×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Injectable Nanoparticles Maintain Normal Blood-sugar Levels For Up To 10 Days

samzenpus posted about a year ago | from the shooting-your-meds dept.

Medicine 121

cylonlover writes "Aside from the inconvenience of injecting insulin multiple times a day, type 1 diabetics also face health risks if the dosage level isn't accurate. A new approach developed by U.S. researchers has the potential to overcome both of these problems. The method relies on a network of nanoscale particles that, once injected into the body, can maintain normal blood sugar levels for more than a week by releasing insulin when blood-sugar levels rise."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

121 comments

and if the GOP gets there way any one on this (-1, Troll)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | about a year ago | (#43641499)

and if the GOP gets there way any one on this will be put on the preexisting condition black list.

Re:and if the GOP gets there way any one on this (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43641623)

The GOP? Heh...typical Yellow Dog Democrat/Liberal. The GOP is Democrat Light these days. But...do keep on believing what you feel to be the case. After all, it's what the Leaders told you was the case, so it's got to be true...

Re:and if the GOP gets there way any one on this (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43641729)

But...do keep on believing what you feel to be the case.

What, all the tea partiers screaming about how they shouldn't have to pay for sick people are democrats now?

Damn, and I thought the progressives were hard to nail down what with their platform being "anything but what we've got now".

Re:and if the GOP gets there way any one on this (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43643275)

He heard it on the Internet, it has to be true.

Re:and if the GOP gets there way any one on this (3, Informative)

Trepidity (597) | about a year ago | (#43641625)

Assuming the GOP doesn't manage to repeal Obamacare (which it doesn't seem likely they'll be able to), preexisting conditions will no longer be excludable [wikipedia.org] starting 8 months from now.

Re:and if the GOP gets there way any one on this (2)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about a year ago | (#43641759)

Even if they managed to, it'd probably come down to the demographics:

All but the frothiest ideologues know that fucking with old people(whose voter turnout rates are consistently excellent, and who tend to be closer to where the GOP is most comfortable on a variety of issues) is a bad plan. Unless it's to further expand it(with some serious sweetheart deals for team pharma) as with Medicare Part D, 'keep your government hands off my medicare!' is standard procedure. Indeed, one of the major attack lines against Obama's implementation of Romneycare was that it was going to mess with your medicare and send granny off to the death panels.

Re:and if the GOP gets there way any one on this (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43642055)

It is a good idea,

Re:and if the GOP gets there way any one on this (-1, Offtopic)

smooth wombat (796938) | about a year ago | (#43642071)

It may not be the GOP (though I hope they succeed) but rather the Democrats hubris which might be the undoing.

As the Constitution states, all bills of revenue must originate in the House of Representatives. As Justice Roberts used his judicial activism to declare the bill a tax, it is thus a revenue.

Only problem is this bill originated in the Senate. Therefore, adhering to the Constitution, this bill is in violation and should be struck down on this point alone.

Then there's the whole 9th Amendment issue of privacy, but as the GOP doesn't believe in one's right to privacy they won't use raise that issue.

Re:and if the GOP gets there way any one on this (1)

Trepidity (597) | about a year ago | (#43642359)

I think it's pretty unlikely that, having had one go at it, the Supreme Court is going to take another look at the Constitutionality of the law overall, especially once it starts being implemented. They had their shot and made a 5-4 decision, and unless someone flips, that will probably stick.

I could see more specific parts being litigated though, e.g. there's currently some kind of controversy over the scope of what federal exchanges can do, which are supposed to be available to people in states where the states themselves have chosen not to set up state exchanges.

Re:and if the GOP gets there way any one on this (2)

Bartles (1198017) | about a year ago | (#43642991)

Actually, things have been warped and twisted enough, that a bill can be considered to originate in the house, if the senate takes a random bill, strips all the language out of it and inserts new language without changing the title. As long as a bill has been passed by the house with that title, it is considered to have originated in the house. I believe that's what happened with the healthcare act.

Re:and if the GOP gets there way any one on this (1)

operagost (62405) | about a year ago | (#43645587)

Essentially, you're right, which is why all that had to be done back in the House was to pass a "harmonizing" bill (because the bill still needs to pass in both houses).

Thanks for the link (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43647883)

I was wondering when Universal Care would kick in and what its requirements were.

I am gonna reply AC so I can still come back and bump you up one if I get any mod points.

http://www.linuxadvocates.com/p/support.html (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43641505)

Dear Linux Advocate,

Money doesn't grow on trees. And, Linux Advocates is growing. Naturally, we anticipate operating costs and hope to be able to meet them.

But, any amount you feel you are able to donate in support of our ongoing work will be most surely appreciated and put to very good use. Your contributions keep Linux Advocates growing.

Show your support by making a donation today.

Thank you.

Dieter T. Schmitz
Linux Advocates, Owner

http://www.linuxadvocates.com/p/support.html [linuxadvocates.com]

Attention Linux Advocate (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43641567)

I have just poured hot grits down my pants.

Thank you!

