Finnish Team Makes Diabetes Vaccine Breakthrough

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Finnish Team Makes Diabetes Vaccine Breakthrough

Posted by Soulskill on Monday October 21, 2013 @04:15PM from the take-two-nontwinkies-and-call-me-in-the-morning dept.

jones_supa writes "A team working at Tampere University, Finland has discovered the virus that causes type 1 diabetes. The enterovirus penetrates the pancreas and destroys insulin-producing cells, eventually causing diabetes. Researchers have looked at more than a hundred different strains of the virus and pinpointed five that could cause diabetes. They believe they could produce a vaccine against those strains. One virus type has been identified to carry the biggest risk. A vaccine could also protect against its close relatives, to give the best possible effect. A similar enterovirus causes polio, which has been almost eradicated in many parts of the world thanks to vaccination programmes. A prototype diabetes vaccine has already been produced and tested on animals. Taking the vaccine through a clinical trial would cost some 700 million euros. Some funding is in place from the United States and from Europe, but more is required. Professor Heikki Hyöty says that money is the biggest obstacle in moving to testing in humans, but he sees that people are interested in their research and that the funding problems will ultimately be solved."

202 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Not much info by Okian+Warrior · 2013-10-21 16:21 · Score: 5, Insightful

I nodded this in the firehose because it looked interesting.
There's not much information in the linked article. Can anyone give us more info? Anyone who reads Finnish care to comment on the source - is it reliable, are the researchers legitimate?
1. Re:Not much info by gl4ss · 2013-10-21 16:35 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  it sounds legitimate. finnish articles don't have that much more info. they're gathering money for trials. but the source in finnish medical scene should be treated legitimate from what I know(it's a well known big university in Finland, from Finlands 2nd biggest city). diabetes-alliance(not probably best translation..) treats it as legitimate, the mentioned prof admits that so far it is not water tight connection yet. it's related to gene sampling and following of kids with high risk of diabetes 1, that project starting back in 1994.
  there's two things in play, the virus and a genetic factor(a risk gene, which is supposed to fight the virus).
  more info in finnish:
  http://www.diabetes.fi/diabetesliitto/lehdet/diabetes-lehden_juttuarkisto/diabeteksen_ehkaisy/enterovirusten_salat_aukenevat.2246.news
  earlier stuff on the connection between the virus has been published in british medical journal, fwiw.
  
  --
  world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
2. Re:Not much info by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 16:41 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  I live in Tampere. On a hunch I'd say it's reliable. Tampere University is a well respected Uni. To be more sure I'd have to read the original study. Would not be the first time the actual study is good, but then media just interprets and reports it all wrong. The actual study might be about exoplanets for all I know.
3. Re:Not much info by niftydude · 2013-10-21 17:14 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  The journal paper the news article is based on seems to be here: http://diabetes.diabetesjournals.org/content/early/2013/08/30/db13-0620.short
  
  Abstract:
  
  Enteroviruses have been connected to type 1 diabetes in various studies. The current study evaluates the association between specific enterovirus subtypes and type 1 diabetes by measuring type-specific antibodies against the group B coxsackieviruses (CBV) which has been linked to diabetes in previous surveys. Altogether 249 children with newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes and 249 control children matched according to sampling time, gender, age and country were recruited in Finland, Sweden, England, France and Greece during the years 2001-2005 (mean age 9 years; 55 % boys). Antibodies against CBV1 were more frequent among diabetic children than in control children (OR=1.7, 95%CI=1.0-2.9) while other CBV types did not differ between the groups. CBV1-associated risk was not related to HLA genotype, age or gender. Finnish children had lower frequency of CBV antibodies than children in other countries. The results support previous studies suggesting an association between group B coxsackieviruses and type 1 diabetes, highlighting the possible role of CBV1 as a diabetogenic virus type.
  
  --
  You can never know everything, and part of what you do know will always be wrong. Perhaps even the most important part.
4. Re:Not much info by pepty · 2013-10-21 17:16 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  has discovered the virus that causes type 1 diabetes.
  Already a problem right there, though it might be in translation. There are several viruses known to trigger the autoimmune response that generally causes type 1 diabetes.
5. Re:Not much info by gl4ss · 2013-10-21 17:24 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  multiple similar enteroviruses, according to the articles. they're developing a vaccine for the most common one which may or may not also work for it's relatives...
  
  --
  world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
6. Re:Not much info by jandersen · 2013-10-21 18:18 · Score: 2
  
  The summary states:
  
  A team working at Tampere University, Finland has discovered the virus that causes type 1 diabetes.
  - which, of course, isn't true; they have at most discovered "...A virus that causes diabetes 1..." - there may well be many others out there.
  Diabetes 1 is an autoimmune disease (ie. one where the body immune defence attacks the body's own cells), and it is entirely plausible that a virus could trigger an autoimmune reaction, and viruses could even be the most common trigger for every type of autoimmunity, like rheumatoid arthritis, lupus etc.
7. Re:Not much info by nbauman · 2013-10-21 18:57 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  it sounds legitimate.
  
  I review stuff like this for a living. This does look like a legitimate, promising study.
  The guy has done a lot of research. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Hy%C3%B6ty%2C+Heikki%5BAuthor+-+Full%5D
  TFA doesn't say what the virus is, but I guess that it's group B coxsackievirus 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coxsackie_B_virus#Diabetes that Hyöty was working on.
  That said, it's a mouse study. I always used to say, "Mice, humans, what's the difference? We're all mammals, right?"
  Then a researcher at Rockefeller University clued me in. "Humans are not big mice."
  As the saying goes, "We've cured cancer in mice a million times."
  It's great to model a disease in mice. But the diabetes type I they model in mice might not be the same as type I diabetes in humans. Probably for every 10 mouse studies, 1 holds up in humans. And for every 10 human studies, 1 turns out to be actually useful against the disease.
  But hey, this is immunology. When it comes down to what causes a disease like diabetes type I, nobody really knows, so 1 in 100 is pretty good odds.
  If you have 100 researchers working on it, you've got a pretty good chance that somebody will get it.
  Diabetes type I is an autoimmune disease. You get exposed to a trigger, your immune system goes after the trigger, but it also starts attacking other things. In diabetes type I, it attacks the beta cells of the pancreas, which produce insulin. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diabetes_Type_I The trigger might be a virus, or it might be something else. Hyöty thinks it's a virus, in fact group B coxsackievirus 1. If he can prove that it is a virus and he's identified it (in humans, not just mice), he'll be doing pretty good.
  And if Hyöty can come up with a vaccine that will prevent coxsackievirus infection in humans, we can give it to kids and they'll never get diabetes type I. That will be great. I hope it works.
  
  ”We know that this vaccine is effective in mice,” noted Hyöty. ”It is important to test it in people, so that we can be sure that the vaccine prevents diabetes.
  That's the important qualification. If he's ready to go to test it in humans, that's pretty good. But he's still got a long way to go. And a lot of vaccines don't make it.
  
  Taking the vaccine through a clinical trial would cost some 700 million euros. Some funding is in place from the United States and from Europe, but more is required.
  Oh, give him the money. We've wasted E700 million on a lot of stupider things that you could probably think of.
  If this vaccine is promising, then the big pharmaceutical companies will probably spot him E700 million for clinical trials (although that does seem a bit high). If it really does prevent type I diabetes, it should be a successful vaccine.
8. Re:Not much info by davester666 · 2013-10-21 19:28 · Score: 1
  
  I believe the plan is for the gov't to fund the first 695 million euros, then the final trial, which is the riskiest, will be conducted by a private company, which will have exclusive rights to make/sell the vaccine worldwide for more than 10 years, in exchange for ongoing royalties of 1/100 of 1 cent per dose.
  
  --
  Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
9. Re:Not much info by Novus · 2013-10-21 19:48 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  That's almost certainly a translation error. The University of Tampere press release states that "these studies clearly show that members of the group B coxsackieviruses are associated with the risk of type 1 diabetes", and the offending sentence in the Yle article would be the same in Finnish irrespective of whether the virus found is the only one or not (e.g. "löytänyt viruksen" would be "discovered a/the virus"). Finnish grammar doesn't have the concept of definiteness, meaning that a translator working from a Finnish source text would in many cases have to guess the intended meaning or look it up elsewhere. For similar reasons, many Finns have problems figuring out whether to use a definite or indefinite article when writing in English.
10. Re:Not much info by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 20:13 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  group B coxsackievirus 1
  Who the hell came up with that name? I can't be the only one that wants to pronounce that as cock-suckie-virus...
11. Re:Not much info by dinfinity · 2013-10-21 20:39 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Imagine living in a town called that: "The virus family he discovered was eventually given the name Coxsackie, for the town of Coxsackie, New York, a small town on the Hudson River where Dalldorf had obtained the first fecal specimens.[3]"
  "The village name is a native word mak-kachs-hack-ing, and when purchased by the Dutch settlers was written as Koxhackung.[1] It is generally translated as "Hoot-owl place"[2] or "place of many owls"."
  But I'm pretty sure Dalldorf et al didn't care about the latter and still giggle when hearing their peers say Coxsackievirus.
12. Re:Not much info by jones_supa · 2013-10-21 20:44 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  There was also recently someone in /r/learnprogramming who was new to C++ and his first impression was that std::cout << "Hello world"; looks just like "count your STDs and tell the whole world".
13. Re:Not much info by Joining+Yet+Again · 2013-10-21 21:14 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  The great thing about the C++ Hello World example is that it simultaneously shows everything that's nice and everything that's horrible about C++.
14. Re:Not much info by Fjandr · 2013-10-21 22:16 · Score: 2
  
  There's a comment above about Finnish grammar explaining why the is likely a translation error. The actual source says a virus rather than the virus.
15. Re:Not much info by gl4ss · 2013-10-21 22:39 · Score: 2
  
  the articles I read on finnish media related to this(earlier too) mentioned them been using data from finnish children(tens of thousands) and had special thanks to people who had submitted their infants dna to the (20 years now) running study.
  they looked for kids who had the risk gene and followed them(and traces of the viruses in them) to see if they got it(this was probably helpful in just providing timely diagnosis to the kids too), so not all related to it is mouse studies.
  now I can see how a vaccine study done like that can get quite expensive since it needs to run for a long time and just finding the candidates for it takes time(and in scale of finnish medicine this would be a huge project monetary wise).
  
