type 2

[Cute Fuzzy Bunny]

It'd be nice if people knew what they were talking about before they started moving their fingers...

Excess calories and inactivity cause weight gain and eventually type 2 in many people. You may most certainly fully reverse this by losing the weight you gained, eating smarter and exercising more.

Carbs? Other than having a world population that is so big that its dependent on grains, roots and whatnot to feed all these people, I'm not sure why we consume carbs that require processing to be edible.

Who I find funny are people who look at a macdonalds value meal and want to crucify the meat and cheese. Its the drink, fries and bun.

For quite some time we've been told by doctors to eat margarine and transfats instead of butter and lard. We were told eggs would kill us. We've been told to eat mostly grains, root vegetables and sugar laden fruits along with considerable amounts of dairy. For quite some time we were told that cigarettes were good for you. We even had special cigarettes for asthma sufferers. I wonder how that worked out.

As a result of all of these ridiculously serious missteps, we're all fat, have coronary problems and diabetes. 75 years ago before all of this dietary "improvement" these illnesses werent anywhere near as common.

Hasnt anyone noticed how we feed cattle? We let them eat grass and whatever else they can find along with some cheap feed thats even included parts of other cows. But when they're ready to butcher, we send them to a feedlot to gain weight and fat marbling. Eating what? Grains.

Diet-wise, we're doing almost everything backwards. Not buying it? Last year I was 50lbs overweight, type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure, not in particularly good condition. I stopped eating most carbohydrates (but I'm not militant about it), eating mostly pasture raised eggs and meat from a local farm. I raised my exercise level slightly (like 30 minutes of walking or using a wii fit for an hour). I've now lost 43 pounds, my blood pressure is actually a little low, and my blood sugar is so low I have to sip a little orange juice once in a while to stop feeling faint.

Besides eating good foods, look for the biggest nutritional and flavor punches. Lets get off the feedlot.

http://www.spacedoc.com/saturated_fat_is_good_for_you_1

http://www.lewrockwell.com/miller/miller38.1.html

http://www.menshealth.com/health/saturated-fat

Re:Eh, Type 2

[hsthompson69]

It doesn't. It never goes away, once you have it.

Let's be clear - type 2 diabetes, as in "if you eat lots of sugar and starch you'll require insulin injections" never goes away.

However, type 2 diabetes, as in "you need to take insulin injections every day to survive" *can* be overcome. The method is simply - stop eating blood sugar raising carbohydrates.

It is not carbohydrates per se, it is carbohydrates in very easily digestable form that transform into blood sugar very quickly and require massive amounts of insulin that are the problem

Sure, you're right, fibrous carbohydrates, like say broccoli, or green beans, with a low glycemic index, not too bad for you. However, that "healthy" whole grain bread, that'll spike your blood sugar levels like crazy. Stop eating *starchy* and *sugary* carbohydrates, and feel free to splurge on spinach.

it contains stuff that makes the body _believe_ there is sugar. So you get the same insulin rush,

B.S. If artificial sweeteners caused the same insulin rush, I'd never go into ketosis, and I drink a six pack of diet coke a day. I've been in ketosis for nearly 3 years now. Try again :)

The bottom line is this - diabetes, obesity, cancer, heart disease, and other chronic diseases are all linked to chronically elevated insulin levels. Those insulin levels are elevated by chronically elevated blood sugar levels. The only food that significantly raises your blood sugar levels are, you guessed it, sugary and starchy carbohydrates.

Re:Eh, Type 2

[hsthompson69]

Excess calories and inactivity cause weight gain and eventually type 2 in many people

Excess fat accumulation is caused by chronically elevated insulin levels, because fat cells are instructed to hold onto fat (rather than cycle it through the body) under the influence of insulin. Calories are not the forcing variable here (although you may be driven to eat more calories to make up for the calories that have been stored in your fat cells, since your muscle cells are starving).

You might as well say that excess calories and inactivity cause height gain, and eventually result in growth in many people - but we know that it's growth hormone that regulates that. Yes, while a child is growing they may eat more (calories), and they may sleep more (that typical teenage lethargy), but they aren't growing *because* they're eating more and sleeping more -> causation works in the other direction. They're eating more and sleeping more because they're growing.

So if you think someone is fat because they're eating more and sleeping more, you've actually got causality backwards -> they're eating more and sleeping more because they're fattening. The cause of the fattening is insulin.

Re:Eh, Type 2

[hsthompson69]

Grains may be the most evil carbs of all.