Preemptively Posting (2, Insightful)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#43641569)

Preemptively posting, because you know there's gonna be some idiot talking about fat people, and who doesn't understand the difference between type 1 and type 2 diabetes.

Re:Preemptively Posting (4, Insightful)

Artifakt (700173) | about a year ago | (#43641607)

As a type 2 diabetic (male) who stands 6' 1" and weighs 180 lbs, I'm not sure you understand it either.

Re:Preemptively Posting (1)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about a year ago | (#43641783)

I have type 3 diabetes you insensitive clods!

Re:Preemptively Posting (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43642259)

Funny, a friend of mine jokingly calls his form of diabetes type 3... He took some shrapnel in Afghanistan that pretty much fried his pancreas. So good shape, but requires an insulin pump for the rest of his life.

Re:Preemptively Posting (1)

ImprovOmega (744717) | about a year ago | (#43645141)

It's effectively the same as type 1 diabetes in that the insulin producing cells are destroyed. There are probably other complications with your friend though as the pancreas produces a host of other enzymes that are needed for proper body function. I guess theoretically if they ever master islet transplants your friend could get off the pump though since true type 1 results from autoimmune destruction of beta type islets of Langerhans [wikipedia.org]

Re:Preemptively Posting (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43641785)

Sssh, you'll hurt his protestant pathetic world view where if something happens to you, you deserved it.

Re:Preemptively Posting (4, Interesting)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#43641869)

Sorry, no offense. Yes, I'm aware that weight is far from the only factor affecting type 2 diabetes. I have several relatives w/ type 2 that were able to reduce their medication dependence by losing weight (they were overweight to begin with), though of course it doesn't cure it.

I made my OP only because whenever health care is discussed (especially these days) there are sanctimonious assholes who attribute all health problems to people's poor habits, and think universal health care (if we ever get it) will pick their virtuous pockets to pay for other people's lack of virtue.

Re:Preemptively Posting (2)

HereIAmJH (1319621) | about a year ago | (#43642103)

I have several relatives w/ type 2 that were able to reduce their medication dependence by losing weight (they were overweight to begin with), though of course it doesn't cure it.

Then there are those of us who managed a normal weight through diet and exercise until diagnosed Type-2 and put on medication.

Re:Preemptively Posting (1)

operagost (62405) | about a year ago | (#43645483)

Mostly, I think universal health care will steal my freedom to give it to government. That's a far greater concern to me than pontificating on other people's health issues. FWIW, it seems to be the Europeans in socialized medicine countries who really like to pick on the "fatties" who, in their opinion, only exist in the USA.

Re:Preemptively Posting (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43647255)

One condition that often shows up with diabetes is hypothyroidism. One of the better known symptoms of hypothyroidism is weight gain. I am party to some data that strongly hints at the thyroid tests having yet another failure mode that isn't yet acknowledged.

Re:Preemptively Posting (1)

mattack2 (1165421) | about a year ago | (#43647863)

...it will pick my virtuous pockets to pay for *anything*, and that makes it bad. But yes, I am complicit, since I voted for him, twice.. (or arguably voted against Romney, even though I agree with him on some issues.. yet he chickened out and withdrew his 47% comments).

Re:Preemptively Posting (4, Informative)

reebmmm (939463) | about a year ago | (#43642039)

As a T1D, I'll note that the GP didn't really comment on what it means to be a T2D. The characterization, however, is mostly true for an overwhelming majority of t2d, but completely false for t1d. T2D is controllable with diet and exercise alone in something like 80-90% of the T2D population. Weight and lifestyle factors make up an overwhelming percentage of the risk factors. And while there is clearly a genetic (usually associated with the likelihood that weight/lifestyle will give way to t2d, not that the genetics alone cause t2d) and medical condition component too, this is the clear minority.

Re:Preemptively Posting (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#43644031)

Thank you for reading my post carefully. I made a post relating to political/social issues of universal health care, and inadvertently implied that type 2 is necessarily caused by being overweight. I apologized and clarified what I meant, but am not sure what else I have to do to atone for what was merely a clumsy attempt at making a point.

Re:Preemptively Posting (3, Interesting)

mpe (36238) | about a year ago | (#43644565)

As a T1D, I'll note that the GP didn't really comment on what it means to be a T2D. The characterization, however, is mostly true for an overwhelming majority of t2d, but completely false for t1d. T2D is controllable with diet and exercise alone in something like 80-90% of the T2D population. Weight and lifestyle factors make up an overwhelming percentage of the risk factors. And while there is clearly a genetic (usually associated with the likelihood that weight/lifestyle will give way to t2d, not that the genetics alone cause t2d) and medical condition component too, this is the clear minority.