  --
  world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
16. Re:Not much info by transporter_ii · 2013-10-21 23:10 · Score: 2
  
  > There are several viruses known to trigger the autoimmune response
  Still significant. Do a search for the *bovine* enterovirus and diabetes. In the alternative medicine world, cows milk has been linked to diabetes ever since I can remember. A quick google shows this link has now been proven:
  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21922634
  Interaction of enterovirus infection and cow's milk-based formula nutrition in type 1 diabetes-associated autoimmunity.
  Source
  Immunogenetics Laboratory, University of Turku, Turku, Finland. johanna.lempainen@utu.fi
  Abstract
  BACKGROUND:
  Enteral virus infections and early introduction of cow's milk (CM)-based formula are among the suggested triggers of type 1 diabetes (T1D)-associated autoimmunity, although studies on their role have remained contradictory. Here, we aimed to analyse whether interactions between these factors might clarify the controversies.
  MATERIALS:
  The study population comprised 107 subjects developing positivity for at least two T1D-associated autoantibodies and 446 control subjects from the Finnish diabetes prediction and prevention cohort. Enterovirus, rotavirus, adenovirus, respiratory syncytial virus and bovine insulin-binding antibodies were analysed from prospective serum samples at 3-24 months of age. Data on infant cow's milk exposure were available for 472 subjects: 251 subjects were exposed to cow's milk before 3 months of age and 221 subjects later in infancy.
  RESULTS:
  Signs of an enterovirus infection by 12 months of age were associated with the appearance of autoimmunity among children who were exposed to cow's milk before 3 months of age. Cox regression analysis revealed a combined effect of enterovirus infection and early cow's milk exposure for the development of ICA and any of the biochemically defined autoantibodies (p=0.001), of IAA (p=0.002), GADA (p=0.001) and IA-2A (p=0.013).
  CONCLUSIONS:
  The effect of enterovirus infection on the appearance of T1D-associated autoimmunity seems to be modified by exposure to cow's milk in early infancy suggesting an interaction between these factors. Moreover, these results provide an explanation for the controversial findings obtained when analysing the effect of any single one of these factors on the appearance of T1D-associated autoimmunity.
  Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
  
  --
  Doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, universities destroy knowledge, religion destroys spirituality
17. Re:Not much info by jones_supa · 2013-10-21 23:35 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Submitter here. I was able to locate the Finnish version from YLE News website. There is indeed a possibility for that kind of translation error. I'll try to retranslate the top part:
  A virus is being uncovered behind type I diabetes, a disease found especially in children. In particular, it is an enterovirus, which invades the pancreas and destroys the cells producing insuline. A vaccine against the viruses can be created.
  There are over hundred of various enteroviruses. A research team conducted by virology professor Heikki Hyöty has gone through all the strains and has been able to mark out five of them which cause diabetes. They can be compiled into a vaccine.
  "We have recognized one type of virus which carries the biggest risk factor. We could also put its relatives into the vaccine, to get the best possible effect", says professor Hyöty from University of Tampere.
18. Re:Not much info by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-22 01:17 · Score: 0
  
  Isn't Mongolia where Neanderthals were primarily located? If so, then genetically they are a good candidate for study as a progenitor of races.
19. Re:Not much info by Andy+Dodd · 2013-10-22 01:38 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Thing is: The virus doesn't directly cause much damage to the pancreas. The theory here is that it causes the immune system to start attacking the pancreas (maybe due to similar antigens between beta cells and the virus???)
  Tuning the immune system to more aggressively attack the virus might instead cause Type I diabetes here...
  
  --
  retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
20. Re:Not much info by nbauman · 2013-10-22 02:01 · Score: 1
  
  That's an interesting point.
  The mouse vaccine doesn't cause diabetes I, so it should be OK.
  I assume the vaccine attacks a different part of the virus than the part that is immunologically similar to beta cells.
  But it's something to worry about.
21. Re:Not much info by jfisherwa · 2013-10-22 02:03 · Score: 2
  
  So what you're saying is, don't go getting all Hyöty Työty on us just because you think you've cured cancer ..
22. Re:Not much info by nitehawk214 · 2013-10-22 02:27 · Score: 1
  
  group B coxsackievirus 1
  Who the hell came up with that name? I can't be the only one that wants to pronounce that as cock-suckie-virus...
  I was thinking more cock-sack-le-virus. Probably something you get from a French prostitute...
  
  --
  I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
23. Re:Not much info by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-22 02:29 · Score: 0
  
  and once they've got the fucking vacine they'll lock it up tighter then a virgin in a chasity belt to keep selling their damn useless drugs.
24. Re:Not much info by nitehawk214 · 2013-10-22 02:30 · Score: 1
  
  mak-kachs-hack-ing
  You should probably see a doctor about that.
  
  --
  I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
25. Re:Not much info by geekoid · 2013-10-22 02:35 · Score: 1
  
  The cute that you can cut and paste, next time try to actually understand.
  It's not a study, it's an extrapolation from a regression analysis.
  Sheesh
  
  --
  The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
26. Re:Not much info by TangoMargarine · 2013-10-22 02:40 · Score: 1
  
  I thought Finnish had like 6 extra tenses/conjugations/whatever we don't have in English, though? That's just not one of them?
  
  --
  Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
27. Re:Not much info by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-22 02:50 · Score: 0
  
  Nope. Finnish has neither definiteness nor grammatical gender, which sometimes (like here) causes problems in translation.
28. Re:Not much info by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-22 04:25 · Score: 0
  
  I'm a native finnish speaker and I'm sceptical about this. "löytänyt viruksen joka aiheuttaa ykköstyypin diabetesta/diabeteksen" would be "found a/the virus that causes type 1 diabetes". So the definiteness is implied elsewhere in the sentence. This story may have gone from english original press release to finnish news item and then to english news item with sloppy editing so nuances like that get lost.
29. Re:Not much info by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-22 04:26 · Score: 0
  
  it sounds legitimate.
  I review stuff like this for a living. This does look like a legitimate, promising study.
  Except that them there "Fins" are a bunch o' left leaning weenies with socialist medicine. And we all know that only the one true free market medical establishment can produce real cures in response to the job creators working without government constraints!
30. Re:Not much info by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-22 04:45 · Score: 0
  
  I thought Finnish had like 6 extra tenses/conjugations/whatever we don't have in English, though? That's just not one of them?
  The linguist in me insists on telling you that Finnish has 16 grammatical cases Case is the word you're looking for since it's for nouns. Verbs have tenses and conjugations.
31. Re:Not much info by j-beda · 2013-10-22 05:14 · Score: 1
  
  I believe the plan is for the gov't to fund the first 695 million euros, then the final trial, which is the riskiest, will be conducted by a private company, which will have exclusive rights to make/sell the vaccine worldwide for more than 10 years, in exchange for ongoing royalties of 1/100 of 1 cent per dose.
  I'm not sure if you are being sarcastic or not. If the public ponies up 695 out of the required 700 how does the spending of the last 5 become "the riskiest"?
32. Re:Not much info by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-22 05:17 · Score: 0
  
  Who says humans are not big mice?
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixrQcGQ6o-w
33. Re:Not much info by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-22 05:22 · Score: 0
  
  I re-translated it, and it hopefully reads better:
  
  Type 1 diabetes, usually found in children, appears to be caused by a virus. The virus in question -- an enterovirus -- penetrates the pancreas and destroys insulin-producing cells. Vaccines can be made to counter viruses.
  There are over a hundred different enteroviruses. A group led by virology expert Heikki Hyöty has pored over the different types of viruses and managed to limit the potentially diabetes-causing viruses to a count of five. A vaccine can be made against them.
  'We have identified one type of virus that carries the highest risk. We could also add its close relatives into the vaccine to achieve the best possible efficacy' says professor Hyöty from Tampere University.
34. Re:Not much info by pepty · 2013-10-22 05:39 · Score: 1
  
  That makes sense. For a while now coxsackievirus and rubella have both been suspected to trigger diabetes in those susceptible to type I, and it looks like cytomegalovirus can be involved in type II.
35. Re:Not much info by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-22 07:07 · Score: 0
  
  The cute that you can cut and paste, next time try to actually understand.
  Alternatively, you could post something that makes sense. We're not holding our breath.
  "Sheesh"
36. Re:Not much info by John.Banister · 2013-10-22 07:31 · Score: 1
  
  If the first 695 is spent on gathering more data and generating a list of people to have the opportunity to participate in the final trial, and the final (5 million euro) trial is the one where people's children actually get injected with something new. That final trial might be considered the riskiest.
37. Re:Not much info by Stanza · 2013-10-22 08:17 · Score: 1
  
  I've met several people who live in Old Lyme and they're always thrilled to tell someone it's where Lyme's disease was named after.
38. Re:Not much info by kermidge · 2013-10-22 20:42 · Score: 1
  
  Best damn summary I've seen anywhere all day. Hat off, man, and thank you for answering many of the questions I had while reading the linked article, although I did manage to come to the same conclusion.
  I agree, fund the guy. Even if the trials and attendant research don't pan out, we'll have learned something useful as well - what line not to pursue, at least in that manner. (May be correct virus group but acting in a way in the body that the vaccine doesn't address, for instance.)
39. Re: Not much info by gzuckier · 2013-10-23 04:26 · Score: 1
  
  There's been this big scale diabetes epidemiology study going on in Finland for a while so their work has a certain stamp of mainstream medical approval.
  
  --
  Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
40. Re: Not much info by gzuckier · 2013-10-23 04:28 · Score: 1
  
  Could have been hooters virus then
  
  --
  Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
41. Re: Not much info by gzuckier · 2013-10-23 04:35 · Score: 1
  
  That is a good point. Given that the infected cells are going to be full of the proteins the immune system is looking for; you better nail all the virus before any cells get infected.
  Another thing I've idly wondered about in this matter is that the rest of the pancreas outside the isles is busily cranking out digestive enzymes; maybe a little degradation in the structure of the isles can lead to them being digested.
  
  --
  Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
42. Re: Not much info by gzuckier · 2013-10-23 04:41 · Score: 1
  
  I don't know which is more bizarre; that you think these guys are somehow part of the big "they" along with drug companies and they're all sharing the cash; that vaccines are routinely being withheld from the market, as if you can't get vaccinated against anything these days; or that insulin is a "useless drug".
  
  --
  Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
43. Re: Not much info by gzuckier · 2013-10-23 04:45 · Score: 1
  
  Back when the autoimmune link was first published, it was Epstein-Barr that was linked.
  
  --
  Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
44. Re: Not much info by gzuckier · 2013-10-23 04:49 · Score: 2
  
  But early introduction to cow's milk would seem to be linked to less breast feeding, which is known to be a signifanct source of immunity for babies. So is cow's milk the cause or is breast feeding the preventive?
  