I refer you to http://www.wheatbellyblog.com/

tl;dr - between gluten mucking with our brain proteins and the super blood sugar spiking features of grains, our idea that this is some sort of healthy food is terribly misplaced.

Re:Eh, Type 2

[ras]

It never goes away, once you have it.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duodenum:

80% of obese people who had gastric bypass surgery (bypassing the duodenum) were cured of their type 2 diabetes

And from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duodenal_switch:

Type 2 diabetics have had a 98% "cure" (i.e. became euglycemic) almost immediately following surgery which is due to the metabolic effect from the intestine switch. The results are so favorable that some surgeons in Europe are performing the "switch" or intestinal surgery on non-obese patients for the benefits of curing the diabetes.

Re:Eh, Type 2

[BigDogCH]

While I agree with your conclusions, and sympathize with you, you are clearly not the average type 2 diabetic. You must admit that. Most every study i have read, along with those I know who have had type 2, have shown far better results than yours simply by losing weight and exercising. Your condition is clearly more severe, and possibly from a different cause.

The vast majority of those with Type 2 could help their cause with a bit of self care. Kudos to you however for taking those steps first and going for the meds second. Everyone else just wants an excuse and a pill.

Re:Eh, Type 2

[boinso]

http://community.wegohealth.com/profiles/blogs/fecal-transplants-may-be-a if you catch it early fecal transplant can work

Misleading

[bgetter]

Really neat stuff until the part where the massive testing had nothing to do with his diabetes control. Oh, and I am sure the idea of more testing in a medical-cost-cutting world is going to go over really well.

Re:Misleading

[Ethanol-fueled]

More testing is going to go over really well with medical insurers, because they can find more excuses to deny your coverage.

Re:Misleading

[SplashMyBandit]

The interesting thing about Type 2 diabetes (the type you acquire) is that often simply but getting exercise as as great an effect on control as taking insulin injections. of course dietary changes are significant too (less sugar, in all its guises eg bread etc). Getting off the couch (and out of the basement) a lot more can actually do something for you!

Unfortunately the same doesn't help with Type 1 diabetes (the type you are born with) :( Hopefully one day someone will find a fix for that.

Re:Misleading

[thejynxed]

Except starting in 2014, if all goes well, it will be illegal for them to deny you coverage based on a pre-existing condition. There will also be no annual cap on your doctor visits, etc because they can no longer cap that, either.

AKA HMOs can't say, "Oh, you're only allowed 3 office visits per quarter, and if you go above such and such amount, we cut off you off for the rest of the year."

Re:Misleading

[fragMasterFlash]

It goes further than that, medical insurers will be required to spend 85% of revenues collected as premiums on the care of insured members. With a potential profit margin narrowed to 15% of revenue minus operating costs the US medical insurance industry will likely no longer be the darling of the investment community.

Re:Misleading

[CAIMLAS]

There's also nothing to prevent them from simply charging you more than you can afford for said coverage, either.

"Our rates just went up to $1500/month with a doubled deductible. It's three times that for a family of 4. So sorry you can't stay with us."

Re:Misleading

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, but I just want to add in here that your distinctions between Type 2 and Type 1 are incorrect. Both involve some degree of genetic factors. The difference is that Type 2 individuals still make insulin but are RESISTANT to the insulin their body produces. Type 1's no longer make insulin, or make very little of it.

I was not born with Type 1, and at the age of 26 years old was diagnosed with it. There are many schools of thought on why this can happen in adults; one possibility is a virus that triggers an autoimmune response and your body begins to attack your pancreas.

Re:Misleading

[Ethanol-fueled]

So you're some fit 6'2" tall stud who runs 2 miles daily, and then you collapse.

You wake up and find yourself in the hospital with a malignant growth in your brain. Or perhaps your equally healthy daughter had a freak aneurysm, or possibly pathogenic meningitis contracted from the filthy dorm she moved into* . Shit happens. That overweight inner-city welfare queen who miraculously never caught anything worse than a cold now has to underwrite your genetic weakness or stroke of bad luck.

Aw, shit, I've been trolled again. But that doesn't make my post any less true.

* True story

Re:Misleading

[bill_mcgonigle]

There's also nothing to prevent them from simply charging you more than you can afford for said coverage, either.

Right. My family doesn't have health insurance because of a pre-existing condition law. I had a package all set to go that I could afford with a rider for two conditions (each controlled by a $4 generic) but then they realized I was in NH so they couldn't do the rider and would have to charge me $550/mo more for the full coverage.