Diabetes is more of a "syndrome" than a "disease". Even divided into groups of T1 (typically no insulin produced in the body), T2 (insulin resistant), T1.5 (LADA), MODY, T3 ("Double Diabetes") & "Gestational Diabetes".
Insulin resistance tends to promote conversion of glucose into fat since it reduces the amount the body can use for anything else. Obesity also tends to increase insulin resistance. Leading to a positive feedback loop. To make matters worst hyperglycemia is toxic to cells, including those which produce insulin.
An important factor is that in the last 30 or so years dietary advice has been to eat lots of carbohydrates. (In some cases up to 70%.) With the result that both obesity and T2 diabetes has dramatically increased. Something previously unheard of called "diabulimia" has appeared amongst T1 diabetics (mostly young women.) But the idea that "Low fat, low calorie, high carbohydrate" might not be the best (let alone the worst) kind of diet for humans tends to result in the classic "heritic treatment". The biggest irony being that humans (possibly all mammals) do not actually need to eat any carbohydrates in the first place. Are there many high carbohydrate (especially high starch) foods which are not the product of agriculture?

Re:Preemptively Posting (2)

Rich0 (548339) | about a year ago | (#43645625)

Are there many high carbohydrate (especially high starch) foods which are not the product of agriculture?

Well, fruit probably qualifies, though obviously an orange isn't as carb-rich as a potato. Potatoes might also be eaten by hunter-gatherers, but I'm not sure how often that happened. I'm not sure if there was much rice-consumption in pre-agriculture Asia.

But yes, in general an evolutionary diet is likely fairly low in carbohydrate content compared to a modern diet.

I'm using "agriculture" above in the sense of farming - planting lots of something and then digging it up. If you define "agriculture" as anything that comes out of the dirt then half the animals on the planet consume agricultural products. So, a caveman grabbing a pear off of a tree is hunter-gathering unless he planted the tree with the intent to have pears.

Re:Preemptively Posting (1)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about a year ago | (#43642311)

We want developments as quockly as possible, as that is the most important factor in saving lives, not handing it out for free.

That means research, government funded or private funded. We should be proud the US, "only 6% of the world's population, using 25% of it's energy" invents 50% of everything invented every year.

Other nations should be more like us, not the other way around. If, and it's a big if, what you care about is saving lives.

Re:Preemptively Posting (1)

ArsonSmith (13997) | about a year ago | (#43642661)

Your type-o is interesting because I first read it as quackly as in we want to take every quack doctors suggestion as a cure for what ever he says it is. In the context of your request, quickly and quackly are very likely the same thing.

Re:Preemptively Posting (1)

Minwee (522556) | about a year ago | (#43642853)

We should be proud the US, "only 6% of the world's population, using 25% of it's energy" invents 50% of everything invented every year.

Indeed. And brave Americans like John Steele [forbes.com] are at the forefront of protecting that 50% from the world's other 94% who want to take away.

Go USA.

Re:Preemptively Posting (1)

Dynamoo (527749) | about a year ago | (#43642869)

I can beat you on that..type 2, 6.1" and 160 lbs. That raised a few eyebrows, but it can happen to anybody it seems..

Re:Preemptively Posting (3, Informative)

Merls the Sneaky (1031058) | about a year ago | (#43643561)

I developed type 2 after contracting pancreatitis due to complications associated with surgery to remove gall stones ( actually it was a second surgery to clear remnants of grit from the passage that ends at the bottom of the stomach). At the time I was 22 years old, 90 KG (about 198 pounds) and I am five foot nine. I am overwieght now but that is down to what diabetes has done to my metabolism. People shouldn't make assumptions about someones situation. Just because they are fat doesn't mean that's what cause their type 2 diabetes.

Forgive me for the crudity of my medical terminology, I am not a medical student.

Both (2)

Frankie70 (803801) | about a year ago | (#43641823)

Type 1 cannot survive without insulin. However, a lot of type 2s also inject insulin. If you get the dosage right, injecting insulin is a much better alternative to oral Sulphonylureas for Type 2s. The main reason Sulphonylureas are preferred is because people don't like injecting stuff.

Re:Both (4, Interesting)

Andy Dodd (701) | about a year ago | (#43642061)

This advancement, if it pans out (most things don't, sadly...), it'll be great for Type Is.

Right now, it can be difficult to manage weight as a Type I - if you exercise, you must reduce your insulin dosage in advance. Otherwise, your blood sugar drops and you wind up eating to make up the calories.

While a normal person (or even a Type 2) can say "I'm gonna go for a run/long walk now because I feel like it", a Type 1's thought process, if they actually want to get benefit is, "I'm definitely going to go for a run/long walk after this meal. I will reduce my insulin dosage for this meal to compensate." Don't run after the meal? Bloodsugar goes high. Run after the meal without planning it before the meal? Bloodsugar goes low and you eat.

My initial reaction to the description of this was "oh, somewhat longer-acting Lantus", but it appears that it is actually load-reactive, sort of acting as an artificial pancreas. However, taking only one injection for a week is unlikely to work - the amount of insulin required for a week is far more than is practical for a single injection unless you're a little kid. That said, going down to 1-2 injections per day, and having that insulin react to load, is a MAJOR improvement for diabetics... Especially, as I said before, load-reactiveness.

Re:Both (5, Insightful)

overshoot (39700) | about a year ago | (#43642463)

Otherwise, your blood sugar drops and you wind up eating to make up the calories.

If you're lucky. Sometimes someone gets unlucky and goes into insulin shock. If they're lucky, someone gets some sugar into them stat.