  --
  Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
45. Re:Not much info by sglines · 2013-10-23 07:14 · Score: 1
  
  Indeed this is very old news. My 30 year old daughter is a type 1 diabetic. It was well known 25 years ago that coxsackie viruses are associated with type 1 diabetes. Specifically coxsackie viruse 23b if memory serves me correctly. It's called baby measles and all kids get it. Get one version of coxsackie and it's believed that you are immune from the rest. At least that was the state of diabetes research 25 years ago.
46. Re:Not much info by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-23 10:42 · Score: 0
  
  It's legit, but it doesn't protect against diabetes caused by diet or genetic factors, which is the overwhelming majority of diabetes cases. Hence, the difficulty in funding.
Wow! by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 16:22 · Score: 0

If true, this has to be one of the top ten medical discoveries!
1. Re:Wow! by JMJimmy · 2013-10-21 18:16 · Score: 1
  
  I don't think it quite hits the rank of the top 10 here: http://science.discovery.com/famous-scientists-discoveries/big-100-medicine.htm though it is very admirable.
progress is good by Gravis+Zero · 2013-10-21 16:22 · Score: 5, Funny

progress toward making a vaccine is good and all but when will they finnish it. ;)

--
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
1. Re:progress is good by NoMaster · 2013-10-21 18:54 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  ... but when will they finnish it. ;)
  There's norway to know; it'll be dane when they're sweden ready.
  
  --
  What part of "a well regulated militia" do you not understand?
2. Re:progress is good by Pranadevil2k · 2013-10-21 19:35 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Europe on that high horse, huh? When they put a release date on this, denmark your calendars.
3. Re:progress is good by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 21:58 · Score: 0
  
  There is norway that they will ever finnish the study.
4. Re:progress is good by famebait · 2013-10-22 00:40 · Score: 1
  
  Suomin still has to sweden the deal with some cash. How el-scandianavia-ford it?
  Suomi the money!
  
  --
  sudo ergo sum
5. Re:progress is good by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-22 01:29 · Score: 0
  
  Now people don't have to go hungary anymore.
6. Re:progress is good by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-22 12:11 · Score: 0
  
  Hel,sinking this kind of money into research they can't affjord is foolish. Do it in Switzerland, they have money to Bern.
7. Re: progress is good by gzuckier · 2013-10-23 04:51 · Score: 1
  
  Are u grik?
  
  --
  Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
THE virus is a bit of an overstatement by kyle3489 · 2013-10-21 16:23 · Score: 4, Interesting

A great advancement, but there are undoubtedly many causes of type 1 diabetes, many of which have been described in the scientific literature. Just a little bit of an overstatement to say, "the virus that causes type 1 diabetes," has been discovered.
1. Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement by kyle3489 · 2013-10-21 16:29 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  That would be type 2 diabetes. Some of the already-described causes of type 1 are genetic (as opposed to this virus).
2. Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 16:36 · Score: 0
  
  Myth: eating too much sugar causes diabetes
3. Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement by gl4ss · 2013-10-21 16:39 · Score: 1
  
  the researcher in question states that they need to study more. but in most cases of diabetes 1 they seem to have detected pieces of the virus. they've been running a study since 1994. according to this theory it is a genetic dysfunctionality that doesn't fight the virus and the virus which causes it.
  mind you this is just type 1 and not type 2 eat-too-much-crap diabetes.
  
  --
  world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
4. Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement by I'm+New+Around+Here · 2013-10-21 16:48 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Myth: eating too much sugar causes diabetes
  Do you guys even bother reading your own links?
  
  Myth: Eating too much sugar causes diabetes.
  Fact: The answer is not so simple. Type 1 diabetes is caused by genetics and unknown factors that trigger the onset of the disease [editor: we know this, that isn't what the debate is about]; type 2 diabetes is caused by genetics and lifestyle factors.
  Being overweight does increase your risk for developing type 2 diabetes, and a diet high in calories from any source contributes to weight gain. Research has shown that drinking sugary drinks is linked to type 2 diabetes.
  The American Diabetes Association recommends that people should limit their intake of sugar-sweetened beverages to help prevent diabetes. Sugar-sweetened beverages include beverages like:
  regular soda
  fruit punch
  fruit drinks
  energy drinks
  sports drinks
  sweet tea
  other sugary drinks.
  These will raise blood glucose and can provide several hundred calories in just one serving!
  Rubycodez isn't saying a certain amount of sugar directly causes diabetes in all cases. He is saying consuming large amounts of sugar is tied to the onset of diabetes. Which is what the American Diabetes Association also says.
  
  --
  If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
5. Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement by Bitsy+Boffin · 2013-10-21 17:01 · Score: 1
  
  . He is saying consuming large amounts of sugar is tied to the onset of diabetes. Which is what the American Diabetes Association also says.
  Of type TWO diabetes. This discovery is about type ONE diabetes, the cause of which has nothing to do with the consumption of large amounts of sugar or otherwise. They are two quite different diseases, with different causes, different treatments, and different complications. Unfortunately they didn't get different names, they really should have.
  
  --
  NZ Electronics Enthusiasts: Check out my Trade Me Listings
6. Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 17:04 · Score: 1
  
  Do you need to be reminded that correlation is not causation?
  "Research has shown that drinking sugary drinks is linked to type 2 diabetes" is not equivalent to "IF you drink too much soda, THEN you will get diabetes."
7. Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement by definate · 2013-10-21 17:37 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  When in Rome.
  Do you guys even bother reading your own links?
  
  ...type 2 diabetes is caused by genetics and lifestyle factors.
  Anonymous Coward is correctly pointing out that while it's linked, the actual relationship is more complicated than that, and that is why "Eating too much sugar causes diabetes" is a myth. Rubycodez was making a joke and hence his comments shouldn't be taken that seriously, however the joke did rely upon the myth that consuming too much sugar causes diabetes, otherwise his joke wouldn't make sense. That is why Anonymous Coward's link was relevant.
  
  --
  This is my footer. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
8. Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 18:57 · Score: 0
  
  What a pity. At least I can strike baldness off my bucket list.
9. Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement by Errol+backfiring · 2013-10-21 20:26 · Score: 1
  
  It's not a myth. Heck, even the mechanism is known: it is insulin resistance. In short, your body gets so high blood sugar level rise in such short time, that the warning system against it is not believed anymore. This also means you can "eat yourself sick" with candy, but not, say, with apples.
  
  --
  Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
10. Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement by Fjandr · 2013-10-21 22:17 · Score: 1
  
  The virus is a mistranslation, as noted in a comment above regarding Finnish grammar.
11. Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement by I'm+New+Around+Here · 2013-10-21 23:51 · Score: 2
  
  Yes, Type 2. Slashdot article is about Type 1. Got it. That doesn't matter.
  Rubycodez posted a throw-away one liner about sugary snacks in relation to diabetes. AC follows with a throw-away link that implies sugary snacks have no relation to diabetes. The title says it's a myth.
  But within the linked article, it explains not that it's a myth, but that it's an inaccurate over-simplification. The reason I responded is I have seen that "it's a myth" claim over and over, when talking about diabetes in general, or about Type 2 specifically. And I got sick of it, especially since the article states that the American Diabetes Association recommends avoiding sugary snacks to help avoid diabetes.
  Also, I do agree with you final thought there. Two distinct names would help avoid the confusion and inaccuracy in the discussions and perceptions.
  
  --
  If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
12. Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement by I'm+New+Around+Here · 2013-10-21 23:58 · Score: 1
  
  Do you need to be reminded that correlation is not causation?
  No, because I said that the joke that someone posted "isn't saying certain amount of sugar directly causes diabetes in all cases". I pointed out that the linked article that seems to call it a myth, actually shows there is a link, and avoiding high doses of sugar is recommended.
  Do you also disagree with the common thought that links smoking to lung cancer, since not all smokers get cancer?
  
  --
  If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
13. Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement by I'm+New+Around+Here · 2013-10-22 00:32 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  When in Rome.
  Hey, you should be speaking Italian after that line. :^)
  I understand there is confusion and misinformation in regards to diabetes in general. I won't attempt to claim to be an expert. But I don't accept the "myth" status regarding high sugar intake, when the myth-busting article itself admits there is a link. I don't accept it because it takes the most precise meaning of "x causes y" as an absolute, then in very inabsolute terms explains that the topic isn't well understood.
  As I asked above, do we doubt the link between smoking and cancer, just because not all smokers get lung cancer?
  Also, as Bitsy said and I agreed with, they should really call these conditions by different names. Make 'diabetes' be the condition when the pancreas isn't producing insulin because of damage from a virus (which generally happens at a young age), as the original story is about. Come up with a different name for when the body has become insulin-resistant due to dietary issues and lack of exercise. Then at least one more term for when the body isn't processing insulin correctly for other reasons, which may include results of an unrelated illness or a car accident.
  They are medically different conditions, so why do they have the same name? They have half a dozen different terms for 'heart attack', which all have to do with one organ, but they can't come up with another term for "something's wrong with the patient's insulin".
  
  --
  If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
14. Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-22 00:37 · Score: 1
  
  It's a myth that consuming too much sugar is the sole cause. As the FAQ points out, it is more complicated than that.
  Almost everyone is eating more sugar these days, and diabetes is on the increase, but it's not a 1:1 correspondence. There are other factors involved. The biggest correlated factor is obesity, and that is tied to excess caloric intake, which is tied to sugar-rich foods. There's no evidence that high sugar consumption with normal caloric intake has any effect on diabetes rates.
15. Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement by martas · 2013-10-22 00:48 · Score: 1
  
  But you could say that about everything. Smoking 2 packs a day causes lung cancer, and yet "lung cancer is caused by genetics and lifestyle factors". There are people who smoke 2 packs a day and never get lung cancer, probably in no small part due to genetics. At some point it's a numbers' game -- when behavior A combined with genotype B causes disease D, if genotype B is sufficiently common (and behavior A is sufficiently uncommon -- i.e. A shouldn't be "drinking water") it's reasonable to say that A causes D. Where exactly you draw the line is unclear, but when behavior A is something that deviates as strongly from the historical norm as taking in a thousand calories' worth of sugar a day, it might not be so misleading to call it the cause.
  
  --
  weinersmith
16. Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement by CastrTroy · 2013-10-22 00:49 · Score: 1
  
  It's really a shame that both diseases share the same name. Although the symptoms are the same (lack of insulin) the two are caused by completely different things. I suppose it's too late now, but they really should change the name of one to avoid confusion to the public at large.
  
