Beta
×

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!

Finnish Team Makes Diabetes Vaccine Breakthrough

Soulskill posted about a year ago | from the take-two-nontwinkies-and-call-me-in-the-morning dept.

Medicine 202

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."

cancel ×

202 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Not much info (5, Insightful)

Okian Warrior (537106) | about a year ago | (#45197333)

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?

Re:Not much info (5, Informative)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#45197411)

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 [diabetes.fi]

earlier stuff on the connection between the virus has been published in british medical journal, fwiw.

Re:Not much info (5, Informative)

nbauman (624611) | about a year ago | (#45198037)

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 [nih.gov]

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 [wikipedia.org] 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 [wikipedia.org] 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.

Re:Not much info (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45198287)

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...

Re:Not much info (5, Informative)

dinfinity (2300094) | about a year ago | (#45198401)

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.

Re:Not much info (4, Funny)

jones_supa (887896) | about a year ago | (#45198421)

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".

Re:Not much info (5, Insightful)

Joining Yet Again (2992179) | about a year ago | (#45198511)

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++.

Re:Not much info (2)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#45198845)

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).

Re:Not much info (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45197445)

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.

Re:Not much info (4, Informative)

pepty (1976012) | about a year ago | (#45197605)

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.

Re:Not much info (3, Informative)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#45197641)

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...

Re:Not much info (5, Informative)

Novus (182265) | about a year ago | (#45198205)

That's almost certainly a translation error. The University of Tampere press release [www.uta.fi] 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.

Re:Not much info (2)

transporter_ii (986545) | about a year ago | (#45198933)

> 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 [nih.gov]

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.

Wanna nod the "nanodiamonds from thin air"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45197497)

Seems legit.

Re:Not much info (5, Informative)

niftydude (1745144) | about a year ago | (#45197599)

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 [diabetesjournals.org]

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.

Re:Not much info (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45197809)

Probably not legitimate. It comes from a former Soviet country with Mongolian genes.

Re:Not much info (2)

jandersen (462034) | about a year ago | (#45197881)

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.

Re:Not much info (2)

Fjandr (66656) | about a year ago | (#45198761)

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.

Re:Not much info (1)

davester666 (731373) | about a year ago | (#45198143)

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.

Re:Not much info -- check BBC/ProMed (3, Informative)

TheRealHocusLocus (2319802) | about a year ago | (#45198899)

Best media reporting
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7926026.stm [bbc.co.uk]

Most notable analysis (scroll to bottom, in square brackets)
http://www.promedmail.org/direct.php?id=20090308.0959 [promedmail.org]

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 [youtube.com] 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.

Wow! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45197335)

If true, this has to be one of the top ten medical discoveries!

progress is good (5, Funny)

Gravis Zero (934156) | about a year ago | (#45197339)

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

Re:progress is good (5, Funny)

NoMaster (142776) | about a year ago | (#45198027)

... but when will they finnish it. ;)

There's norway to know; it'll be dane when they're sweden ready.

Re:progress is good (4, Funny)

Pranadevil2k (687232) | about a year ago | (#45198153)

Europe on that high horse, huh? When they put a release date on this, denmark your calendars.

Re:progress is good (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45198693)

There is norway that they will ever finnish the study.

THE virus is a bit of an overstatement (4, Interesting)

Kyle Jacoby (2973265) | about a year ago | (#45197347)

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.

Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement (-1, Flamebait)

rubycodez (864176) | about a year ago | (#45197371)

so U.S. kids still might have to stop washing their pop tarts down with carbonated high fructose corn syrup?

Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement (5, Informative)

Kyle Jacoby (2973265) | about a year ago | (#45197387)

That would be type 2 diabetes. Some of the already-described causes of type 1 are genetic (as opposed to this virus).

Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45198035)

What a pity. At least I can strike baldness [slashdot.org] off my bucket list.

Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45197419)

Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement (5, Informative)

I'm New Around Here (1154723) | about a year ago | (#45197477)

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.

Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement (1)

Bitsy Boffin (110334) | about a year ago | (#45197525)

. 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.

Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45197539)

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."

Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement (3, Informative)

definate (876684) | about a year ago | (#45197707)

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.

Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement (1)

Errol backfiring (1280012) | about a year ago | (#45198333)

It's not a myth. Heck, even the mechanism is known: it is insulin resistance [wikipedia.org] . 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.

Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#45197433)

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.

Re:THE virus is a bit of an overstatement (1)

Fjandr (66656) | about a year ago | (#45198765)

The virus is a mistranslation, as noted in a comment above regarding Finnish grammar.

Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes (5, Informative)

timeOday (582209) | about a year ago | (#45197369)

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.

Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45197547)

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.

Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes (4, Informative)

mpe (36238) | about a year ago | (#45198015)

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.

Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes (2)

RivenAleem (1590553) | about a year ago | (#45198861)

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?

Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes (1)

relyimah (938927) | about a year ago | (#45197553)

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)!

Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes (1)

timeOday (582209) | about a year ago | (#45197655)

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.

Re: Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes (1)

relyimah (938927) | about a year ago | (#45197725)

Here's hoping. While it's a manageable thing I still wouldn't wish it upon anyone.

Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes (2)

Festering Leper (456849) | about a year ago | (#45197845)

...Assuming the anti-vaxxers don't keep their kids from getting it :(

Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45197891)

Really you should wait a generation or two before getting a vaccine. The reality is there is no way to know the long term effects when they roll them out initially.

Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes (2)

timeOday (582209) | about a year ago | (#45197921)

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.

Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes (2)

whydavid (2593831) | about a year ago | (#45198295)

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.

Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45197597)

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.

Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45197893)

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.

Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes (1)

jabuzz (182671) | about a year ago | (#45198875)

Citation for that please. Type 2 diabetes is very much linked to diet, and you don't have to be fat either.

Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes (4, Insightful)

mpe (36238) | about a year ago | (#45197919)

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.

Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes (1)

RivenAleem (1590553) | about a year ago | (#45198865)

I thought it was Fructose and Sucrose (and by extension, HFCS), and not Glucose that was causing this.

And i might see it in my lifetime. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45197377)

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.

Re:And i might see it in my lifetime. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45197395)

Coal was a billion dollar industry. Think they gave that up when oil came along? Oh wait...

Re: And i might see it in my lifetime. (2)

scrote-ma-hote (547370) | about a year ago | (#45197403)

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.

Re: And i might see it in my lifetime. (2)

Pranadevil2k (687232) | about a year ago | (#45198227)

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.

Re: And i might see it in my lifetime. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45198977)

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.

Re:And i might see it in my lifetime. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45197441)

What was the last billion dollar industry that let itself go obsolete?

Slave trading.

Re:And i might see it in my lifetime. (4, Insightful)

maroberts (15852) | about a year ago | (#45197653)

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.

Re:And i might see it in my lifetime. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45197759)

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.

Re:And i might see it in my lifetime. (2)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#45197457)

..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.

Re:And i might see it in my lifetime. (1)

Heshler (1191623) | about a year ago | (#45197537)

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.

Re:And i might see it in my lifetime. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45197701)

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

viruses cause everything (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45197385)

AIDS, cancer, diabetes, computer crashes, ......

What's next, bacterial infection and ionizing radiation are also caused by viruses somehow?

Re:viruses cause everything (2)

philip.paradis (2580427) | about a year ago | (#45198059)

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

700 million euros? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45197439)

$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...

Re:700 million euros? (0)

binarylarry (1338699) | about a year ago | (#45197511)

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.

Re: 700 million euros? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45197565)

If you and your republitard friends want to inject untested and unverified medicine to yourself, please do so by signing up for medical ttrials.

Re:700 million euros? (1)

ATMAvatar (648864) | about a year ago | (#45197521)

That seems high, but it's lower than average [forbes.com] .

Re:700 million euros? (2, Interesting)

Bite The Pillow (3087109) | about a year ago | (#45197755)

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.

Re:700 million euros? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45198047)

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.

Re:700 million euros? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45198117)

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.

Re:700 million euros? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45198149)

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%.

Hey (1)

Lucky_Pierre (175635) | about a year ago | (#45197551)

Lawyers have to eat too!

Re:700 million euros? (-1)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | about a year ago | (#45197617)

And yet, the brainwashed scientist dutifully reports:

Professor Heikki HyÃty says that money is the biggest obstacle in moving to testing in humans

As if there wasn't a group of people standing before him threatening violent action if he were to somehow get the vaccine to market without spending a billion dollars by doing it their way.

Re:700 million euros? (2)

whydavid (2593831) | about a year ago | (#45198343)

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]

Where is the data? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45197519)

Where is the data? This news piece is worthless.

$$!$$Treat $Cure (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45197535)

You can bet Eli Lilly won't go down without a fight on this one.

Diabetes vaccine?!?! (2)

Lucky_Pierre (175635) | about a year ago | (#45197541)

Sweet!

Type 2 is a plumbing problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45197747)

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.

Re:Type 2 is a plumbing problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45197795)

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

Funding? Give everyone a piece of the prize... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45197851)

Kickstarter baby! ;)

This has been suspected for some time... (5, Interesting)

aussie.virologist (1429001) | about a year ago | (#45197929)

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? (1)

bradley13 (1118935) | about a year ago | (#45197939)

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?

Re:Isn't Type 1 largely genetic? (3, Interesting)

Pranadevil2k (687232) | about a year ago | (#45198255)

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.

been waitin' (1)

Tablizer (95088) | about a year ago | (#45198023)

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

What about P2RX7? (4, Interesting)

slew (2918) | about a year ago | (#45198025)

P2RX7 [wikipedia.org] was all the hype back in January. Here's a blog [vectorblog.org] entry on it... Or the paper abstract [diabetesjournals.org] 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 [nih.gov] (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 [wikipedia.org] leading to diabetes...

So, I wasn't totally impressed after reading that paper, but you never know...

False positives (1)

gringer (252588) | about a year ago | (#45198215)

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 [gringene.org] ).

Kickstarter it (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45198271)

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 ;)

Already have a preventative measure: (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45198297)

It's called not eating complete garbage (and I'm looking @ you Americans). A vegan lifestyle would prevent probably 90% of this "disease".

Re:Already have a preventative measure: (1)

Fjandr (66656) | about a year ago | (#45198785)

You're confusing Type 1 diabetes with Type 2 diabetes.

Sickening fraud (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45198345)

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

Re:Sickening fraud (1)

Fjandr (66656) | about a year ago | (#45198791)

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...

Why 700m Euros ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45198599)

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 ?

animal testing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45198805)

just use illegal immigrants!

Good research (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45198817)

If they can make it , it will be wonderfull . Good luck.

Long-term far away possible vaccine versus cure (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45198911)

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. :-| (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45198949)

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".....

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>