Sometimes they're unlucky and a cop tries smacking them around for driving (or walking, or sitting) drunk. This doesn't end well.

Re:Both (1)

superflippy (442879) | about a year ago | (#43644677)

Another thing to keep in mind is that since Type 1 is genetic, you've got it from birth, which means that there are little kids who have to manage their insulin levels. A weekly treatment could be much, MUCH easier for diabetic kids & their parents to deal with, and less invasive than an insulin pump.

Re:Both (1)

kiwi_james (512638) | about a year ago | (#43646589)

Another thing to keep in mind is that since Type 1 is genetic, you've got it from birth...

Not quite true - whilst it does seem to be genetic to a large degree, having Type 1 at birth is very rare. The average age of diagnosis is 6 - 7 years old. That said, having personally managed Type 1 in a 1 year old (and ever since) - you're absolutely right that a 10 day injection and I assume reduced blood glucose monitoring in between would be a great thing.

Re:Both (1)

Rich0 (548339) | about a year ago | (#43645671)

Many of the issues with sugar management are somewhat-alleviated by a pump, which I imagine most Type 1's use these days. Continuous glucose monitors also help out. If you plan for exercise and then skip it, you just reset your basal rate to normal (instead of dropping it), or whatever (I'm not actually a diabetic - I'm sure anyone who is could tell you exactly how they handle it).

However, I'll certainly agree that this shot sounds a heck of a lot better than a pump. I wonder if it would work for insulin-dependent Type-2's? They'd probably consume quite a bit more of it.

Re:Both (1)

slash.dt (701002) | about a year ago | (#43648323)

Many of the issues with sugar management are somewhat-alleviated by a pump, which I imagine most Type 1's use these days. Continuous glucose monitors also help out. If you plan for exercise and then skip it, you just reset your basal rate to normal (instead of dropping it), or whatever (I'm not actually a diabetic - I'm sure anyone who is could tell you exactly how they handle it).

Being on the pump does make it much easier to exercise without having to plan too far in advance, and both the pump and CGM make it much easier to do long duration activities like Ultra marathons. Most people are NOT on the pump though - they are still using multiple daily injections of long acting and short acting insulin.

Nice (2)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43641689)

That is some sweet science

Tested in mice only! (5, Informative)

astaines (451138) | about a year ago | (#43641711)

This is a neat idea, but not yet remotely ready to try in people. There were quite significant local infammatory reactions (big lumps!) in some of the mice tested.
There's probably ten years of work, and well north of $150 million dollars before the first human tests.
Good luck!

Re:Tested in mice only! (2)

mpe (36238) | about a year ago | (#43642623)

This is a neat idea, but not yet remotely ready to try in people. There were quite significant local infammatory reactions (big lumps!) in some of the mice tested. There's probably ten years of work, and well north of $150 million dollars before the first human tests.

Would any sensible T1 want to try this if all it will do is get their blood glucose level below 200mg/dl? Which is still nowhere near normal (non diabetic) for either a mouse or a human.

Re:Tested in mice only! (1)

crmarvin42 (652893) | about a year ago | (#43643967)

As Astaines pointed out, this is still very early work. I'm sure that one of the goals is to get the blood glucose levels down to a more normal range. However, the fact that it appeared to control glucose at all is impressive.

Even if a diabetic is fitted with a pump (3 of my friends have them), you still get abnormal spikes and dips in your blood glucose level over time. Based on some epidemiological data (of which I'm always sceptical to be sure) it appears as though these large swings in blood glucose concentration may take years off of a diabetics life. If this technology can counter some of that, then it could very well be work it. Too early to tell.

Re:Tested in mice only! (1)

tirerim (1108567) | about a year ago | (#43647395)

Depends -- if it could be combined with traditional insulin therapy to help prevent the serious highs, it could still be pretty beneficial for overall control. I don't know if that would work or not, but it seems like a possibility, at least.

I'm also not sure what normal blood glucose levels are for mice. They refer to source that I found says that the mean level for mice is about 174 mg/DL.

It's a complete game changer (5, Interesting)

Begemot (38841) | about a year ago | (#43641757)

It doesn't only solve the two mentioned problems, it would completely change the life style!
- eat whenever you want to
- stop eating when you feel you had enough, instead of eating "enough" for the insulin you took
- no need to wake up in the night to check sugar level
- exercise whenever you want to w/o worrying that your sugar level is high enough for the effort

And that for responsible adults. Now think about diabetic kids and their parents - how much easier and comfortable their life could be... I'm not even mentioning the first period when you get diabetes - it takes months to learn balancing insulin doses, timing of injections, type and amount of food and physical exercises.

Pregnant diabetic women could be much less worried too.

This medicine can be a complete game changer. No less.

Re:It's a complete game changer (3, Insightful)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about a year ago | (#43641825)

This medicine can be a complete game changer. No less.