  --
  
  Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
17. Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-22 01:24 · Score: 0
  
  If we can call cancer by a single name, I'd hardly think we should make the exception for diabetes.
18. Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-22 01:59 · Score: 0
  
  There is much data starting to come in that suggests Type II diabeties may be related to viral infections as well. Having controlled my diabetes (Type II) with diet does not mean that the cause is not viral. It simply means that it can be mitigated. I can say for fact that I am extremely susceptible to the possibility of blood sugar problems in the future. I don't think it is wise to assume that the researcher is wrong or that diet control measures are wrong either. Regards Type I it was always assumed to be genetic in the past. It is a bit releaving to understand that it may be subject to vaccination.
  Regards the whole problem here is that way too many assumptions regards medicine are fixed and "right" only to be found to be wront. Cancer is proving to be viral as well. (Not all but most varieties) I suspect that figuring out viral defences is in order. In particular the problem of treating someone "already infected" is at issue since vaccinations typically do not affect that class of persons. Hopefully we will get some good methods of importing body immunity against existing infections. That has hot prospects of halting the progress of such diseases.
19. Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement by nbauman · 2013-10-22 02:21 · Score: 1
  
  Or maybe it's a bacterium. Here's another one from the DIPP-Finnish Type 1 Diabetes and Prediction study:
  http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/10/111028081949.htm
  Specific Bacteria That Precede Autoimmune Diabetes Identified: New Potential Avenues for Early Disease Detection and Prevention
  Dec. 7, 2011 — A study led by Matej Orei from VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland suggests that autoimmune diabetes is preceded by diminished gut microbial diversity of the Clostridium leptum subgroup, elevated plasma leptin and enhanced glucose-stimulated insulin secretion.
  In collaboration with the DIPP-Finnish Type 1 Diabetes and Prediction study, VTT researches have previously found that specific metabolic disturbances precede early -cell autoimmunity markers in children who subsequently progress to type 1 diabetes. However, the question remained what are the environmental causes and tissue-specific mechanisms leading to these disturbances?
  Matej Orei from VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland and collaborators Eriika Savontaus from the University of Turku, Samuel Kaski from Aalto University and Mikael Knip from the University of Helsinki set out to address this question, and the results were published on October 27, 2011 in PLoS Computational Biology Journal.
  The team carried out a study using non-obese diabetic (NOD) mice that recapitulated the protocol used in the DIPP clinical study, followed up by independent studies in which NOD mice were studied in relation to the risk of diabetes progression. Researchers found that young female NOD mice that later progress to autoimmune diabetes exhibit the same metabolic pattern as prediabetic children. These metabolic changes are accompanied by enhanced glucose-stimulated insulin secretion, upregulation of insulinotropic amino acids in islets, elevated plasma leptin and adiponectin, and diminished gut microbial diversity of the Clostridium leptum subgroup.
  The elucidation of early metabolic pathways associated with progression to Type 1 diabetes points to novel avenues for early disease prevention. The ongoing efforts of VTT researchers are focused on the potential of specific bacteria from the C. leptum subgroup to help prevent Type 1 diabetes.
  This study was supported by the Finnish Funding Agency for Technology and Innovation Tekes, the Seventh Framework Program of the European Community, and Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation.
  The environmental factors and molecular mechanisms leading to Type 1 diabetes are poorly understood and of great public health interest. The incidence of inflammatory and autoimmune diseases is rising faster than for any other major disease, and these diseases are affecting a wide spectrum of the population. The number of new cases of Type 1 diabetes in European children less than 5 years of age is expected to double between 2005 and 2020.
  Journal Reference:
  Marko Sysi-Aho, Andrey Ermolov, Peddinti V. Gopalacharyulu, Abhishek Tripathi, Tuulikki Seppänen-Laakso, Johanna Maukonen, Ismo Mattila, Suvi T. Ruohonen, Laura Vähätalo, Laxman Yetukuri, Taina Härkönen, Erno Lindfors, Janne Nikkilä, Jorma Ilonen, Olli Simell, Maria Saarela, Mikael Knip, Samuel Kaski, Eriika Savontaus, Matej Orei. Metabolic Regulation in Progression to Autoimmune Diabetes. PLoS Computational Biology, 2011; 7 (10): e1002257 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002257
20. Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement by geekoid · 2013-10-22 02:38 · Score: 2
  
  I hear you. Fat people and anti science people who don't want to change their life style are always finding excuses and cherry picking. I get sick of it as well.
  Keep it up.
  
  --
  The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
21. Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-22 06:17 · Score: 0
  
  Although the symptoms are the same (lack of insulin) the two are caused by completely different things.
  No, the symptoms are high blood sugar (and the various side effects of that). Lack of insulin is one cause.
  The other is insulin resistance.
22. Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement by I'm+New+Around+Here · 2013-10-22 10:05 · Score: 1
  
  It's a myth that consuming too much sugar is the sole cause.
  And that is why no one ever claims it is the only cause. We understand it's not a 1:1 relationship, and there are nuances that we gloss over. But claiming the entire line of thought is a myth is even more incorrect. We know there are nuances in the link, you ignore all nuances and claim no link at all.
  
  --
  If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
23. Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-22 10:57 · Score: 0
  
  > And that is why no one ever claims it is the only cause.
  Yes, they do. People imply all the time that your'e going to be diabetic if you consume too much sugar. That's how this whole subthread got started when rubycodez "joked" about washing down Pop Tarts with HFCS-laden soft drinks. Taking it to a logical extreme doesn't negate the fact that the myth is quite widespread.
24. Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement by I'm+New+Around+Here · 2013-10-22 11:21 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, you are obviously right. All us dunces who believe the "myth" think that all kids who drink soda have diabetes. Every single one of them develop the condition within the year, that is exactly what we believe. You are so smart to figure out what the great unwashed masses erroneously believe.
  Or, possibly, we make a simplistic joke that glosses over some details of a widely misunderstood topic.
  
  --
  If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
25. Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-22 16:24 · Score: 0
  
  Or, possibly, you think your POV is the same as everyone else's, and thus you're without a fucking clue.
26. Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement by groblewis · 2013-10-23 04:41 · Score: 1
  
  The evidence is becoming overwhelming: excessive sugar consumption causes not only Type 2 diabetes, but a host of other maladies including obesity, heart disease, premature aging, and quite possibly cancer. Must see: Dr. Robert Lustig's YouTube video "Sugar: the Bitter Truth". Must read: award-winning science reporter Gary Taubes' book "Good Calories, Bad Calories". In most people, Type 2 diabetes can be effectively cured by losing weight and following a low carbohydrate diet.
27. Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-23 11:21 · Score: 0
  
  I wouldn't trust Lustig any farther than I could throw him. He has demonstrated a stout determination to ignore facts in his crusade to sell more books. He cherry-picks data like nobody's business.
  Read the comments on this debate, where Lustig gets his ass handed to him:
  http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/02/19/a-retrospective-of-the-fructose-alarmism-debate/
28. Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-24 21:48 · Score: 0
  
  I know you're not an expert, however if you do care to read up on this sort of thing, you'll find that the reason they don't call them a different name, other than type 2 diabetes is because, they have literally no idea what's going on. Your statements about how it's happening aren't correct.
  In fact, they've recently found that there's 3 types of bacteria which are highly associated with diabetes, and when eliminating this in rats, they were able to cure metabolic syndrome, which is essentially the precursor to diabetes.
  Now really, your whole post is just "confusion and misinformation". It makes me sad that it got upvoted so much, considering that most of the articles on diabetes breakthroughs that I've read, have been linked here.
Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes by timeOday · 2013-10-21 16:27 · Score: 5, Informative

It is worth noting this is for type 1 diabetes, not type 2 which is the modern plague resulting largely from bad diet and inactivity. That said, if you know somebody for whom diabetes is a lifelong affliction since childhood, and kids who need shots for diabetes, that's type 1. A cure would be a huge deal.
1. Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 17:05 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  A cure would be a huge deal.
  Fortunately for potential, future, type 1 diabetics, this is a vector for prevention. Unfortunately for those of us who are already type 1 diabetics, this does not appear to be a cure.
  The key to type 1 is that it is a disease of the immune system. If this virus actually caused diabetes, then diabetes would be a communicable disease, and everyone who got exposed to the virus would become diabetic. Instead, the disease is genetically inherited and only expresses itself if the person is exposed to a certain class of virus. What this virus does is elicit an immune response from people. In a small percentage of people who have inherited a defect in their immune system, their bodies react by producing antibodies that do not just kill off the virus in question, but also kill off the insulin producing beta cells in the pancreas. It appears that these researchers have found that class of virus, but it is the diabetics immune response to the viruses that kills insulin production.
  If you inherit the defect, and don't ever get exposed to the virus, you don't become diabetic. If you are exposed to the virus and aren't genetically keyed to produce these T-cells that are lethal to your insulin producing cells, then you don't become diabetic.
  I became a type 1 at 28, after I was sick for a week. My father became type 1 at 32. They used to call it Juvenile Diabetes, but obviously that is a misnomer. The later you get exposed to the virus, the later you become diabetic.
2. Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes by relyimah · 2013-10-21 17:06 · Score: 1
  
  I have type 1 diabetes, so can relate.
  
  This, however, is NOT a cure but a vaccine. Am guessing that this will be used to prevent the onset of T1D, rather than a magical cure (which would be freaking awesome by the way)!
3. Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 17:14 · Score: 0
  
  Yes, a cure would be a huge deal. Unfortunately, it won't cure people who already have type 1 as the cells are already damaged. It might prevent others from being infected.
  On a larger scale, I think it's extremely interesting that more and more diseases are discovered to have their source in viruses.
4. Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes by timeOday · 2013-10-21 17:26 · Score: 1
  
  Sorry, "cure" was sloppy. Maybe in 50 years it will be a standard childhood vaccine like polio and the distinction won't matter as much for now it does.
5. Re: Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes by relyimah · 2013-10-21 17:40 · Score: 1
  
  Here's hoping. While it's a manageable thing I still wouldn't wish it upon anyone.
6. Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes by Festering+Leper · 2013-10-21 18:08 · Score: 2
  
  ...Assuming the anti-vaxxers don't keep their kids from getting it :(
  
  --
  if you want people to think you know what you are talking about, just put ".com" at the end of everything you say.com
7. Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 18:19 · Score: 0
  
  It is worth noting this is for type 1 diabetes, not type 2 which is the modern plague resulting largely from bad diet and inactivity.
  If your parents are both type 2, your chances of developing type 2 are 75% regardless of diet. What you're spreading is fat-hating victim-blaming bile. Knock it off.
8. Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes by mpe · 2013-10-21 18:26 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  It is worth noting this is for type 1 diabetes, not type 2 which is the modern plague resulting largely from bad diet and inactivity. That said, if you know somebody for whom diabetes is a lifelong affliction since childhood, and kids who need shots for diabetes, that's type 1.
  
  Genetics appears to be a strong factor in ALL forms of diabetes.
  As for "bad diet" this may well be the low fat, but very high glucose, diet pushed as "healthy" since the late 1970's (in the US). Given that diabetes is the inability to effectivly handle dietary glucose.
9. Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes by timeOday · 2013-10-21 18:27 · Score: 2
  
  Well, the long-term effects of diseases like diabetes and HPV are known perfectly well - they're awful. Be sure to weigh that against your skepticism of new vaccines.
10. Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes by mpe · 2013-10-21 18:52 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  I became a type 1 at 28, after I was sick for a week. My father became type 1 at 32. They used to call it Juvenile Diabetes, but obviously that is a misnomer. The later you get exposed to the virus, the later you become diabetic.
  