There's no magic $6600 in my budget, so we're uninsured. Senator Shaheen can kiss my uninsured ass.

Re:Misleading

[Gavagai80]

If that were allowed, every sick person in history would've immediately had a monthly bill larger than their care costs... at which point it's not insurance anymore, it's just bills for your care plus extra useless bills when you're well. But that's not how it works, they can't arbitrarily personalize your price.

Re:Misleading

[Z34107]

Those stories are a great reason to buy insurance. It's a shitty way to explain why "Insurance company, here's $10, now give me a $million 'cuz my house is already on fire" is a good way to manage risk.

Re:Misleading

[glorybe]

Really the only thing that health care workers really do is run tests, prescribe meds or cut away at something. And those tests cost a king's ransom. On top of all that we have doctors that prescribe tests simply to protect themselves from legal problems. For example a $2,000 cat scan may be ordered simply to be able to make the claim that all proper diligence has been applied to the patient.

Re:Misleading

[mbkennel]

the problem isn't that they are doing a $2000 CAT scan, the problem is that a bog-standard scan and three minute examination of the results costs $2000.

I had a very simple chest X-ray. This technology and much of the medical training for common conditions is unchanged for at least 50, and probably 80 years. I was charged $600 which my insurance's awesome discount helpfully lowered to $450. This was an as an outpatient.

Re:Misleading

[RealUlli]

There's no magic $6600 in my budget, so we're uninsured. Senator Shaheen can kiss my uninsured ass.

Watch out, you might catch someting!

SCNR...

Re:Misleading

[19thNervousBreakdown]

It's a good way for people to manage risk. It's a terrible way for a company trying to make the largest possible profit to manage risk. You know what? Some of my best friends are people. None of them are companies. Fuck companies, if they make a 0.01% profit, it's more than they "deserve". If those individuals that are part of the company want to make more money than any fifty people need for an entire lifetime, they're free to pursue some area of business where my friends don't die so they can have a yacht. The medical insurance industry turning off predators and attracting more altruistic people would be a fantastic thing.

Re:Misleading

[user32.ExitWindowsEx]

But if you cap profit margins as a fixed % how will they increase net profits?

Simple.

Charge more for the same service (or lack thereof).
It's basic math...15% of 20 billion is *DOUBLE* 15% of 10 billion.

They'll have to pass along more to doctors but they'll still get to tell Wall Street their profits went up (yet again).

Re:Misleading

[user32.ExitWindowsEx]

If you think the technology for chest xrays has been the same for 50-80 years you are so wrong.

Re:Misleading

[tepples]

AND, my small business pays less per employee on the extra taxes than on the premiums we might pay in the USA.

Thus a lot of drugs simply are never released in Canada, or released much later in Canada than in the United States, because the lower expected prices for prescriptions in Canada mean that drug companies can't make iMoney on Canadian customers. I remember Strattera (atomoxetine, an antidepressant for treating ADHD) being one of them.

Re:Misleading

[the eric conspiracy]

I would hope so. Type 2 diabetes is not treated with insulin.

And no you aren't born with type 1 diabetes either. It's an auto-immune disease.

Re:Misleading

[s0nicfreak]

Just as there's nothing stopping a person from saying "screw insurance" and simply paying for their health care.

Re:Misleading

[bill_mcgonigle]

There's no such thing as uninsured here. AND, my small business pays less per employee on the extra taxes than on the premiums we might pay in the USA.

Canada's unique ratio of oil revenues to population makes the books balance nicely.

But, I don't need my government to work out an arrangement for me - I need them to stop unconstitutionally interfering in the right of private contract and I'll be all set.

Re:Misleading

[timeOday]

Those stories are a great reason to buy insurance. It's a shitty way to explain why "Insurance company, here's $10, now give me a $million 'cuz my house is already on fire" is a good way to manage risk.

I'm not sure what you mean? No exclusions for pre-existing conditions is exactly the reason for the individual mandate to carry coverage under the new law. It's so you can't just wait until you need expensive treatment to start buying "insurance."

Re:Misleading

[timeOday]

You're just getting sidetracked by the human interest angle, which is basically irrelevant.

Science is all about looking more closely at something than others have done. This often results in seeing something new and thus gaining new understanding. In this case it's about understanding the dynamics of how the body is constantly regulating gene expression, the immune system, and many other things to ward off deterioration and constant threats from the environment. It sounds like a promising avenue of research to me.