It's not a medicine. It's an early proof-of-concept in mice. If we managed to produce viable treatments from every mouse experiment ever done we'd all be six feet tall, weigh 150 pounds, run the mile in 4 minutes, have full heads of hair and have secondary sex characteristics that would cause members of the opposite sex (or several other odd combinations) to furiously engage in uninhibited sex.

Reality isn't quite like a Hentai movie so you can just go back downstairs for a while.

Re:It's a complete game changer (1)

timeOday (582209) | about a year ago | (#43642101)

I'm curious if this approach has any inherent advantages over implantable insulin pumps (which have been around for a few decades), and why they haven't take off wildly (for all the benefits you mention).

Re:It's a complete game changer (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43642295)

Pumps are still injections, and require the same amount of pre-planning. Sure, they can use quicker-acting insulin, but even something like 100% humalog takes well over an hour to get most of the effect.

Re:It's a complete game changer (2)

Major Blud (789630) | about a year ago | (#43642367)

I'm a Type 1 who's been wearing a pump for the past 6 years. I also have the relatively new real-time glucose monitoring attachment.

I haven't read through the fine details of the article, but if the nanoparticles are somehow able to determine when to release insulin without intervention, that would be a definite benefit over the current pump technology. As it stands right now, the real-time monitoring only tells you that your blood-sugar levels are high, and requires manual intervention to make corrections. The sensors are also wildly inaccurate, and require that the user still check their blood-sugar on a regular basis for calibration. I quit using the sensors for that reason (since I still end up checking my blood sugar 6-10 times daily anyways, there's no point).

FWIW, the pump is a huge improvement over old-school syringe injections. Having insulin delivered in small quantities throughout the day has improved my blood-sugar levels considerably. Using a pump has also made the entire process much more convenient; I don't need to cary syringes and insulin bottles with me when I go out to eat at a restaurant, and I'm less worried about blood sugar spikes while I'm sleeping.

Re:It's a complete game changer (1)

Begemot (38841) | about a year ago | (#43643391)

Thanks for the tip.

In my case, very unfortunately, medical insurances in my country (Israel) do not fund a pump because I'm relatively well balanced. Oh the irony...
It would cost me a fortune to buy and maintain one myself :( can't afford it.

Re:It's a complete game changer (1)

cbhacking (979169) | about a year ago | (#43646213)

That's actually the thing that concerns me about this treatment. A very good friend of mine with IDDM has been forced to take insane risks with her blood sugar because she didn't have a job that provided health insurance, but she worked part time at a couple jobs (this is right out of college) and thus made just enough money to not be eligible for the various aid programs. She could no longer afford the injection kits for her pump (they have to be replaced frequently) and could barely afford the insulin itself on top of her other living expenses. Diabetes is a real bitch of an expense if you don't have insurance...

Re:It's a complete game changer (1)

HAKdragon (193605) | about a year ago | (#43642449)

As a Type 1 diabetic:
I can already eat whenever I want.
I bolus my insulin for the amount of carbohydrates I'm eating, so I don't have to keep eating to compensate.
I don't need to wake up in the middle of the night to test my glucose - if I wake up in the middle of the night and feel low, I will test and have a glucose table if necessary.
I do check before I go to the gym, especially if I'm feeling low - again, I take a glucose tables or two if required.

Re:It's a complete game changer (1)

cabraverde (648652) | about a year ago | (#43644185)

Aw crap. I just wrote exactly these 4 points in reply to the GP & then saw your answer before submitting.

I would just add: I consider it to be the 'silver lining' of getting type 1 (aged 35) that I think a bit more about what I eat and whether I need to eat it. My diet was already quite good, but it's improved since.

Re:It's a complete game changer (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | about a year ago | (#43642683)

Not only that, but there's a lot of other problems with quality of life when you're a diabetic. Scott Hanselman (has a podcast, works for Microsoft) [hanselman.com] has mentioned a few times that when he travels the world he ends up eating at Subway all the time, because it's the only place you have a really good idea of how the meal is going to affect your blood sugar. Imagine going to a foreign country and not being able to eat any of the local cuisine because you don't know if it's going to send you into a coma. It's like being a vegan, except that breaking the rules means that you end up getting sick. Vegans can usually find something to eat at almost any restaurant. But for people with diabetes, it can be quite difficult to eat at a lot of restaurants, especially non-chain restaurants as they usually don't have any nutritional information (nor are they required to).

Re:It's a complete game changer (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about a year ago | (#43645069)

Imagine going to a foreign country and not being able to eat any of the local cuisine because you don't know if it's going to send you into a coma. It's like being a vegan, except that breaking the rules means that you end up getting sick. Vegans can usually find something to eat at almost any restaurant

Man, oh man. First, study up before you go somewhere, then you'll know what you can eat. Second, vegans can't eat anything in a lot of restaurants (well, not can't, won't) because of influences like fish sauce. Of course, if you just don't tell them it's in there, they'll tell you how much more delicious it is than most vegetarian food they've had... not least because fish sauce contains natural MSG

Re:It's a complete game changer (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | about a year ago | (#43645507)

What are you supposed to study up? Unless you're going to limit yourself to chain restaurants, you're probably out of luck. Most independently owned places don't even have the information you're looking for. Even chain restaurants tend to vary their menu quite a bit between different places. And I'll admit, if you don't get the count right, you probably won't die. But if you're going to be on stage in front of 1000 people, you don't want to let them down because your blood sugar is a bit off and you can't think straight. And the mention of "study up" is a bit of proof right there. Non-diabetics don't have to study up before going into a restaurant. They just walk in to any restaurant they feel like and order whatever looks good that day. Also, you mention Fish Sauce and MSG, which probably only accounts for a small percentage of restaurants out there. I was good friends with a (now reformed) vegan in university, and while the restaurant choices were somewhat limited when he wanted to eat a good vegetarian meal, he was almost always able to find something to eat no matter which restaurant we picked.