  Similarly T2 used to be called "Mature Onset Diabetes". Thus you end up with terms such as Latent Autoimmune Diabetes of Adulthood (LADA) and Maturity Onset Diabetes of the Young (MODY). IIRC the oldest person diagnosed T1 was in their 90's and the youngest person diagnosed T2 around 7.
  It turns out than many people with MODY actually have a mitochondial abnormaility. Whilst this produces "insulin resistance" the biochemical mechanism is different.
11. Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes by whydavid · 2013-10-21 20:16 · Score: 2
  
  The methods for manufacturing vaccines are constantly changing. If you wait a generation or two, the vaccine will have changed and you'll need to wait another generation or two. Of course, if you are anything like a typical anti-vax nut, you have no idea how vaccines work, how they are manufactured, or how bad the diseases they are designed to prevent actually are. Just do us a favor an home-school your unvaccinated children.
12. Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes by RivenAleem · 2013-10-21 22:44 · Score: 2
  
  This is something that confuses me about all this.
  If you have a genetic problem, where your immune response to the virus is what causes you to end up with Type 1 diabetes, how is a vaccine going to help? Surely even a small dose, which triggers the immune response, is going to have the same effect?
13. Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes by RivenAleem · 2013-10-21 22:46 · Score: 1
  
  I thought it was Fructose and Sucrose (and by extension, HFCS), and not Glucose that was causing this.
14. Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes by jabuzz · 2013-10-21 22:50 · Score: 1
  
  Citation for that please. Type 2 diabetes is very much linked to diet, and you don't have to be fat either.
15. Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-22 01:38 · Score: 0
  
  By the time it gets to the blood it's glucose and will lead to desensitized insulin response. HFCS seems like it must be causing a signal sent from the stomach. Even simple carbohydrates turn to glucose fairly quickly. Pasta is just as bad as chocolate.
16. Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-22 02:41 · Score: 0
  
  Yes agreed. I think vaccines seem to be taking a known chance of risk and replacing it with an unknown risk, there should be more discussion of this and less emotional appeals to authority.
17. Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-22 02:55 · Score: 0
  
  The truth is the vaccine approach sucks. It requires too much trust in authorities not to mess up, be evil, or just waste everyone's time and money with useless injections. The approach itself is in direct conflict with proper medical testing as you have noted for yourself. We should be trying to find alternative ways of dealing with viral problems.
18. Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes by bradgoodman · 2013-10-22 03:15 · Score: 1
  
  I want to just make this incredibly clear to people: Type-1 and Type-2 diabetes are two completely different diseases. They have different causes and different treatments. IMHO, they shouldn't even share the same name.
19. Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes by budgenator · 2013-10-22 04:16 · Score: 1
  
  .... if you know somebody for whom diabetes is a lifelong affliction since childhood, and kids who need shots for diabetes, that's type 1. A cure would be a huge deal.
  Used to be, Kids are now developing type II diabetes at an alarming rate; youthfull energy levels used to provide immunity to type II to kids, but their diets suck just as bad as adult's, schools are dropping gym classes and receses and they are vegging out in front of the TV, video game and cellphone so they are just as sedentary as adults now.
  
  --
  Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
20. Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes by budgenator · 2013-10-22 05:02 · Score: 1
  
  if the vacine produces an appropriate antibody, they may not become infected with the virus and have the body produce an inappropriate antibody to the virus which damages the cells. Naturally we produce antibodies for the virus itself and antibodies for infected cells, if there is enough viral antibodies the cells may not get infected enough to produce infected cell antibodies.
  
  --
  Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
21. Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes by budgenator · 2013-10-22 05:09 · Score: 1
  
  If the vaccine prevents infection by the virus and thereby the immune system's attack your islet cells, then the possibility of an effective stem cell treatment becomes more likely.
  
  --
  Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
22. Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes by budgenator · 2013-10-22 06:24 · Score: 1
  
  Fructose is associated with fatty liver disease, fructose is a monosaccaride that the liver must convert into glucose before it can be utilized, sucrose (table sugar) is a disaccaride composed of fructose and glucose.
  
  --
  Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
23. Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes by mpe · 2013-10-22 09:51 · Score: 1
  
  Fructose is associated with fatty liver disease, fructose is a monosaccaride that the liver must convert into glucose before it can be utilized, sucrose (table sugar) is a disaccaride composed of fructose and glucose.
  
  The liver converts excess sugars into FATS. The reason it does this is because sugars disolve in blood plasma (water) thus their concentration within the blood must be closely regulated. Where as fats, within VLDL, can circulate in the blood at various concentrations without causing any problems. The association with fatty liver disase would be that the liver is producing fat faster than either VLDL (or cholesterol). (So maybe it's more fructose/galactose without protein.) Converting fructose to glucose would serve no useful purpose in a mammal. (Even glucose to galactose dosn't appear to be a major part of lactation.) Fats are of rather more use, since they can be used "structurally" as well as for "fuel".
24. Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-22 16:48 · Score: 0
  
  > HFCS seems like it must be causing a signal sent from the stomach
  Basically impossible, since there's nothing chemically special about HFCS. It's essentially the same as sucrose once it reaches the small intestine. It's closer to honey, actually. The source of the glucose/fructose mixture doesn't matter nearly as much as the quantity.
And i might see it in my lifetime. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 16:28 · Score: 1, Insightful

But i wouldn't bet on it.
Diabetic treatment and supplies are a multi-billion dollars a year industry.
You think they're going to give that up?
Nope. They're going to spend a few million and throw up so many regulatory and availability roadblocks to prevent the loss of their ever increasing income.
What was the last billion dollar industry that let itself go obsolete?
That just doesn't happen anymore. Not when you can buy the law.
1. Re:And i might see it in my lifetime. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 16:31 · Score: 0
  
  Coal was a billion dollar industry. Think they gave that up when oil came along? Oh wait...
2. Re: And i might see it in my lifetime. by scrote-ma-hote · 2013-10-21 16:33 · Score: 2
  
  Two things: 1. This is for type 1 diabetes. Most of the good money is for type 2. 2. Lots of billion dollar medical industries go belly up. COX-2 inhibitors. Clot busters replaced by angioplasty in a lot of cases.
3. Re:And i might see it in my lifetime. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 16:41 · Score: 0
  
  What was the last billion dollar industry that let itself go obsolete?
  Slave trading.
4. Re:And i might see it in my lifetime. by gl4ss · 2013-10-21 16:43 · Score: 2
  
  ..yeah because nobody wanted to make money from the preventive cure for type 1? grow up.
  and from what I gathered from the article you would need to be treated with the vaccine prior to your pancreas getting fscked by the virus.
  
  --
  world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
5. Re:And i might see it in my lifetime. by Heshler · 2013-10-21 17:03 · Score: 1
  
  Uh... first of all, there is an extraordinary business opportunity to give this drug to EVERY BABY FOREVERMORE. And so a company that isn't already in the diabetes business will go for it. Regulatory roadblocks are nothing that big industry players don't know how to deal with. That is, unless the Finns didn't patent the vaccine, in which case big pharma touch it. Then it will have to be government funded trials, but you can bet there would be major philanthropy dollars and influence if this got to stage 3 trials, which make up the vast majority of the costs.
6. Re:And i might see it in my lifetime. by maroberts · 2013-10-21 17:26 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  What was the last billion dollar industry that let itself go obsolete?
  Slave trading.
  It didn't go obselete, it just implemented a different business model.
  
  --
  Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
  Karma: Chameleon
7. Re:And i might see it in my lifetime. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 17:35 · Score: 0
  
  Railroads?
  Immune system suppression drugs that might be the wrong end of the immune system.
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polly_Matzinger
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGpY3L5Uwn0
8. Re:And i might see it in my lifetime. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 17:49 · Score: 1
  
  Hmm, slavery didn't go obsolete willingly.
  The modern slavery scourge is called 'unpaid internships' and is condoned by several governments including the USA, Canada and UK.
9. Re: And i might see it in my lifetime. by Pranadevil2k · 2013-10-21 19:58 · Score: 2
  
  Type 1 diabetes comes with a lifetime requirement of insulin, syringes (or needles, for those nifty pens by novo nordisk), blood-sugar testers and their required test strips, and a small army of professional endocrinologists whose sole purpose is to tell people how to control their blood-sugar levels with as little insulin as possible to reduce risk of complications.
  Type 2 diabetes comes with the occasional need for medications, a few doctor visits, and lifestyle changes.
  I think you're confused.
10. Re: And i might see it in my lifetime. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 23:16 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Type 1 versus Type 2 is the difference between a missing leg, and serious arthritis. There are 20 times as many Type 2 diabetics, but most cases of Type 2 can be treated by lifestyle changes and maybe oral medication. Type 1 is...., well, for me, it's limited career choices and lifestyle. I've probably been knocked out hypoglycemic episodes 300 times or so in my life: that has to have caused some intellectual damage. I've got notable kidney, eye, and skin damage, though I'm doing pretty good for a 45 year Type 1. Don't get me *started* on what it does to your sex life to need your blood sugar low enough to be amorous, and high enough to prevent hypoglycemia and impotence during good sex. Those regions don't overlap anymore!!!
  Sorry, I had to rant. Anyway, the result is that the consequences are so profound that the smaller numbers of Type 1 diabetics get a much, much larger than 5% share of the research. It's so much more profound, so much more dangerous, and so much more *expensive* to treat that it justifies the investment. The treatment costs really add up, with one dollar each test strips, $3/day insulin costs, infusion sets for insulin pumps, doctor visits for eyes and kidneys and feet and skin, etc., etc. that it makes sense to invest more heavily in it.
11. Re: And i might see it in my lifetime. by jittles · 2013-10-22 00:55 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Type 2 diabetes comes with the occasional need for medications, a few doctor visits, and lifestyle changes.
  I think you're confused.
  Type 2 diabetes can progress to the stage where it is just as difficult to manage as Type 1. Your body can become resistant to medications such as glucophage and then you end up on insulin anyway. Glucophage doesn't even work for all Type 2 patients, some have to use insulin regardless. In fact, they have developed synthetic insulin that is very concentrated specifically for people with Type 2 diabetes. No I am not a doctor, but I know someone with severe Type 2 diabetes and I know an ICU doctor who has to deal with diabetics on a regular basis.
12. Re:And i might see it in my lifetime. by geekoid · 2013-10-22 02:50 · Score: 1
  
  I don't normally reply to AC, but this myth is persuasive enough that I am going to make an exception.
  0) Health care is a very competitive business.
  1) The company that gets a vaccine for diabetes will make more money in the long run then their competitors.
  2) If I have the vaccine my competitors will loose value
  3) The stock bump will make C level position and the board some very large bonuses.
  4) If a company doesn't release it, another will discover it and release it.
  5) It's pretty open science, if a company sits on it some other country will start making it anyways.
  So you completely ignores self interest and competition.
  Now there is the other power player, Insurance companies.
  They will be far better off supporting a vaccine.
  "What was the last billion dollar industry that let itself go obsolete?"You don't become billion dollar industry unless you provide something, and are diversified.
  There are technologies that have gone obsolete, and the companies just refocus. see: IBM
  
  --
  The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
13. Re: And i might see it in my lifetime. by geekoid · 2013-10-22 02:53 · Score: 1
  
  What you are saying the insurance companies will ensure it's released.
  Or are you saying the CEO is going to pass up an a bonus worth millions so a company that he won't even be at in 5 years can keep making the same profits and hope another company doesn't release it?
  And Type 2 can progress to the same needs as type 1.
  
