Science Ain't So Bad » Diabetes

A Cure For Type 1 Diabetes?

MISTER Science Ain't So Bad — Tue, 11 May 2010 13:34:21 +0000

Vanquished!

Diabetes: cure.

INSULIN PRODUCING BETA CELLS PROTECTED IN FOUR YEAR STUDY

Let’s see what’s new.

Ah. Here’s a study from the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation about a cure for diabetes.

Now I KNOW I’m dreaming!

A new drug, otelixizumab, is in phase III trials. (Phase III trials are the randomized, controlled, multicenter trials where you figure out if the drug really works).

Forty eight months into the study, the insulin making cells of the eighty “type 1″ patients in the study are still OK.

How’re you doin’? Hair standing up on the back of yer neck? Hands shakin’? If not you don’t get it. This is an atomic bomb! This is a breakthrough of a breakthrough! This is.. well… ScienceAintSoBadRating = 10.

MISTERScienceAintSoBad SHOULD know better than to give away 10′s like this. Something this important’s gotta be tested on more than 80 patients. Maybe the head’ll fall off of the 81st one (considered a setback). But DAMN this is neat!

Maybe there IS something to all this science stuff!

An Artificial Pancreas For Diabetes: Still In The Works

MISTER Science Ain't So Bad — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 20:44:40 +0000

THAT'S one. (A pancreas.)

image from Creative Commons

Medicine: Type 1 Diabetes.

An artificial pancreas really is just over SOME horizon now. An announcement from Cambridge (article in the Lancet) describes the fine work of Dr Roman Hovorka at the University of Cambridge, working with a group of seventeen diabetic kids.

A cure for diabetes would be nice, of course. And there are some intriguing hints but, for now, an artificial pancreas would be stunning enough.

If it works out (and if it is widely accepted), this development has the potential to greatly reduce the complications of the disease, ease peoples’ lives, and reduce health care costs significantly (Wouldn’t THAT be nice?).

Back to which horizon this is over.

It’s hard for MISTER ScienceAintSoBad to say this but, once again, this is only a tantalizing possibility of something that is badly needed. We ARE a lot closer, thanks to the great work being done. Maybe as little are three, four or five years.

Karen Addington (Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation) says this is a “proof of principle” and that we “need to redouble our efforts.”

I’m not sure that’s what we want to hear. But reality IS so darn real, isn’t it?

ScienceAintSoBadRating = 9

- – - – - – - – - Postscript – - – - – - – - –

Karen Addington was nice enough (and ubiquitous enough) to leave a comment which I am duplicating below since it addresses the question of when this device might really hit the road. Notice that her motivation is personal.

Her comment:

Thanks for picking up on this new research.

We know that developments like the artificial pancrease can’t come quickly enough for people living with type 1 diabetes, and their families. That’s why we’re working really hard to make sure that the artificial pancreas becomes a reality as soon as possible. In January my colleagues at JDRF International (based in the USA) announced a partnership with Animas (a Johnson & Johnson company that manufactures pumps) to develop a first generation artificial pancreas.

The goal is to develop a system that can prevent the extremes of both hypoglycaemia and hyperglycaemia automatically – but will still need some input from the wearer, such as informing the system of meal times and periods of exercise.

This partnership is planned for four years and by the end we hope to reach the point where it will ready to go forward for approval by regulatory bodies like the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMEA), and from there to people with type 1.

I have had type 1 diabetes for 30 years, and I’m really excited about what this research could soon mean for me, and everyone else with type 1.

Maybe Salt’s OK For You

MISTER Science Ain't So Bad — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 20:50:44 +0000

EVIL

Cardiology: Seasoning.

Well.

Here’s the thing. About 25% of you are “salt sensitive”. Which means, if you eat too much salt, you could be at risk for high blood pressure (like you always heard), as well as heart failure, kidney disease, diabetes, cataracts, strokes.. on and on.

As if you didn’t have enough to worry about.

How can you tell if you’re salt sensitive?

Not that easy. A clue: low birth weight kids are prone to it.

If you’re in that group (salt sensitive, that is), you really SHOULD steer clear. Keep it off the table and out of reach. Learn other ways to enjoy food.

Or try exercise.

I’m sure you remember from your running days that you can get sick if you don’t have ENOUGH salt. Good hard exercise (done often enough) chews up the salt and may very well ALLOW you to indulge a bit.

Not such a terrible compromise, is it?

SALT AND HIGH BLOOD PRESSURE

I knew you would ask.

See, keeping extra salt out of your diet is such a standard part of government guidelines, that it is now the orthodoxy. EVERYBODY knows it’s true.

“But,” you may ask, “if one in four of us is salt sensitive, don’t we bias the results of the studies that all this stuff is based on?”

You would think.