Re:Misleading

[multiplexo]

AND, my small business pays less per employee on the extra taxes than on the premiums we might pay in the USA.

Thus a lot of drugs simply are never released in Canada, or released much later in Canada than in the United States, because the lower expected prices for prescriptions in Canada mean that drug companies can't make iMoney on Canadian customers. I remember Strattera (atomoxetine, an antidepressant for treating ADHD) being one of them.

I call bullshit. This is just another lie put out by conservatards and libertards to spread FUD about single payer health care. Give us a list of drugs that have not been released in Canada but have been released in the US because of profitability. Come on. I want a list, and an unequivocal statement from the drug company that the reason that these drugs aren't available is because of Canada's single payer system. Come on you lying SOB, produce some fucking evidence, and no, a broadcast from the Rush Limbaugh show or anything put out by the Heritage Institute, American Enterprise Institute or Competitive Enterprise Institute doesn't count as evidence.

Re:Misleading

[ArsonSmith]

Don't try to kick me off my high horse of blaming type 2 on people just being fat and not getting off their ass and exercising.

Re:Misleading

[tepples]

produce some fucking evidence

Google drugs not available in canada

anything put out by the Heritage Institute, American Enterprise Institute or Competitive Enterprise Institute doesn't count as evidence

There was a piece in The Washington Post . But is the Pacific Research Institute too much like the three blacklisted think tanks you mentioned?

Terrible Headline

[Lord of the Fries]

Slashdot headlines are getting pathetically lame. This kind of twisted deceptive word play is what I expect when I stand in line at the grocery store. Would it have been stooping so low to integrity to post

'IMAX Movie of Body' Allows Stanford Geneticist To See Type 2 Diabetes Progress Like Never Before

?

Re:Terrible Headline

[idbeholda]

Type 2 Diabetes CAUGHT CHEATING.

- Stanford Geneticist calls off engagement
- Secretly recorded "IMAX" tape released
- "Not on my watch, you don't!"

Really, though I think the headline would be a bit more eye catching since two viral infections were going on if instead it read "Type 2 Diabetes CAUGHT SAMPLING THE BUFFET".

Re:Let's associate something unnecessary.....

[EchoRomeo]

How about bitcoin?

Elsevier boycott

[Strange Attractor]

Cell is published by Elsevier which has been in the news recently because of a boycott. A search provides http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/feb/02/academics-boycott-publisher-elsevier I support the boycott.

Re:Elsevier boycott

[drinkypoo]

Cell is published by Elsevier which has been in the news recently because of a boycott

You mean, which has been in the news because it is one big fucking scam. When you publish with Elsevier, you publish with EVIL.

what?

[Charliemopps]

So they took 20 blood tests over a 14month period and this is a big deal?

Re:what?

[Anonymous Coward]

dumbass...it's not like he got a standard lab corp report of his glucose and cholesterol levels. the group did an entire proteomic, genomic, and metabolomic analysis - reporting how transcriptional levels of his genes and translational levels of his proteins changed over the course of time. it's never been done before, and proves that tracking this amount of information can likely be more informative than just a simple metabolic panel ordered by your physician. it's proving that the information can be practical...now you just need costs to come down, and it will be commonplace, and everyone will benefit from quicker more informed diagnoses.

One of the next big things?

[Okian Warrior]

Constant monitoring could be the next big thing in medicine.

We currently diagnose based on discrete measurements compared with cutoffs - "averages" and numbers which are rounded to easily-remembered values. For example, Type-II diabetes is indicated when glucose is over 200mg/dl 2 hours after an oral glucose test. ...that seems like an awfully contrived number, simply because it's so easy to remember.

Instead of single point cutoff measurements, maybe we could get better diagnoses if we could see the change in values over time. Perhaps a more accurate diagnosis of diabetes would come from characterizing the slope of several months worth of glucose measurements.

With the rise of cheap microprocessors, I think there's a lot of opportunity for medical monitoring. Something like a wristwatch which records 10 types of measurements every hour. Of course I don't know how this could be done - perhaps spectroscopic measurements of reflected light through the skin, or terahertz wave reflections.

I've often wondered if it's possible to make a USB peripheral that records to a TI Chronos wristwatch for later display.

I bet there's lots of interesting features there just waiting to be discovered.

Re:One of the next big things?