Re:It's a complete game changer (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43645339)

I've been a t1d since I was 4 years old, I am now 28. Getting t1 at such a young age, I never got used to eating the way normal people eat. I barely get hungry any more. My body rather tells me "it's time to eat something" even if I'm full from dinner or lunch. Eating random food is not a big problem either. After years of t1d I have developed a rather terrific sense of detecting how much sugar is in the food I eat. Getting t1d early sucks bigtime, and I expect to die 10-20 years earlier than I would without it, but at the same time, it is part of who I am and I don't feel like I have lost something (because I never had it)

Re:It's a complete game changer (1)

Dynamoo (527749) | about a year ago | (#43642967)

It's not going to happen overnight (assuming it works). And you can guess that it will be *expensive* to start with. But for some people the difference in quality of life will be enormous, with children in particular. But the demand for this would be huge..

Re:It's a complete game changer (1)

mpe (36238) | about a year ago | (#43643953)

It doesn't only solve the two mentioned problems, it would completely change the life style!
- eat whenever you want to
- stop eating when you feel you had enough, instead of eating "enough" for the insulin you took


No doubt there are plenty of T1s who can regulate their insulin dosage to be able to do this.

- no need to wake up in the night to check sugar level

If someone is frequently interrupting their sleep then it might be better to adjust their control methods.

- exercise whenever you want to w/o worrying that your sugar level is high enough for the effort

The only organ which really needs glucose for respiration is the brain. Muscle cells can directly use amino acids and fatty acids for respiration. Also the liver will perform both gluconeogenesis and glycogenolysis to prevent hypoglycemia. Which can in some cases result in reactive hyperglycemia.
All a reading before exercise will indicate is how much glucose is in the blood. It won't indicate how much glycogen is in the liver or the muscles to be used. How much gluconeogenesis the liver is capable of. Even which metabolic pathways the muscles might use.
Even if this were to work exactly as intended you'd still need to know when it's time for the next injection.

Pregnant diabetic women could be much less worried too.

Presumably you mean T1s diagnosed before they became pregnant. Rather than those diagnosed with "gestational diabetes".

Half the solution? (1)

RogueWarrior65 (678876) | about a year ago | (#43641945)

Kick-ass concept (I have two close relatives who are Type 1 and on insulin pumps). But this seems to be only half the solution. You still have to monitor your levels to be absolutely sure and currently this is still an invasive albeit simple process. When a non-invasive measurement method that fits in a wristwatch arrives, then it will be a lot better form of treatment. You'll probably still have to keep insulin pens around for emergencies though.

Re:Half the solution? (1)

Krater76 (810350) | about a year ago | (#43647123)

You'll probably still have to keep insulin pens around for emergencies though.

I'll assume that is a small mistake on your part. The term "insulin pen" is typically used to describe pre-mixed insulin in a pen-like device that will last for anywhere from 5-7 days worth of dosages. I think you mean "glucose pen" which is used when a diabetic goes way low. An extreme low is an immediate danger to a diabetic and can cost them the faculties (confusion, lack of body control) to even deal with the situation. While high can be an immediate danger in extreme circumstances it's much easier to manage.

Nice therapy for Type Is and Type IIs (1)

RandCraw (1047302) | about a year ago | (#43641955)

This appears to be a 'new and improved' way to dispense insulin 1) adaptively and 2) with a single dose that lasts an entire week. Type 1 diabetics will benefit most since they must take insulin already. They're likely to find this a god send.

But this technology will also appeal to Type 2s who now may be a lot more likely to take insulin rather than an insulin secretagogues drug like sulfonylureas (e.g. glipizide, glibenclamide). A significant benefit of taking insulin rather than an insulin stimulant is 1) glucose control will be much improved and 2) this will place much less strain on the pancreas thereby perhaps reducing the 'progressive' nature of diabetes, where the pancreas wears out prematurely due to increased demands placed on it.

Of course, they have yet to make it work in pimates and humans. No small hurdle.

Re:Nice therapy for Type Is and Type IIs (1)

cellocgw (617879) | about a year ago | (#43643765)

Of course, they have yet to make it work in pimates and humans. No small hurdle.

Combination of a missing letter and being in a /. frame of mind led me to wonder why a drug approved for humans wouldn't work for _pirates_. I'll go ask the FSM about this.