  --
  The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
700 million euros? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 16:40 · Score: 0

$956 million US dollars, to do a clinical trial?
That is crazy. Cures are supposed to reduce costs and make everyone healthier without the recurring costs and downside to having a disease. It is the only way to make socialized single-payer medicine work...
1. Re:700 million euros? by binarylarry · 2013-10-21 16:56 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah but think of how many porsches and ferrari's need to be bought, along with home many regulatory bodies and legal authorities whom need to be jerked off to get this going.
  We deserve to be hit by a meteor.
  
  --
  Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
2. Re:700 million euros? by ATMAvatar · 2013-10-21 17:00 · Score: 1
  
  That seems high, but it's lower than average.
  
  --
  "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
3. Re: 700 million euros? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 17:07 · Score: 0
  
  If you and your republitard friends want to inject untested and unverified medicine to yourself, please do so by signing up for medical ttrials.
4. Re:700 million euros? by Bite+The+Pillow · 2013-10-21 17:48 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Anyone who blames the cost of health care on outlandishly priced medicine should have their eyelids removed and that article stapled to their face so they can read it several times a day. For perspective, I did the work for everyone.
  AZN - $6.3B on revenues of $30B, 21% profit
  GSK - $8.3 B on $42.5, 20% profit
  SNY - 6.5B on $47B
  RHHBY - $10.6B on $51.8B
  PFE - $14.6B on $59B for 25% those bastards
  JNJ - 10.9B on 67B
  LLY - 4B on 22.6B
  ABT - $6B on $40B
  MRK - 6.1B on 47.2B
  BMY - 2B on 18B - 11%, what is this, charity?
  NVS - 9.6B on 58B
  AMGN - 4B on 17B
  Source: Yahoo finance numbers, the first result that didn't require scripts or images, for 2012 year ending December.
  If you want to argue whether $500B in drugs is needed for a year for 7.1 billion people, most of whom either aren't sick or can't see a doctor, that's a different argument.
  Every one of you mouthbreathing neckbeards who made a comment about gold plating, bribes, or other ridiculous nonsense need to either learn something about the world, or figure out why you are so resentful of a 20% profit margin.
  Ever watch shark tank? They would shit on themselves rather than move over less than 200% profit margin, and then they look for bringing down cost after that. 20% is low for general consumer goods, and of course we aren't talking about consumer goods here but a comparison hopefully helps. The R&D costs are not so far off from the profits - meaning they could double their profits immediately in return for not having anything new to market in 5 years, and considering patents they would be busto in another 10 years. Barely skating by in business terms.
5. Re:700 million euros? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 18:59 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah, I know something about the world.
  I know that corporations deliberately hold their profits down using a variety of financial tricks, in order to limit their tax exposure.
6. Re:700 million euros? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 19:21 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah a breakdown on where the costs are would be more enlightening than how much profit they make.
  
  After all they could be spending lots of money on flying people to expensive holidays oops I mean conferences.
7. Re:700 million euros? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 19:33 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  20% for consumer goods?
  I think Walmart sells those ... OK, according to Yahoo finance:
  http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=WMT
  Walmart have a profit margin of 3.61%
  Not 20%.
8. Re:700 million euros? by whydavid · 2013-10-21 20:28 · Score: 2
  
  In one line you managed to span the spectrum from ill-informed to irrelevant. Good job.
  1) Cures are not "supposed" to reduce (monetary) costs, and in many cases they don't. [ill-informed]
  2) The number of people with Type I Diabetes is in excess of 10 million. A billion dollar clinical trial, amortized over this population, pales in comparison to the costs (monetary or human suffering) of management. [ill-informed]
  3) None of this has anything to do with socialized medicine. [irrelevant]
9. Re:700 million euros? by IamTheRealMike · 2013-10-22 02:56 · Score: 1
  
  You're probably very right, but for those of us who know little about medicine, can someone explain where that BILLION dollars would go? I know there will need to be trials run, data studied, scientists paid etc but a billion dollars is an awful lot of money ....
10. Re:700 million euros? by airdweller · 2013-10-22 05:23 · Score: 1
  
  20% profit is "barely skating by"? That's just fucked up.
Wanna nod the "nanodiamonds from thin air"? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 16:53 · Score: 0

Seems legit.
Where is the data? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 16:58 · Score: 0

Where is the data? This news piece is worthless.
$$!$$Treat $Cure by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 17:02 · Score: 0

You can bet Eli Lilly won't go down without a fight on this one.
Diabetes vaccine?!?! by Lucky_Pierre · 2013-10-21 17:04 · Score: 2

Sweet!

--
"Whenever the cause of the people is entrusted to professors, it is lost." ~ V.I. Lenin
Hey by Lucky_Pierre · 2013-10-21 17:06 · Score: 1

Lawyers have to eat too!

--
"Whenever the cause of the people is entrusted to professors, it is lost." ~ V.I. Lenin
Type 2 is a plumbing problem by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 17:46 · Score: 0

I thought Fructose was the prime candidate for over production of Fatty Acids and Triglycerides that literally "jam up" the mechanism that normally brings high blood sugar down. And that Insulin "resistance" was simply a conservation of mass problem.. literally.. all available Fat cell space is used up.. until the body can make more.. like a Housing Shortage.
So the Blood Sugar and Fat Triglycerides just sit in the blood stream congealing and eroding the outside of the cells in the arteries and veins and organs exposed to the soup.
Since you don't have to be Fat to Spike your blood sugar with a wallop of Fructose derived overload, and leave the excess Glucose with no where to go.. you can actually be "thin" and make the same "corrosive soup" to eat away at your muscles and peel the "paint" off your arteries and brain cells.
The only thing with excess weight is it speeds up the degeneration immensely.
1. Re:Type 2 is a plumbing problem by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 17:57 · Score: 0
  
  You might also mention that Fructose (while it taste Sweet) is the Stealth molecule.. they body "can't detect".. you can eat a ton of Fructose.. or sugars like Table Sugar, Date Sugar, Maltitol, Sorbitol or 90% Fructose Agave Syrup.. and not raise your Insulin levels one Iota.. the Body it quite literally "Blind" to Fructose.
  Fructose is "sweet" but doesn't reduce your hunger or provide any satisfaction.. your just as hungry after eating a piece of candy with Fructose as when you started.. but you've started filling your Liver and Fat cells.. taking away valuable space to handle excess Blood Glucose.
  Fruit at least "fills" your gut with Fiber.. very slowly reducing your hunger by pressing against the walls of your stomach and colon.. then your brain starts reducing your hunger. You would get as much benefit from easting cardboard.
  The body can't burn Fructose, it has to turn it Into human Fat, then store that Fat, then Break that same Fat down into Glucose before it can burn it to fuel.. so its like Exercising before eating.. you end up making yourself even hungrier.. only guess what.. you've already filled your Fat cells with the Jellied Fructose Fat. Quite literally makes any Glucose that would have been harmless before.. Toxic and in Life threatening instantly.. congratulations.. you have Type 2 diabetes
2. Re:Type 2 is a plumbing problem by mpe · 2013-10-22 08:45 · Score: 1
  
  I thought Fructose was the prime candidate for over production of Fatty Acids and Triglycerides that literally "jam up" the mechanism that normally brings high blood sugar down. And that Insulin "resistance" was simply a conservation of mass problem.. literally.. all available Fat cell space is used up.. until the body can make more.. like a Housing Shortage
  
  The human (or any other mammal) body dosn't work that way. Some cells need insulin before they can take up glucose. But more or less all cells can take up fructose and galactose without needing it to be present. What typically happens in practice is virtually all dietary fructose and galactose is changed into fats by the liver. It's impossible to fat cells to become "full up" since they can always undergo mitosis.
  
  So the Blood Sugar and Fat Triglycerides just sit in the blood stream congealing and eroding the outside of the cells in the arteries and veins and organs exposed to the soup.
  
  Sugars disolve in blood plasma, thus must be cosely regulated to maintain the required physical and chemical properties. Lipids are carried in cell like structures called lipoproteins. The number of lipoproteins in the blood, especially chylomicrons and VLDL can vary greatly.
  Usually cells would taking glucose from the blood once the concentration in the cytoplasm exceeds a certain level. (Regardless of how much insulin is present in the blood.) Insulin resistance is the case insulin receptors remaining "off" even after cytoplasm glucose levels fall e.g. due to glycolysis. High levels on insulin and/or glucose tend to inhibit formation of lipoprotein receptors so an insulin resistant cell can't easily switch its ATP production from glycolysis and TCA cycle to beta oxidation or ketosis. Since liver and fat cells have the additional metabolic pathway of converting glucose to fat they don't tend to become insulin resistant.
3. Re:Type 2 is a plumbing problem by mpe · 2013-10-22 09:24 · Score: 1
  
  You might also mention that Fructose (while it taste Sweet) is the Stealth molecule.. they body "can't detect".. you can eat a ton of Fructose.. or sugars like Table Sugar, Date Sugar, Maltitol, Sorbitol or 90% Fructose Agave Syrup.. and not raise your Insulin levels one Iota.. the Body it quite literally "Blind" to Fructose.
  
  Manitol and sorbitol are "sugar alcohols" a different type of ogranic compound. "Table Sugar" is sucrose, a disaccharide of fructose and glucose. Fruits tend to contain a mixture of glucose, fructose and sucrose. As plant based foods the will also contain galactan, a galcatose polysaccharide. Some, such as bananas, also contain high levels of the glucose polysaccharides amylose and amylopectin.
  
  The body can't burn Fructose, it has to turn it Into human Fat, then store that Fat, then Break that same Fat down into Glucose before it can burn it to fuel..
  