[stevelinton]

Absolutely right I think. A first step is the difference between being in hospital, where the first thing any doctor does is look at the chart at the end of the bed for the history of your temperature, BP, etc. and going into a GP surgery and having a single measurement. We already have wearable 24 hour BP and ECG monitors. Looking ahead 5-10 years, I can imagine anyone who is ill (or pregnant or old) wearing a wristwatch and maybe a few stick-on or swallowed or injected wireless sensors that records their vitals every few minutes. Looking ahead 20-30 years, imagine microscopic sensors in every vital organ, powered by blood sugar and logging and reporting every significant hormone and mineral level, organ by organ to the processors in your personal area network. Going out 50-100 years, you could imagine a monitor nanobot in every cell: tracking hormones, gene expression levels, firing rates if the cell is a neuron, etc., reproducing when the cell reproduces. Start adding control functions, or distributed memory and computing (all vaporized except two teaspoons of the left foot -- not to worry that has a full brain backup in it just a couple of seconds old...) and we're definitely getting post-human.

Re:One of the next big things?

[doesnothingwell]

a lot of opportunity for medical monitoring

Continuous blood sugar monitoring would require a supply of reagent to react with glucose and need constant refills. There are no currently known properties of dissolved blood sugar you can measure without a direct chemical reaction.

If you want near continous measurements you can get software and data cables but they never come free or included, and lately they only send data to a website and not your own computer. Gotta love the business approach to healthcare.

You left out "and promptly patented." After 10yrs of diabetes and only 4yrs of insurance I can say costs for monitoring have only increased. I had a cheap monitor with a $0.50 per jab consumable but it was sourced overseas and discontunied locally. Now I can pay over twice as much or file the obigitory begging forms to the mfg's of said devices. If I had government insurance they would send two free devices, and bill the government for the higher priced consumables.

In America you can find better healthcare but you can't pay more.

Re:One of the next big things?

[Herve5]

Indeed you are perfectly right.
I work in the space industry, and clearly here we are already using this "detect changes" strategy for everything that we can check regularly, from design to assembly to actual lifetime use.
Of course within the technical field this is easier to perform than on the human body, but definitely you can set warnings not only on levels but on trends, etc. and indeed we now predict not only when a system will fail, but also when its situation will only become "difficult to handle".
A very efficient strategy that I hope my sons will see applied to themselves...

Re:Let's associate something unnecessary.....

[foniksonik]

I'll take a Beowulf cluster of those please. But in Soviet Russia...

1 iPOP
2 IMAX
3 ???
4 Profit!!!

Re:A little late on this article...

[Anonymous Coward]

And yes, I know this comment will be subsequently down moderated for saying this. So be it.

Not really.

Whenever people on slashdot say their comment will be modded down for being unpopular opinion, it usually ends up being modded up due to the kneejerk reaction of people to not seem biased.

I know I'll be modded down for saying this, but it has to be said.

Enjoy your catch-22.

Not much critics in the article

[thrill12]

Interesting news article, but when I read at the end that he is creating his own startup (and the disclosure of the author), I get funny feelings about the research and read back in the article: no critics. There must be some critical information in the scientific publication, but this article reads like a readers digest. Such articles make people probably pull their wallets quicker I guess... [/rantmodeoff]

Stupid commenter

[symbolset]

That's an illness that once cured will be missed.

Re:A little late on this article...

[philip.paradis]

Mod parent up.

Stop with the IMAX

[bill_mcgonigle]

'IMAX Movie of Body' Allows Stanford Geneticist To See Type 2 Diabetes Progress Like Never Before

Stop with the IMAX. It's a stupid analogy (I know, not yours) and this is a tech site. Perhaps:

"Comprehensive time-series body data analysis sheds new light on Type 2 Diabetes Progression."

Next thing you know, they'll be changing the Big & Tall Section at the department store to the IMAX Clothing section. I wonder if attendance is down at real IMAX theatres since the brand's destruction.

Re:A little late on this article...

[bill_mcgonigle]

I posted this for submission yesterday and it was declined. Its already old news by now.

Who cares if this news is a day old? It's no less relevant.

The tragedy is that your summary couldn't have been worse than this one!

The Boycott Works...Elsevier is Hurting

[Moridineas]

I work in the publishing industry for a small publisher.

I was at a convention several weeks ago and spoke with some people who worked for a subsidiary of Elsevier. As an aside, just like in other industries, the publishing industry conglomerates are GIANT. Beyond the science and medical journals that were involved in starting the boycott, Elsevier owns LexisNexis (synonymous with law databases and also a book publisher), Harcourt (fiction), Butterworth, and many more. They have gobbled up literally dozens of formerly independent publishers, and in general data and knowledge companies in all fields.