What about those of us who aren’t sensitive – the majority?

Dr. Richard Fogoros, from the University of Pittsburgh, talks about the “Salt Wars” and concludes, conservatively, that you should “sell your salt shaker”.

Just in case.

MISTER ScienceAintSoBad, doesn’t want to lead you astray, but, given that most of us AREN’T salt sensitive, maybe a little common sense, based on your own medical history, your known inherited risk factors, and the advice of your Doc might give you license to “shake it”.

Just a little.

Anyway, all this stuff is a reminder that science is great ‘n all. But it doesn’t always lead us to clear answers.

The salt and pepper shaker image is from:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/eraphernalia_vintage/ / CC BY-SA 2.0

Diabetes: Lenses To Measure Blood Sugar?

MISTER Science Ain't So Bad — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 21:01:17 +0000

Easier?

Medicine: Color changing lenses for diabetes.

Back to diabetes.

The primary way that diabetics check their blood sugar level (other than passing out, of course) is by analyzing a little blood. They say you get good at it.

So this new thingee from Jin Zhang at the University of Ontario should be very welcome, right? Contact lenses that change color, depending on your sugar level.

Elegant, easy, and convenient.

Have you ever TRIED to poke a lens into your eye? It isn’t the most natural thing in the world. My optometrist claims it’s cause I’m the wrong sex. Women, supposedly, have a contact lens gene. Or, anyway, are more used to screwing around with their eyes.

But for those who find lenses convenient or who already DO wear them, this may be a very appealing idea.

It’s not like I’m running out of 10′s or anything.

ScienceAintsoBadRating = 10

Pancreatic Cancer And Libraries and Whatnot

MISTER Science Ain't So Bad — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 04:32:00 +0000

photo courtesy of Creative Commons

http://www.flickr.com/photos/timetrax/ / CC BY-SA 2.0

LibaryScience:The Future Of Libaries

Books are being digitized.

Google’s taking the lead.

Having already digitized several million books, Google hopes to become a digital “Library of Alexandria”, a modest claim since the collection of the ancient Greeks was nothing compared to what has already been digitized by the big G.

But, in its day, the Library of Alexandria, with its 700,000 volumes of manuscripts, was the best library anywhere.

This seems to be Google’s hope too.

700,000 volumes is just spit in the ocean, these days. According to the Trivia Library, 277 of our books were written by a single person – Alexandre Duma pere (remember The Three Musketeers?) and that was before we had word processors. Two more writers, Mary Faulkner and Lauran Payne, have written a combined total of over 1650 books. If there’s a lost art, it isn’t the art of writing books.

Amazon presently sells more than 14 million different titles.

Google wants ‘em all.

The specific agreement with the Authors Guild covering Google’s right to capture and distribute a wide variety of books including those that are out-of-print isn’t screwed down yet. There’s more suing and defending to be done.

But with, maybe, some modifications, Google is likely to prevail.

I assume that old-fashioned books will continue to be bought and sold for many years. Some say that digitization will even be good for the trade.

But what about libraries? How will such easy online access to books affect the repositories of printed material? What form will libraries take in the future? Will they disappear? Will they adapt? And what adaptations would make sense?

This year, there’s lots of talk about electronic books. But until recently, the idea was mostly dismissed as silly. Nothing could replace the experience of the printed page and no electronic device was gonna change that.

I don’t know what got into the book traditionalists. Was it Google? Was it Amazon’s Kindle or Sony’s Reader? Or does it just take time for a new reality to sink in? But the inevitability of e-books isn’t far fetched anymore.

Whether books will endure or not, Googleizing them WILL turn your browser into a library and may EVENTUALLY undermine the old public libraries. And, meanwhile, the stubborn defenders of books have mutated into the stubborn defenders of the buildings that hold them.

Suddenly, libaries are wonderful places. Romantic. We’ve always loved them. With dusty printed matter out of the way, they would be good places to come to for community gatherings and ideal places to digitally look at books. Maybe they could be art centers.

I dunno. It doesn’t work for me.

I’m thinking an old library would be a great place for a gas station.

GlaucomaResearch:DISOVERY POINTS TO LOWER EYE PRESSURES

If the fluid pressure in your eye gets too high, it can harm the optic nerve and hurt your vision or cause blindness. The primary way Glaucoma is treated involves the drainage of this fluid – usually with drops, sometimes with surgery. But this development describes a whole new system of drainage.

Totally unknown till now.

A system for circulation of lymph in the eye just like in other parts of the body.

Cool.

Glaucoma’s complicated. And intraoccular pressure isn’t always behind the degeneration of nerves (neuropathy). But getting the pressure down IS the focus of most therapy so this development is, potentially, a big deal.

Nice study. Nice conclusion.