Another therapy (-1, Troll)

slashmydots (2189826) | about a year ago | (#43642043)

I know plenty of people with Type 1 diabetes so stop reading now if that's you :-P Otherwise, I heard of another great treatment that's super-effective. It's not injectable but it's a lot cheaper. It's called get off your ass, lose some damn weight, and stop eating high-sugar and high-calorie crap all the time. It's proven to be even more effective than injectable non-particles.

Re:Another therapy (1)

Mike Frett (2811077) | about a year ago | (#43642215)

Ignorance pops it's head up again. It's not easy in these types of Medical situations for a large person to simply lose weight. Let's take a Thyroid removal for example (which is on the rise), it's not out of the question for a Skinny person to gain 100 pounds in one week. These people can't lose weight, no matter what they do. It can be controlled, but once it's on, it's there to stay.

Telling someone to lose weight is sheer ignorance of the medical situation the person may be in.

Re:Another therapy (0)

slashmydots (2189826) | about a year ago | (#43642555)

Except that violates the laws of thermodynamics and chemistry and physics. If you take in less energy in fuel than you use during a day, your body will burn fat instead to keep you running. There are advantages and disadvantages genetically about ease of putting on or losing weight but that one rule still applies to every human on the planet. Stop lying to yourself.

Re:Another therapy (1)

TheAlgebraist (1900322) | about a year ago | (#43646873)

Obligatory car analogy:
A car gets lighter as it burns up its gas faster than you put gas in. Of course, if the gas is obstructed from going to the engine as quickly as you like, that doesn't mean you violate the laws of the thermodynamics. It means your car doesn't move as fast as it you want it to.
Maybe you have a citation showing that metabolic disorders don't exist? That there is nothing that can go wrong with someone's body that would interfere with its ability to provide the energy required to the muscles to move as requested?

Re:Another therapy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43642651)

it's not out of the question for a Skinny person to gain 100 pounds in one week

Is this really possible?
I can't imagine it would be possible to gain more than (about) 20 pounds in a week.

Re:Another therapy (1)

Artifakt (700173) | about a year ago | (#43644021)

I'm a former military officer, who once usually scored in the extended, above 300 range on the ARMY physical fitness test. My regular running partner at one point was an Olympic silver medalist before joining up. I have literally run marathons before, and once hiked 55 miles in 2 days with a 88 lb. load out in a hot desert setting. During my enlisted days, I was usually the guy doing long range recon while carrying a 30 cal machine gun and 3 belts of ammo instead of just an M-16.
        Ten years later, out of the army for a few, and my weight was up to 210 lbs. I could still bench press 250 at that time, and still put in 2 miles at the track at least once a week, but had a sedentary job. And then I suddenly started feeling weak and lethargic. It took another six months to get a diagnosis, because the first physician assumed anybody with my muscle to fat ratios couldn't possibly be a type 2. He made a note on my chart saying that had been evaluated, but he meant he'd done a mental evaluation of the odds, not actually run the tests.
          Losing 30 lbs to get off of insulin and into the range where oral meds were enough was physically the hardest single thing I have ever done. I did it by diet and exercise, and until my sugar stayed consistantly below 200, I never had a single moment free of pain. I didn't heal after exercise at anything like the normal rate, I simply hurt all over, for a week or more after each session at the track or gym. Yeah, I beat it eventually, and running 5 miles became something that left me with occasional moderate soreness and not a week of constant throbbing pain. You're absolutely right, all I had to do was get off my ass and lose some weight, at a level above training for the Boston marathon as far as personal dedication (not bragging, I didn't want to die, and the way it hit me I thought I was damn well going to. Dieting alone seemed like it would take at least six months and I wasn't sure I had six months, the way it felt. With intense exercise I made it in five weeks, but the first four were nasty).
        Mary Tyler Moore was diagnosed as a type 2, with a blood sugar level initially over 750 (which is enough to kill most people - 200 is about where symptoms usually start). Her weight at the time - 20 lbs more than she weighed when she did the MTM show. She was still dancing regularly too.

        I know plenty of people with Loud Mouthed Idiot Syndrome, so stop posting now if that's you. Go join the U. S. Army, and when you make it through Ranger school's hell week, you can come back here and judge me some more.

Why group them into a network? (1)

Hentes (2461350) | about a year ago | (#43642203)

Doesn't that increase the risk of an embolism?

Re:Why group them into a network? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43643193)

Only if you put it in the blood stream, and it seems like this could be done subdermally instead.

Another treatment that doesn't address the problem (0)

dehole (1577363) | about a year ago | (#43642577)

This is an example of how medical research dollars are used to create expensive treatments to this problem. The hospitals would go broke if diabetics regulated their blood sugar not with expensive medicine, but by restricting how much carbs they eat.

Why should they regulate the amount of carbs? Well consumption of an excessive amount of carbs (low and high glycemic) naturally get converted into sugar for our body to use as fuel. The problem is that when we consume too much (> 100g per day), it causes our blood sugar to rise too much, and if our body doesn't respond to it fast enough, we can easily die (hence Type 1 and 2 diabetics needing to closely monitor their blood sugar).