Anyway, the employees of this particular subsidiary said Elsevier was SEVERELY hurting because of the boycott. I was shocked... I had assumed the boycott would have minimal impact. These particular employees (again, not of Elsevier directly) were glad as they were fully aware of how expensive Elsevier journals are and how ridiculous Elsevier's links in to government are. One of them said basically that Elsevier had spent millions of dollars over the past 15 years to get exclusive rights to public domain research (link). Once they got it, the situation blew up and Elsevier backed off--waiting no doubt for people to forget.

This also goes to show how many of the individuals in a corporation can believe the "right" thing but that horrible leadership at the top is all that matters.

It's corporations like Elsevier that give ALL companies a bad name. I support the boycott.

Re:The Boycott Works...Elsevier is Hurting

[sootman]

Elsevier sold Harcourt about 5 years ago.

Re:The Boycott Works...Elsevier is Hurting

[Moridineas]

Did not realize that, thanks for the correction!

Re:A little late on this article...

[philip.paradis]

Crappy quality, but hey, it works. Reminds me of the GP.

Unrelated, but you may also enjoy this clip. It's one of my all time favorites.

OT: For Type 1 Diabetes: "Edmonton protocol"

[ivi]

FYI:

+ http://diabetes.niddk.nih.gov/dm/pubs/pancreaticislet/

Not problem-free, but some successor or spin-off might be, someday, if not now.

Make it my fault

[symbolset]

Then chow down on your Mac & Cheese with bacon. That will fix everything.

r/science = science.slashdot

[mapkinase]

The only difference are comments which I will never get to because the subject is so made up.

"Apple tree's fruit allows Cambridge physicist to discover the law of gravity"

Noah

[tepples]

And who was mother to Cain and Able's children?

For the first 1650-odd years in the Bible's continuity, there weren't yet enough lethal equivalents in the gene pool for inbreeding to be a problem. After this, there was a great population bottleneck as a side effect of a divine intervention to flood the Nephilim off the face of the planet, and human life span declined sharply.

Dr. Fuhrman on curing most Type II diabetes

[Paul Fernhout]

See also Dr. Fuhrman: http://www.drfuhrman.com/disease/Diabetes.aspx
"The vast majority of my patients, who adopt my nutritional and exercise recommendation for diabetes, become thin and nonâ"diabetic. They are able to gradually discontinue their insulin and eventually other medications. They simply get well. I work with people who have diabetes who want to live a long and healthy life and enjoy the achievement and confidence that they have control this disease. The membership services offered here on this website, and the information in my book, Eat For Health, can get you started on this road to wellness. My hope is that the information below about diabetes will enable you to feel more confident that you or someone you care about can be motivated and work with me to recover their health."

Re:Dr. Fuhrman on curing most Type II diabetes

[garaged]

I dont want to be pesimistic about this, but that sounds exactly like the next miracle product ad on TV.

My guess would be that type two is slowered down a lot by a good regimen (we have know this for long time anyway), but I found it hard to believe that we have a cure and only a handful of doctos in the world know about it, my biased opinion about biology and medecine research does not help a lot, I gotta say :)

Not Eyelets, but Islets

[waterbear]

"eyelet transplantation" (ie, from a healthy donor, into a Type 1 Diabetes sufferer)

For the sake of helping any searchers not miss a load of references through searching on "eyelets" ....

These are "islets", not "eyelets", i.e. "Islets of Langerhans" (named for the scientist who first described them), they are little islands of special tissue in the pancreas gland, and they contain the beta-cells that normally make insulin, and in Type-1 diabetes they fail after attack by autoimmune processes. Their transplantation has been both promising and problematic, and as the parent post noted, tissue rejection problems have been met by immunosuppression.

-wb-

Can it be?

[garyoa1]

Interestingly I was reading an article a few months back about obese people undergoing gastric bypass. The report said something like 60 people were followed and 20 had diabetes. Strange thing is, as soon as the operations were over, the diabetes disappeared. Instantly. In all the diabetic patients. No one knows why.

I don't think dragging a lab around is practical.

[Colin Smith]

sure they are experimenting with small implantable devices but they are not real labs. The general purpose discrimination power of a modern medical lab is phenomenal, small implanted device, not so much.