  Human cells are prefectly able to "burn" frutose (or galactose for that matter). These get turned into fat by the liver since fats are of considerably more use than sugars to mammals. Any glucose which cannot be used in fairly short order is also converted to fats (assuming insulin is available.) The only cells which can't "burn" fats are those without mitochondria there's thus no need for anything other than a fairly low level of GNG even with a zero glucose diet.
  
  you've already filled your Fat cells with the Jellied Fructose Fat.
  
  Fats produced by the liver enter the blood inside VLDL, which are likely to remain in the bloodstream considerably longer than any dietary glucose.
  
  Quite literally makes any Glucose that would have been harmless before.. Toxic and in Life threatening instantly.. congratulations.. you have Type 2 diabetes.
  
  An excess of glucose in the blood is dangerous in itself. This would also be the case with fructose and galactose. But the regulatory mechanism is different here. T2 diabetes occurs when it cannot be removed quickly enough from the blood to keep it below toxic levels (7.6 mmol/l). Doing this is going to be easier with every cell taking up glucose than if only the liver and fat cells are doing so...
Funding? Give everyone a piece of the prize... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 18:08 · Score: 0

Kickstarter baby! ;)
This has been suspected for some time... by aussie.virologist · 2013-10-21 18:28 · Score: 5, Interesting

There is a significant body of literature attempting to associate the onset of type 1 diabetes with infection by members of the species B enteroviruses, specifically CVB's (Coxsackieviruses B1 to B6) , if you search pubmed you will find hundreds of manuscripts. The problem has been nailing down a definitive causal relationship, from my understanding it is thought that there may be an element of molecular mimicry involved in the disease (or something similar). Essentially the virus infects the host and damages specific parts of the pancreas, the host's immune system mounts a response to the insult, but in the process creates antibodies that target the hosts own islet cells, resulting in the autoimmune disease that is type 1 diabetes. The problem of definitively implicating CVB's for type 1 diabetes is similar in some ways to that of other enterovirus infections like Polio. Basically there are other host mediated issues at play but with Polio you are able to detect the virus around the time of infection, with diabetes the disease presents after the infection has been cleared, complicating matters. To this day we still don't understand why only about 1% of people infected with Polio will develop paralysis, whilst the majority of people ~95% will show no significant signs of illness. Host factors are really important and not fully understood, there may even be a role for certain bacteria in the gut assisting the infection!
As a side note there has been some recent rumblings about the possibility of viral infections triggering transient type 2 diabetes, I can't link to any papers at the moment (too busy at work) but if anyone is interested I can have a dig around later.
Hopefully the vaccine is able to account for the amount of drift in the enterovirus genome that occurs at up to ~1% per annum, a similar problem exists with the new enterovirus 71 vaccine, an emerging bug similar in presentation to Polio.
Isn't Type 1 largely genetic? by bradley13 · 2013-10-21 18:29 · Score: 1

I was under the impression that most type 1 diabetes was cause by genetics. The brief article doesn't mention this at all. Does it then take both - genetic predisposition plus a virus? Or are these two entirely separate causes?

--
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
1. Re:Isn't Type 1 largely genetic? by Pranadevil2k · 2013-10-21 20:05 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  The research suggests that the genetic predisposition causes the immune system to act different in response to the virus. If the research is correct, then yes you need both the genetic factor and the virus to get type-1 diabetes. Of course, that completely discounts any other possible methods of 'catching' the disease. Since it is an autoimmune disorder, there are likely multiple factors involved. If this pans out and cures the most common of those factors, it may still not eliminate the disease.
2. Re:Isn't Type 1 largely genetic? by mpe · 2013-10-22 10:00 · Score: 1
  
  The research suggests that the genetic predisposition causes the immune system to act different in response to the virus. If the research is correct, then yes you need both the genetic factor and the virus to get type-1 diabetes.
  
  All diabetes appears to be GbyE. The interaction between both Genetic and Enviromental factors. It's supected that the genetic factors involved with T1 are more general (could be involved with many "auto immue" conditions) than those involved with T2.
been waitin' by Tablizer · 2013-10-21 18:52 · Score: 1

It's about time; I thought they'd never finnish.

--
Table-ized A.I.
1. Re:been waitin' by geekoid · 2013-10-22 02:56 · Score: 1
  
  That's what she said.
  
  --
  The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
What about P2RX7? by slew · 2013-10-21 18:54 · Score: 4, Interesting

P2RX7 was all the hype back in January. Here's a blog entry on it... Or the paper abstract for the more technically inclined (pay-wall for paper)...
If people are interested, I think there is some more info in English concerning the earlier Tampere research here (for free)...
Sometimes it's hard to predict what is going to work in bio-science just by seeing the techno-press response. Although polio is caused by an Enterovirus, so is the common cold (the variety caused by a Rhinovirus). Generally you get Enterovirus infections orally. Some Enteroviruses can eventually enter the bloodstream and infect other organs.
Apparently, the Tampere study looked at the small-bowel mucosal biopsies of 120 patients and did a PCR technique to assess if there was likely a Enterovirus infection. 74% of people with type 1 diabetes tested positive, compared with 29% of the non-diabetic ones. On that basis they conclude that a persistent Enterovirus infection in the small-bowel might eventually spread to the pancreas where the on-going immune response might destroy the insulin producing cells leading to diabetes...
So, I wasn't totally impressed after reading that paper, but you never know...
1. Re:What about P2RX7? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-22 01:45 · Score: 0
  
  P2RX7 has been a trendy protein to associate with every disease lately.
Re:viruses cause everything by philip.paradis · 2013-10-21 19:02 · Score: 2

Given that some viruses infect bacteria and alter their genetic profiles, sure, some of that is possible.

--
Write failed: Broken pipe
False positives by gringer · 2013-10-21 19:51 · Score: 1

Hmm, I wonder if this explains the false positive results I got when trying to find genetic markers for T1D risk (chapter 5 of my thesis).

--
Ask me about repetitive DNA
Kickstarter it by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 20:11 · Score: 1

Well, then document it very well and then bloody kickstarter it. 700 million is much more than other projects, but then, this fight against diabetes is more important than your average next gadget ;)
1. Re:Kickstarter it by woutercx · 2013-10-22 01:32 · Score: 1
  
  Just what I was thinking!
Sickening fraud by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 20:29 · Score: 0

Since there is no such thing as 'vaccination', this is yet another disgusting fraud, 700 million euros! And it won't work!
Still waiting for ONE person, anywhere in the entire world, to refute any of Dr Hadwen's talks. Still, they've only had over a hundred years to do so...
http://www.whale.to/v/hadwen.html
1. Re:Sickening fraud by Fjandr · 2013-10-21 22:26 · Score: 1
  
  Of course, which is why we still have polio, small pox, measles, mumps, and rubella crippling or killing millions of people a year.
  Oh, wait...
2. Re:Sickening fraud by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 23:38 · Score: 0
  
  Yes, these all started to decline with the invention of this silly little thing known as, "Sanitation".
3. Re:Sickening fraud by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 23:45 · Score: 0
  
  So you didn't read Dr Hadwen's talks. Why am I not surprised?
4. Re:Sickening fraud by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-22 04:20 · Score: 0
  
  Interesting talks, thanks for sharing it. The origin of vaccination appears to have been one of fraud and superstition. Still, this does not prove it does not work.
  How do you account for the recent drops in reported cases of measles, mumps, and rubella since the 1980s? Looking at the literature it is definitely full of the correlation not causation type of argument. However, the correlation is convincing in the absence of some other explanation.
Why 700m Euros ? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 21:32 · Score: 0

It would be nice, if someone that works in the medical industry, could elaborate on exactly why, conducting studies in mice seems to be dirt cheap, but, testing the same drug in humans somehow costs $700m euros ?
While not being entirely ignorant, I mean really, come on, with mice, you have to feed them, house them, clean their cages, force feed them the medication,, etc. Humans on the other hand, will drive themselves to your location, and swallow whatever pill you hand them, shake your hand and leave. ( Yes, I know, I am simplifying.)
But seriously, wtf ? Why $700m euros, and why can't this process be streamlined ?
1. Re:Why 700m Euros ? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 23:33 · Score: 0
  
  Most of that cost is paid in legal fees to go through government, which is good at holding peoples' lives ransom for money.
  If the vaccine works for 99.9% of people but 0.1% of people who take it have an adverse reaction, the vaccine will not be approved.
  Human society is not good at making small sacrifices for enormous gain, but it is very good at forcing enormous sacrifices to reduce gain if that's what it takes to achieve "equality," "economic justice," or "social justice."
  Basically, government believes in bringing everyone down to the same level, rather than allowing a tent pole to raise the entire tent, when some of it gets raised more than the rest.
  So, this vaccine will likely be held hostage my government, because someone might profit from having developed it. They'd rather millions die than someone make a decent living helping people get better.
Re:Already have a preventative measure: by Fjandr · 2013-10-21 22:23 · Score: 1

You're confusing Type 1 diabetes with Type 2 diabetes.
animal testing? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 22:30 · Score: 0

just use illegal immigrants!
Good research by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 22:33 · Score: 0

If they can make it , it will be wonderfull . Good luck.
Re:Not much info -- check BBC/ProMed by TheRealHocusLocus · 2013-10-21 22:59 · Score: 3, Informative

Best media reporting
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7926026.stm
Most notable analysis (scroll to bottom, in square brackets)
http://www.promedmail.org/direct.php?id=20090308.0959
The ProMed moderator links to related background research, points out that there are 5 specie of Enterovirus distinct enough that one vaccine could not fit all, it is 'premature' to announce it this way until the particular agent and mechanism is identified.
So by all means forge ahead, but be prudently wary of anyone who implies this is in the final stage where a vaccine is just around the corner.
---
If we were to fund LFTR research with the same dedication and fervor that we funded the polio vaccine, America could be energy-independent within 30 years, forever. Off-topic, pretend it's my sig.