ScienceAintSoBadRating = 10

HearingResearch:FOLATES COULD SAVE HEARING

Hearing loss is one of my favorite topics. Wearing hearing aids’ll do that.

The authors of this study, Josef Shargorodsky, Gary Curhan; Sharon, Curhan and Ronald Eavey, found that the much touted anti-oxidants don’t do a dang thing for hearing loss. Folates, on the other hand, seem to be truly effective, reducing the risk of hearing loss by 20% which, from a public health standpoint, is big.

Folates? They’re all over the place. Spinach, lettuce, turnips, beans, peas.

Fresh salad with your meals may be all it takes.

And, while we’re on the subject (of hearing loss), a group from the Scripps Research Institute is onto something too. They’ve discovered a gene which is related specifically to “age related hearing loss”. Since that’s the type of hearing loss that’s most prevalent, could be a good thing. LOTS of work to be done yet.

ScienceAintSoBadRating = 7

CancerRearch:EARLY DETECTION OF PANCREATIC CANCER

The five year survival rate for pancreatic cancer is less than 5%. Dismal. This is primarily because most cancers of the pancreas aren’t caught until they’re quite advanced.

In fact there may be some early warning signs such as suddenly getting diabetes or persistently itchy feet. But wouldn’t it be great if there were a really reliable detection system?

Work in this area is intense. This, this, this, and this give some indication of the newest stuff.

Maybe one of these hopeful ideas will lead to real progress in catching cancer of the pancreas early. If ScienceAintSoBad had fingers, they would be crossed.

ScienceAintSoBadRating = 6/10 (6 because it’s too early to know, 10 because of the importance. Make that an 11.)

Flight Data Recorders. A Radical Solution

MISTER Science Ain't So Bad — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 23:46:00 +0000

EngineeringDesign: AIR FRANCE FLIGHT 447

Frustrating.

The Flight Data Recorders of Flight 447 are in the ocean. When the batteries for its “pingers” run down, that it.

Gone.

I suggested, last time, that the data in those “Black Boxes” could have been broadcast or “streamed” to a receiving station (perhaps via satellite) for later use. My very knowledgeable nephew, Sean, questions the practicality of such a scheme. He doesn’t think “the bandwidth is there” But the Managing Director of the NSTSB seems to think something like that may be technically/scientifically possible.

If the “Black Box data” for the Air France flight could have been thus transmitted and stored, how would things be different now?

We would certainly know more. In fact, we might well have had enough information to begin reconstructing the accident without having to wait for recovery operations. Even more important, we might have captured the last known GPS coordinates of the airplane.

Had it come down in one piece, we would know where to go. Exactly where.

The Air France accident was probably unsurvivable. But, in some wrecks, knowing an exact location immediately could make a big difference.

I have not been able to get an “on the record” response from the Airline Pilots Association.

Not that I blame them. Science Ain’t So Bad isn’t NBC. But I continue to wonder if pilots are ready to allow in-flight data (and, maybe, voice communications) to escape the confines of the cockpit with all the implications for later scrutiny and second guessing.

What about airlines? How do they feel about a huge cache of discoverable records just waiting for the lawyers to find them on “discovery”?

Practical concerns vs safety. Technical achievement vs cost.

For now, the Black Boxes remain.

EarthquakeRescue: Sonic Beacon

See if you can recognize the very famous actor in this video which shows my team’s approach to the problems of earthquake survival.

Deafness & Hearing Loss: A REMARKABLE INFORMATION SOURCE

This week, I discovered a free, weekly newsletter which is focussed on hearing loss and deafness. Edited by Larry Sivertson, it is carefully crafted, with a great mix of science and practical information. It’s called HOH-LD News. If you’re interested, send an email. HOH-LD-News-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Diabetes: TYPE 1. A CURIOUS DISCOVERY OF SOME REAL IMPORTANCE

This may be a comfort for people with Type 1 diabetes (recently discussed here). Vitamin C. Doggone!

And I’m not neglecting Type 2.

Coming

Stroke: DETECTING STROKE BEFORE IT HAPPENS

I’ve been having discussions with Dr. Michael Bodo about some intriguing work he’s doing that has implications for brain health. Maybe early detection/prevention of stroke.

Coming.

Update: Diabetes

MISTER Science Ain't So Bad — Fri, 29 May 2009 01:36:00 +0000

A quick update.

I just heard from Dr. Von Herrath (La Jolla Institute for Allergy and Immunology) who’s research I describe in the last post. As you can imagine, there’s a LOT of interest in his timeline and knowing when the human studies start.

Dr. Von Herrath says that they’re “actively pursuing combination therapies in recent – onset diabetes with Genentech and Bayhill Therapuetics”. They’re not ready to announce human trials yet but he hopes it’ll be soon.

Indeed, so do we.