Dr. Fuhrman Cures Type 2 Diabetes...

[Paul Fernhout]

But Drug Companies Object ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46_GInjBeQU
"Joel Fuhrman MD has cured hundreds of people of diabetes using diet and lifestyle. The American Diabetic Association wanted him to write about his work -- but then objected because their sponsor, Eli Lilly drug company, might feel threatened by an MD promoting a cure which could destroy the market for their diabetes medications. This is an excerpt from Dr. Furhman's presentation at the Healthy Lifestyle Expo 2007."

This is the cure, and it is free to look at:
http://www.drfuhrman.com/library/foodpyramid.aspx
(Most diabetics need to take vitamin D and some other supplements too, probably.)

You can watch that in action in relation to other diseases, too:
http://www.fatsickandnearlydead.com/

It's sad that the non-profits that claim to be interested in helping people with a disease become invested in perpetuating that disease to perpetuate paying jobs for their staff etc..

We need something like a "basic income" to help move past that conflict-of-interest, where jobs only get done when they need doing.

You can look up multiple other cases where most type 2 is cured, and type 1 is greatly improved. Another example:
http://www.rawfor30days.com/index4.html

Look and you will find plenty more.

Anyway, you can take the red pill or the blue pill, Neo. Or better yet, no pill. :-)

Re:Dr. Fuhrman Cures Type 2 Diabetes...

[beerbear]

'we have a simple, easy cure for X but BIG PHARMA suppresses us' is a common line found in pseudo-medicine circles. I still think that healthy nutrition and proper exercise is a good idea, I'm just saying 'we are being oppressed' triggers many alarms.

Re:Dr. Fuhrman Cures Type 2 Diabetes...

[Paul Fernhout]

It is certainly reasonable to be skeptical of such claims; all I ask is you keep an open mind and do some research for yourself.

Again from Marcia Angell, an editor of the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine:
http://pdfernhout.net/to-james-randi-on-skepticism-about-mainstream-science.html#Some_quotes_on_social_problems_in_science
"The problems I've discussed are not limited to psychiatry, although they reach their most florid form there. Similar conflicts of interest and biases exist in virtually every field of medicine, particularly those that rely heavily on drugs or devices. It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine."

Places to start on how much of modern medicine has been a scam for a century:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexner_Report
http://www.soilandhealth.org/02/0201hyglibcat/shelton.bio.bidwell.htm
"At this time in 1927, Dr. Shelton is already being harassed in his Hygienic practice by advocates of The Medical Mentality and by the police. In 1927, Dr. Shelton is jailed for the first time for "practicing medicine without a license" and is fined $100.oo. This same year of 1927, a second arrest takes place, under similar circumstances and with charges of $300.oo. His money is so tight this second time, he has to borrow to be released. Also, in 1927, the New York Evening Graphic lets Dr. Shelton go because he will not co-operate with their advertisement policies and insists on running an anti-smoking article. Still, during this time, Dr. Shelton's Hygienic practice grows; he is respected and admired for his efforts. The third arrest also occurs, all in New York, for "practicing medicine without a licence." The great irony is that Dr. Shelton would never "practice medicine"! Still, that is what the authorities call it when someone tells people how to live, how to sleep, how to eat, and how not to take medicines!"

Fuhrman learned from Shelton (who cured him of a leg injury that would not heal -- probably in part from vitamin D deficiency), and then went beyond him.
http://bruisedfruits.net/3050/joel-fuhrman-fasting-story-world-class-athlete.html

Did you know MD doctors used to recommend smoking? And infant formula? And they essentially beat to death the guy who suggested handwashing would save the lives of all the patients they were killing? And so on?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis

Medicine has a very weird history...

See also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupthink

So, given that, is this really surprising, even now?
http://www.drfuhrman.com/library/PCI_angioplasty_article.aspx
"Interventional cardiology and cardiovascular surgery is basically a scam based on a misunderstanding of the nature of heart disease."

Of course, many other institutions have similar problems as they focus on self-perpetuation and profits and job creation. We need to move beyond that somehow (perhaps starting with a basic income, home 3D printers, a gift economy, better planning, etc.) to at least reduce the profit motive for giving harmful but profitably self-serving advice that is potentially driving our society off a cliff.