--
<blink>down the rabbit hole</blink>
Long-term far away possible vaccine versus cure by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 23:03 · Score: 1

The research into Coxsackie B flu virus and its link to Type 1 diabetes is at least 40 years old. (I heard about it when I was diagnosed as a "juvenile onset diabetic", now called Type 1, over 40 years ago.) None of the vaccine attempts since then have actually worked, so it continues to be fairly pointless research.
However, there *is* a vaccine based treatment of considerable interest. Dr. Faustman's lab at Mss. General Hospital found that using the BCG tuberculosis vaccine to alter the T-cell response of lab animals, intended to reduce the auto-immune problem at the core of most Type 1 diabetes and improve transplants, *cured the lab animals*. Adult stem cells transformed to insulin producing cells (beta cells). They're on their second round of human testing: I got a note recently from them to come in and get a blood test to become an experimental subject. So it seems to be going very well (http://www.faustmanlab.org/).
And the vaccine is BCG!!! It's used worldwide for tuberculosis, it's made in lots of millions worldwide, and the reason it's not simply cured Type 1's who are visiting India and get the vaccine is that it needs to be administered differently: the lab animals needed 30 days of small doses, with very tight blood sugar control. That's also why other labs had such trouble duplicating the results at first: their test animal diabetic care wasn't as rigorous. (Glucose test strips are about $1/each: this gets expensive really, really fast with a dozen lab animals, all on insulin.) Dr. Faustman's lab found this because they were *meticulous* in their animal care: a less rigorous lab would have never seen the cure.
If the tests work out, there is *no way* the pharmaceutical companies in the US can restrict its release indefinitely. People will start going to any second world or third world nation for "the cure", using locally manufactured vaccine and a 30-day treatment. A trip to India still be one heck of a lot cheaper than the diabetes supplies for my next year, and I could disguise it as an on-site visit with the outsourced engineers there!
Bollocks. :-| by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-21 23:12 · Score: 0

As a type 1 diabetic (posting AC as this is obviously horribly selfish) I don't want a vaccine. A vaccine will mean the loss of focus, (maybe stopping enitrely) of treatment vectors for current T1 diabetics.
I have struggled with blood control my entire life and have damage appearing now because of it (Neuropathy - after 25 years)
ANYTHING that could help me treat my condition would be appreciated. Anything that "gets in the way" bothers me greatly.
Obviously, if asked publicly I'd say "great stuff! I don't want children to have to go through what I have been through".....
1. Re:Bollocks. :-| by EmagGeek · 2013-10-21 23:28 · Score: 1
  
  Like most viruses, a vaccine will do you no good once you already have the disease. So, the hundreds of millions of people throughout the world who have T1D already will not go away as a market, and there will still be billions of dollars to be made treating them.
  You have nothing to worry about.
Re:Already have a preventative measure: by EmagGeek · 2013-10-21 23:35 · Score: 1

You're thinking of Type 2 diabetes, which is acquired voluntarily through poor dietary and health choices.
Type 1 diabetes is an autoimmune disease, or at least now maybe it's a viral disease, but in any case, it's not acquired by behavioral choice, and it can happen to just about anyone.
I know lots of skinny people who have it.
Funding is never going to happen... by WillyWanker · 2013-10-22 00:32 · Score: 1

Drug and medical supply companies make far too much money from diabetes. There is no way in hell they're ever going to allow researchers to cure it.
Name the cure after Wilfred Brimley by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-22 00:59 · Score: 0

Name the cure after Wilfred Brimley and you could have a kickstarter launched and finished in 24 hours!
Getcher cure right here! by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · 2013-10-22 01:05 · Score: 2

> "Taking the vaccine through a clinical trial would cost some 700 million euros"
This is why I am always saying the FDA and similar organizations kill more than they save, by several orders of magnitude. All it takes is delaying introduction of one big cure by a few years and you've cost more lives than are lost because bad drugs get introduced too soon.
There were no mass epidemics from snake oil. Just watch "new" drugs carefully and stop as necessary.
It's a political issue, though, and a few hundred ill people before the camera is fodder for politicians to seize power with. Meanwhile nobody points out continued deaths for ancient diseases are far and away the bigger mass murderer than pharmacological companies-qua-snake oil salesmen.

--
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
1. Re:Getcher cure right here! by geekoid · 2013-10-22 02:59 · Score: 1
  
  "There were no mass epidemics from snake oil."
  yes, there was and still is.
  You know what? I"m not going to get into it. Yu are clearly ignorant of the FDA and it's history, you have no clarity way from you narrative to actually look at facts.
  Ignorant SOB
  
  --
  The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
2. Re:Getcher cure right here! by Nemyst · 2013-10-22 04:17 · Score: 1
  
  "There were no mass epidemics from snake oil."
  
  That couldn't possibly be because the FDA has been doing its job, right? No way!
The ONLY cause? by Gothmolly · 2013-10-22 01:16 · Score: 0

"A team working at Tampere University, Finland has discovered the virus that causes type 1 diabetes."
So everyone with Type1 diabetes has the virus? Not because they're corn-syrup guzzling fatties?

--
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
1. Re:The ONLY cause? by geekoid · 2013-10-22 03:00 · Score: 1
  
  Correct.
  You might want to read up on diabetes a little more, cause you aren't saying what you think you are saying.
  
  --
  The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
2. Re:The ONLY cause? by Shados · 2013-10-22 03:22 · Score: 1
  
  It's type 2 (Resistance to insulin) that is frequently caused by bad eating habits, not type 1...
700,000,000 euros for a study? by n2hightech · 2013-10-22 02:13 · Score: 1

The rate of type 1 is 0.4% so to get 100 cases they would need to study 25,000 people double that for a control group. The disease is most often discovered in children so they would need to be followed for say 15 years. So 700,000,000 / 50,000 / 15 = 933 euros per person per year for the study. That still sounds like a lot. Each participant would need a checkup once a year to see if they have developed the disease or got anything else that might show up in abnormal levels after the vaccine. Considering the socialized medicine in Europe the cost of checkups is already covered most of the study cost would be collecting and evaluating data.
1. Re:700,000,000 euros for a study? by geekoid · 2013-10-22 03:02 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, and that isn't a lot fr a study that large.
  Yes, complex shit that needs a detail monitoring over a long time is expensive.
  
  --
  The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
Re:Not much info -- check BBC/ProMed by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-22 02:15 · Score: 0

The link isn't that strong anyway, even if you combine the different strains of virii. We are talking about stuff like 6% of normals had a virus while 12% of diabetics did. They compared a bunch of things so some are going to give spurious correlations by chance. That said there are some clues they may be on to something since alot of the correlations were focused on similar virii.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23974921
This article seems to be more blustering for funding BS by medical researchers trying to get people's hope up for money. Kind of disgusting behaviour to act so overconfident if you think about it.
If you or someone you know sufferes by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-22 03:45 · Score: 0

If you or someone you know sufferes from diabetes then visit diabetes.vitalityempowered.com
Human Trial costs by Virtucon · 2013-10-22 04:47 · Score: 1

Find some death row or life without parole inmates and let them be guinea pigs to test the vaccine. I'm sure you'd have volunteers.

--
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
Please don't rely on these comments... by gosand · 2013-10-22 05:00 · Score: 1

especially when your life and health is at stake. And don't necessarily listen to those that simply subscribe to "traditional wisdom" because it could very well be wrong.
Read "Why We Get Fat" by Gary Taubes (or the work it is based on, Good Calories Bad Calories)
Watch this video by Dr Peter Attia: The limits of scientific evidence and the ethics of dietary guidelines -- 60 years of ambiguity
Read the Primal Blueprint by Mark Sisson
I cut out grains, sugar, and most carbs from my diet a year ago and couldn't be happier or healthier now. Don't do it just as a way to lose weight, learn WHY it is healthier and part of our genetic makeup.

--

My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
1. Re:Please don't rely on these comments... by I'm+New+Around+Here · 2013-10-22 07:49 · Score: 1
  
  I cut out grains, sugar, and most carbs from my diet a year ago and couldn't be happier or healthier now. Don't do it just as a way to lose weight, learn WHY it is healthier and part of our genetic makeup.
  When you say "most carbs", do you still have whole fruits and vegetables? Either raw, cooked, or preserved? What is a typical dinner meal for you?
  
  --
  If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
2. Re:Please don't rely on these comments... by gosand · 2013-10-22 13:00 · Score: 1
  
  Pretty much all starchy carbs (like potatoes) and of course anything grain-based (bread, flour, rice, etc). I'll eat sweet potatoes on occasion (boiled, then mashed up with butter, some heavy cream, salt, pepper), kale, spinach... pretty much any leafy greens are good. Fruits on occasion, I do like apples, try not to eat too many bananas, no grapes or other really sugary fruits. Berries are good. Fruit is really only an occasional thing. Eggs are a staple. Many people avoid dairy, but I like cheese. No milk, but I do use butter and heavy cream. Only good oils, like cocoinut and olive oils. Oh, and butter. Tree nuts are good (but not peanuts). No beans. Tonight I had a big cheeseburger using lettuce leaves as a bun and some pickles. I do also like dark chocolate, 70% cacao or above.
  
  --
  
  My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
Already being done for less in the US by wcrowe · 2013-10-22 08:02 · Score: 1

The Faustman Lab at Mass General has already been going down this road for years, and are ready for a phase II trial now -- but they only need to raise $16 million more. Just sayin', if anyone is thinking about donating, the Faustman Lab seems further along.

--
Proverbs 21:19
Great! by Jmc23 · 2013-10-22 08:51 · Score: 1

Another way for humans to abdicate responsibility for their health!

--
Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
My name is Anthony Guy from Trinidad & Tobago by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-22 13:01 · Score: 0

I am not surprise that the estimated cost is 700e. If it was US$5.00 to develop, pharmaceutical companies won't be interested because there is no money to charge.
Statistics seem to be off by backslashdot · 2013-10-22 22:37 · Score: 1

If this is the sole and leading cause of diabetes, why is it that type I nearly always occurs in childhood or, rarely, in adults? If it's solely virus mediated we would see a more even distribution of type I diabetes.
I'm not ruling it out, but other things have to be at play here.
1. Re:Statistics seem to be off by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-23 19:44 · Score: 0
  
  If this is the sole and leading cause of diabetes, why is it that type I nearly always occurs in childhood or, rarely, in adults? If it's solely virus mediated we would see a more even distribution of type I diabetes.
  I'm not ruling it out, but other things have to be at play here.
  It's probably because some people have the genes expressed that allow them to produce the antibodies necessary to fight it off and some don't.
Polio not eradicated yet ... by RockDoctor · 2013-10-27 16:17 · Score: 1

A similar enterovirus causes polio, which has been almost eradicated in many parts of the world thanks to vaccination programmes.
The weasel word "almost" is in there, but even so that is, unfortunately, nowhere near correct. There is an attempt at eradicating the virus, but it's being stalled in at least three places (up from two a few months ago) : NW Pakistan (where the local leaders are forbidding the vaccination efforts and trying to kill the vaccinators ; this has been going on for a couple of years) ; Northern Nigeria (where Boko Haram are doing much the same, and for a similar period) ; and most recently there have been dozens of cases reported in refugee camps in and around Syria.
On the upside, India haven't reported any cases for some time.

--
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
1973 by GlucoPilot · 2013-11-01 10:36 · Score: 1

Hasn't this been known since the 70s? Here's 1973. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1587352/

--
http://hanselman.com