Our bodies can use Carbs, Fats, or Proteins as its main fuel source. If you switch from using carbs, to using Fats (such as the ketogenic diet), suddenly your blood sugar isn't changing very much, and you usually can reduce your insulin usage over time. It helped me a whole lot, so perhaps it can help you too...

Re:Another treatment that doesn't address the prob (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43643065)

Don't even know why I'm bothering to respond, but how do you propose type 1 diabetics use your methodology? Or are you just an ignorant twat who can't even be bothered to understand what type 1 diabetes is?

That being said, my $0.02 is that type 2 diabetics should only be allowed to get this kind of treatment after they've demonstrated that changing their lifestyle choices isn't sufficient (unless they're wealthy enough to pay out of pocket). Type 1 diabetics are a completely different story, and if you don't know why, lurk moar before making yourself sound like a jackass.

-Vel

Re:Another treatment that doesn't address the prob (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about a year ago | (#43644213)

Don't even know why I'm bothering to respond, but how do you propose type 1 diabetics use your methodology? Or are you just an ignorant twat who can't even be bothered to understand what type 1 diabetes is?

Hear, hear! I also feel vindicated that my 9:48AM post, while clumsily phrased so that it was misconstrued by some, was nevertheless accurate in predicting that somebody would make the sort of ignorant remarks that the OP did. Of course that prediction is like predicting that the sun will rise in the East, but I was still right.

Re:Another treatment that doesn't address the prob (1)

cbhacking (979169) | about a year ago | (#43646417)

Type 1 diabetes (also called IDDM - the ID stands for Insulin-Dependent, for the benefit of those unfamiliar) can be less of a problem on an extremely low-carb diet - that is, if you needed to survive as long as possible without insulin, if you could drink a ton of water and eat nothing with carbs in it and you might survive for 1-2 months - but in the end your body does need glucose, does produce it from food, and if it can't absorb it (because it doesn't have insulin) you will die.

Re:Another treatment that doesn't address the prob (1)

armanox (826486) | about a year ago | (#43644991)

And thus someone doesn't understand Type 1.

Re:Another treatment that doesn't address the prob (1)

TheAlgebraist (1900322) | about a year ago | (#43647049)

I have type 1 diabetes, and when I was paying for humalog out of pocket it was amazing how motivating it was for me to have to think about how many dollars worth of insulin a meal would cost. 100 calories worth of carbs requires far more insulin than 100 calories worth of protein or fat. Of course I probably cut more carbs out than I should have, but I have to admit, I splurged a lot less than I do now that I can just take a little extra insulin and don't have to worry about the cost. Also, taking less humalog and eating fewer carbs means less up and down movement with my blood sugar. It is not clear from the OP whether we was claiming type 1s could eliminate insulin use completely, which is of course absurd, but one can definitely reduce it if there is a reason.

Re:Another treatment that doesn't address the prob (1)

armanox (826486) | about a year ago | (#43647415)

I interpreted him to be claiming that carb reduction/elimination would be a "cure" for Type 1. I too suffer from T1, and keep my meals to ~45-60g carbohydrates (doctor's orders originally). Just because you can eat more and take more insulin doesn't mean it's the best idea. And advocating just a primarily protein or fat diet ignores the risks that go with them. The body needs balance, which the OP seemed to ignore.

Hashtag "Replicators" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43642903)

Hashtag "Replicators". I'm concerned that there aren't enough researchers who watch dystopian sci-fi, and that any paper like this should address the "holy shit, how could this go terribly wrong" part just to remind people...

An ISP wrote the title... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43643241)

If you're a diabetic I'm pretty sure you're not interested in how long your drug could work...

What happens when they impact artery walls? (1)

kfsone (63008) | about a year ago | (#43643645)

Bear in mind that it's the degradation of normally smooth artery walls by, e.g., high blood pressure that enables plaque build up. What happens if they impact a plaque deposit?

I ask because the treatments might start to get expensive if it's not quantified before people start using the treatment and J. Edgar Pure-Butter-Diet takes them to court over their "contribution" to the arterial furring that put his head in a jar.

Re:What happens when they impact artery walls? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43644433)

Plaque buildup in arteries occurs when the walls are damaged by sugars in the blood. It's the body's natural protection. High blood pressure alone (I know this is rare) cannot cause this, but can compound the problem if there is a plaque buildup.

You can prevent damage to arterial walls by avoiding foods that elevate blood sugar. This includes not only pure and refined sugars, but also carbohydrates. Unfortunately, this is not a solution most people want to follow.

this would be great for everybody to use! (1)

somepunk (720296) | about a year ago | (#43643949)

If the costs are low and side effects minimal. How stablely can it regulate blood sugar? The modern practioce of three meals a day just isn't very optimal for good mood regulation and high productivity and creativity. Of course, we should probably all be taking naps, too :)

Two Words (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43645053)

Borg nanoprobes.

...for up to 10 days... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43645169)

Or your money back?

Classic Slashdot health post (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43645797)

A load of geeks who think that, because they understand iptables, their opinion on something health related is somehow interesting or relevant.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...