Scientific Studies Show Angioplasty ... Worthless

[Paul Fernhout]

http://www.drfuhrman.com/library/PCI_angioplasty_article.aspx
"Interventional cardiology and cardiovascular surgery is basically a scam based on a misunderstanding of the nature of heart disease. Searching for and treating obstructive plaque does not address the areas of the coronary vascular tree most likely to rupture and cause heart attacks. If there was never another CABG or angioplasty performed or stent placed, patients with heart disease would be better off. Doctors would be forced to educate our citizens that their heart disease risk is determined by what they place on their forks. Millions of lives would be dramatically extended. To abandon the theory of stretching and cutting out areas with plaque would shut down interventional cardiology, nearly all cardiovascular surgery, and many suppliers of the biotechnology. In many cases, interventional cardiology is the major income generator to hospitals. The ending of this ill-conceived, out-dated and ineffective technology would dramatically downsize hospitals in the United States and free up over $100 billion annually in medical care costs. Besides being ineffective, interventional cardiology places the responsibility in the hands of the doctor and not the patients. When patients finally realize they must take control of their heart problems with aggressive dietary modifications (and when needed medications for temporary periods) we will essentially solve the health crisis in America.
    The sad thing is surgical interventions and medications are the foundation of modern cardiology and both are relatively ineffective compared to nutritional excellence. My patients routinely reverse their heart disease, and no longer have vulnerable plaque or high blood pressure, so they do not need medical care, hospitals or cardiologists anymore. The problem is that in the real world cardiac patients are not even informed that heart disease is predictably reversed with nutritional excellence. They are not given the opportunity to choose and just corralled into these surgical interventions.
    Trying to figure out how to pay for ineffective and expensive medicine by politicians will never be a real solution. People need to know they do not have to have heart disease to begin with, and if they get it, aggressive nutrition is the most life-saving intervention. And it is free."

Similar is said elsewhere by others (even Bill Clinton).
"From omnivore to vegan: The dietary education of Bill Clinton"
http://www.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/08/18/bill.clinton.diet.vegan/index.html

A century of legal intimidation and scamming is slowly coming to an end (not to say non-MDs can't be scammers too, or that 20% of what MDs do is not a miracle):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexner_Report

Insulin index

[NewYork]

Check https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insulin_index to know what NOT to eat, if you're diabetic.

RTFA on what the results mean

[billstewart]

The article comments that he's not the typical fat person who you'd expect to get Type 2 diabetes (and my blood sugar is just fine, thank you very much :-) That's what made it surprising when it showed up - but the article also comments on it being an "N=1" kind of result, so it's still just a well-documented anecdote, not up to being a real theory yet. But it's the kind of thing that now they can do more research about.

Re:Anecdotal Evidence Says Angioplasty Saved My Li

[Paul Fernhout]

"I was having a heart attack, a 100% blockage of the lower anterior decending artery. It was a killer heart attack. Without angioplasty and a stent I was dead. Cardiac intervention is corrective medicine. When you need it, you need it."

AC, I can only plead with you to look into Dr. Fuhrman's approach. It is true the article says "almost" worthless, and maybe you were someone who benefitted from a stent for a time -- although were you really informed of all your options? But if you keep eating the same way that produced the first blockage, your stent and/or arteries will block again leading to another heart attack, possibly in six months to two years time, like happened to my own father and sister. I wish I knew before my loved ones died what I know now. This paper says the median survival time for people with stents in one study was something less than six months:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18766117
"The median survival time in patients treated with metal and plastic stent was 5.9 and 4.4 months (P = 0.074), respectively. "

See also:
http://www.fatsickandnearlydead.com/

You can most likely cure your heart disease by changing your eating patterns today following Dr. Fuhrman's approach or similar, and it will bring you as much joy or more than the way you now eat:
"How to escape The Pleasure Trap !"
http://www.drfuhrman.com/library/article16.aspx

Success stories:
http://www.drfuhrman.com/success/stories.aspx/heartdisease

At least get your vitamin D level checked and try to stay away from refined starches and sugars. Idealy "make the salad the main dish" as Dr. Fuhrman says, and eats lots of fruits, vegetables, and beans.

Good luck if you happen to see this.

Re:Yo Fat Mama!

[Culture20]

And who was mother to Cain and Able's children? This is what you want to stake your reputation on?

Abel didn't have any children. Cain's wife came from the people created on the sixth day. Notice the beginning of chapter two, where it describes the garden (and Adam/Eve) having a separate creation timeline? Adam was created before the sixth day, but on the sixth day, humanity was created. We don't know how long it took for Adam to feel lonely and want a mate, but Eve was probably created before the sixth day too.