Cure for diabetes discovered?

[mangell6]

Ethics and FarmaSuitIcicles companies
Scientifically Proven and Herbal Remedies

Riffer, wonder what the impact would be to your system if you upped your intake of chillis and capsicums? Probably play hell until you stablised again.
Wonder if the packaging woulhd have consumer warning "Warning contents are rumoured to be part of the "vegetable" family"

[riffer]

I eat too much spicy food as it is.

Crashe - what's interesting about all of this is that it seems to indicate that both Type I and Type II diabetes, which have always been considered to be almost exclusive - are actually caused by the same problem.

Actually, there's now generally accepted that there's a third type of diabetes - hybrid, or Type III diabetes, which is characterised by an inability to produce insulin and insulin resistance. I first found out about this when I was under the guidance of Dr Robin Toomath about ten years ago, as she speculated at the time that I was one of the (un)lucky ones who showed both symptoms.

I would speculate that Pharmac would subsidise any new drugs for diabetes, as the financial implications of not helping diabetics are huge, particularly as we are facing epidemics in the future.

Also, for other immune-system diseases, this may be of great benefit.

What makes this research significant is that it's a complete paradigm shift here. They're talking about nerves sending the wrong signal to the brain. This could lead to huge discoveries in the next decade as scientists and researchers start to look in new directions.

My son could have his coeliac disease cured. Too late for Gini, but she could have her endometriosis cured as well. Not to mention asthma, diseases of the central nervous system, and goodness knows what else.

[sAsLEX]

I would speculate that Pharmac would subsidise any new drugs for diabetes, as the financial implications of not helping diabetics are huge, particularly as we are facing epidemics in the future.

And the fact that the Labour voters are prone to getting the disease would certainly assist Pharmac in its decision should they still be in power......

Of note its interesting no one complains over the Genetic Engineering used to produce Insulin, only the big cases that hit the news .....

[ManDownUnder]

The way I see it there are two problems

One is finding the cure
The other is funding the cure

We always had two problems - now we're hopefully down to one...

[crashe]

Cheers Riffer.......

I have sent the link to one who has Type 1......
The other one I dont have their email addy.... but will try to contact them over the next few days to let them know... they also have a daughter with Type 1 as well.

[riffer]

AOf note its interesting no one complains over the Genetic Engineering used to produce Insulin, only the big cases that hit the news .....

True. AFAIK, the insulin I use (Humalog, Humalin N) which is made by Eli-Lilly, is of recombinant DNA origin, a type of genetic manipulation.

Here's some info on rDNA, for those who like to know such things. And here's some info on how they use recombinant DNA to create insulin. Pretty clever stuff, really.

[wendigo]

I have a mate who has worked on arthritis research for 20 years. Tens of millions have been spent by his employer - the result? Nadda.

Only tens of millions? Shit, pharmaceutical companies lose more money running for the bus.

Remember back in the mid '90's when I was still in academia, the Irish government decided to prime the research pump, so to speak, by injecting about 20 million, I think it was, over a number of years. For this, they pretty much wanted the cure for cancer.

This might sound like a reasonable amount of money, but at the time one of the larger pharmaceutical companies had just spent somewhere in the region of 900 million (Sterling) in research the previous financial year and was projected to go beyond the billion mark the next year.

When you bear in mind that a medical patent only lasts about 15 years I believe, and that it can take several years to get FDA approval, the companies only have a few years in which to recoup their costs, and fund ongoing research.

It's hardly surprising that pharmaceutical companies appear unethical on occasion.

[James Deuce]

It's hardly surprising that pharmaceutical companies appear unethical on occasion.

Appear????

The ethical treatment of people would involve no profit. Blaming the approval process is a cop out for creating the approval process in the first place because they experimented on healthy people and vivisected live animals.

There are no ethics involved in Corporate business, Government, or Religion.

The only large organisations I've seen use ethics in dealing with people are military organisations with their roots in "Western" democracy.

[Paul in NZ]

Appear????

The ethical treatment of people would involve no profit. Blaming the approval process is a cop out for creating the approval process in the first place because they experimented on healthy people and vivisected live animals.

There are no ethics involved in Corporate business, Government, or Religion.

The only large organisations I've seen use ethics in dealing with people are military organisations with their roots in "Western" democracy.

I disagree - some Japanese corporates I've worked with put considerable energy into an attempt to be ethical. They just don't last long or make the kinds of profits that puts them front of mind. That aside........

Don't care today - I just want the cure.. Another crushing hypo (low blood sugars) last night at 2am. Thank goodness i can still pick them up before I go off the wall but I'm completely wasted this morning and was damn near in tears of frustration last night. Just a couple of units too much insulin and then had to do something 'unplanned for' and used a bit more energy than anticipated and wham.... Far out.....

