'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

[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

[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

[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]

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

[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.

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

[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.

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

?

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.

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: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.

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.

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.

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-