Today I'd pay what ever the pricks want - A bad hypo is something everyone should experience, especially the researchers / corporates / govt, the 'cure' (if it exists at all) would be free and on the market toot sweet. I'd try and describe the feeling but if you have not experienced it, you just would not 'get' what I mean and frankly - I just don't have a energy today and the black dog is chewing on my ankles....

A coffee and a trip to the gym will shake it off but somedays - this fuckin sucks...

Paul N

(lifes a bloody joy most days and thank goodness it aint a worse thing so I'm not feeling sorry for myself - just gritty eyed tired)

[Winston001]

Appear????

The ethical treatment of people would involve no profit. Blaming the approval process is a cop out for creating the approval process in the first place because they experimented on healthy people and vivisected live animals.

There are no ethics involved in Corporate business, Government, or Religion.

I generally agree with you Jim but not this time, assuming you mean ethical treatment to be free medical treatment. There are no free lunches. People work and strive so they can prosper and support their children. If scientists, doctors, nurses etc weren't paid for their work, they couldn't do it.

It can take 10 years to develop a drug. The cost has to be recovered somehow so the drug is sold, not given away. We have a partial solution in NZ with Pharmac buying the drugs and the taxpayer subsidising the price to the community. Many social democracies such as the EU do the same.

[James Deuce]

I didn't say free.

The drivers for production of anything in pharmaceuticals is profit. That is entirely the wrong driver, especially when the decision making process is governed by profit, not ethics.

Doctors and Nurses don't work in Drug research. If they do they have changed career track drastically and probably have taken an academic route away from the Medical and Nursing disciplines. My Sister-in-Law for instance is a Dentist who retrained as a pharmacologist and developed Tramidol, a synthetic opiate, because she hated hurting people in the dentist's chair. That is the correct ethical motivation for a research scientist in the pharmaceutical world IMO.

[riffer]

IAnother crushing hypo (low blood sugars) last night at 2am. Thank goodness i can still pick them up before I go off the wall but I'm completely wasted this morning ... A bad hypo is something everyone should experience...

Those 2 am ones are the pits. About 3 weeks ago I experienced the worst yet - a 1.7 mmol/l - and somehow managed to wake Gini to get me some glucose.

We realised the other day that we needed to have the "what if" talk with the kids - in case they are alone at home with Dad and you can't wake him up.

Hard conversation.

[Oakie]

Most of you probably don't give a shit about this, but I'm bloody excited.

Well yes, after my last routine check up I'm a little bit interested.

[wendigo]

Appear????

The ethical treatment of people would involve no profit. Blaming the approval process is a cop out for creating the approval process in the first place because they experimented on healthy people and vivisected live animals.

I didn't say free.

The drivers for production of anything in pharmaceuticals is profit. That is entirely the wrong driver, especially when the decision making process is governed by profit, not ethics.

Doctors and Nurses don't work in Drug research. If they do they have changed career track drastically and probably have taken an academic route away from the Medical and Nursing disciplines. My Sister-in-Law for instance is a Dentist who retrained as a pharmacologist and developed Tramidol, a synthetic opiate, because she hated hurting people in the dentist's chair. That is the correct ethical motivation for a research scientist in the pharmaceutical world IMO.

(1) The approval process exists to stop the poor woman having a thalidimide kid when she pops down to the doctor for something to help her with her morning sickness. I.e. they didn't experiment enough on healthy people. They certainly didn't test it enough on any pregnant women prior to releasing it on a large scale for general use.
(2) Experimentation. At some stage all the theory must be tried out in practice. Some you win. Some you lose. Most probably do sweet FA. N years and millions in research down the tubes.
(3) Vivisection. Ah yes the moral high ground. No one can really defend this can they... Morally it's sorta like paedophilia*.
(4) Motivation for a pharmaceutical is like any company - Survivability and accountability to the owner (s).
(5) The motivation of the people indulging in research in pharmaceutical firms is probably the same as your sister in law. The desire to help our fellow human being's etc.
(6) The example you give of the development of 'Tramidol' would not have been possible without a thorough understanding of opiate chemistry and its pharmacological effects. Understanding gained through previous research. Research that no doubt involved plenty of points (2) and (3) above...
Surely this must make 'Tramidol' ethically unclean.




* unless of course you happen to be a Catholic priest. Then vivisection, like kiddy fiddling is Aok. Ugh just had a horrible image of a Priest in a vivisection lab, with bulgin' eyes and a raging hardon, looking 'round, going "Sweety?"

[yungatart]

It would be wonderful if it all came to fruition, wouldn't it?
At this point in time, it has no effect on me, as diabetes does not run in my genes - and being quite lean, the chances of type 2 rearing its ugly head is pretty remote.
However, funding treatment for diabetes can only escalate as the obesity epidemic bites.
One of my grandaughters is a prime candidate for type 2- family history, part Maori and severely overweight, so I have a vested interest in this panning out, I guess.