'biggest ever' study on how to prevent children getting type 1 diabetes

[Amity Island]

So far, more than 10,000 newborns have been tested - with 50 signed up to the follow-up SINT1A study being led by the paediatric research team at the Royal Victoria Infirmary. SINT1A is the study to see if being given a probiotic can prevent diabetes developing.

'Biggest ever' study at Newcastle to prevent children getting type 1 diabetes

A study is examining whether we can prevent children from developing type 1 diabetes

www.chroniclelive.co.uk

 

[Amity Island]

If the poor quality/lack of gut biome is responsible for so many illnesses etc instead of taking a probiotic to fix the gut biome, wouldn't eating a non-processed healthy diet be a better solution?

 

[Amity Island]

"Type 1 diabetes has no cure and affects one in 250 children born in the UK"

This can't be right?

 

[SimonP]

It does sound like quite a high proportion, I wonder if they've missed off a 0? I don't have any better data to hand mind you.

 

[Bruce Stephens]

It does sound like quite a high proportion, I wonder if they've missed off a 0? I don't have any better data to hand mind you.

Sounds about right to me. Overall we're about 0.5% or so of the population (in round numbers) which would make 1 in 250 children the right order of magnitude (maybe it's closer to 1 in 400 or something, depending on exactly what they're saying).

 

[Inka]

"Type 1 diabetes has no cure and affects one in 250 children born in the UK"

This can't be right?

It could be. It’s 1 in 300 in the US. The rate of diabetes in children has been increasing for decades which is scary because we still don’t know the cause.

 

[Inka]

I think it was 1 in 300 when I got it, and that was almost 30 years ago, so 1 in 250 makes sense.

 

[Lily123]

That would make sense to me - out of my schools years 7-11 there’s 4 T1 in 1200 which would equate to 1 in 300. Obviously that’s a very small amount

 

[SimonP]

I stand corrected! 🙂

 

[Amity Island]

Sounds about right to me. Overall we're about 0.5% or so of the population (in round numbers) which would make 1 in 250 children the right order of magnitude (maybe it's closer to 1 in 400 or something, depending on exactly what they're saying).

Wow. I was always under the impression type 1 diabetes was rare. 1:250 is not rare at all. So what is the incidence of type 2?

 

[harbottle]

The last figures I read were something like 1 in 16 people in the UK have type 2 diabetes, and the figure is increasing.

Since I was diagnosed, I am quite surprised at how many people I know have it. When people ask me why I lost so much weight, and I say it was to try to improve blood sugar, they say, 'oh I've got that as well.' as if it's like having a cold. (Most are overweight, but I do know a few who have no weight issues and still have it.)

I know someone who is on the brink (hba1c of 47) and is making no attempt to change their lifestyle.

 

[Amity Island]

The last figures I read were something like 1 in 16 people in the UK have type 2 diabetes, and the figure is increasing.

Since I was diagnosed, I am quite surprised at how many people I know have it. When people ask me why I lost so much weight, and I say it was to try to improve blood sugar, they say, 'oh I've got that as well.' as if it's like having a cold. (Most are overweight, but I do know a few who have no weight issues and still have it.)

I know someone who is on the brink (hba1c of 47) and is making no attempt to change their lifestyle.

Thanks.

So in context, say we had a crowd of 1000 people, 4 would likely have type 1 diabetes and 63 would have type 2.

 

[Burylancs]

Thanks.

So in context, say we had a crowd of 1000 people, 4 would likely have type 1 diabetes and 63 would have type 2.

Depends on the ages and gender balance and ethnicity. It would have to be a representative sample like an Opinion Poll.

 

[Amity Island]

Depends on the ages and gender balance and ethnicity. It would have to be a representative sample like an Opinion Poll.

Also, having thought about this further, the 4 in a thousand incidence of type 1 is just an overall figure. Is it 4 in a 1000 when looking at non hereditary causes?

 

[Burylancs]

Also, having thought about this further, the 4 in a thousand incidence of type 1 is just an overall figure. Is it 4 in a 1000 when looking at non hereditary causes?

Are there any non-hereditary causes of diabetes ? The genes form the background that facilitates a tendancy to both T1 and T2.

 

[Amity Island]

Are there any non-hereditary causes of diabetes ? The genes form the background that facilitates a tendancy to both T1 and T2.

I don't know. I do know I have type 1 and it doesn't run in the family as far as I can find. I was told at diagnosis it was either environmental (pollution etc) or perhaps a virus that caused it.

 

[Burylancs]

I don't know. I do know I have type 1 and it doesn't run in the family as far as I can find. I was told at diagnosis it was either environmental (pollution etc) or perhaps a virus that caused it.

ADA's take on it ...

Genetics of Diabetes | American Diabetes Association

Get valuable insights into the genetic factors behind diabetes and find answers to your questions. Explore more resources on diabetes genetics.

diabetes.org

 

[Amity Island]

ADA's take on it ...

Genetics of Diabetes | American Diabetes Association

Get valuable insights into the genetic factors behind diabetes and find answers to your questions. Explore more resources on diabetes genetics.

diabetes.org

In brief it says:

Most people who are at risk (of type 1) do not get diabetes.

That it's a genetic risk plus either cold weather or a virus that triggers it, yet; i'd assume most of us are subject to cold temperatures and viruses, so this trigger theory doesn't quite explain it all.

 

[Amity Island]

ADA's take on it ...

Genetics of Diabetes | American Diabetes Association

Get valuable insights into the genetic factors behind diabetes and find answers to your questions. Explore more resources on diabetes genetics.

diabetes.org

Also this:

"Type 1 diabetes presenting in adults, in contrast to children, is predominantly determined by non-genetic factors with a reduced role for protective and susceptibility HLA alleles. Thus, the evidence is that genes involved in genetic susceptibility to type 1 diabetes operate predominantly in children not adults and in both amplify the immune response and the rate of disease progression."

So, yes type 1 can be genetic and non genetic. Given we are all born, not manufacturered, we all have genes, those genes are human and perhaps just being human is the conditon that predisposes us to the risk of developing disease, not always the case that we inherit specific "disease" genes per se?

Impact of genetic and non-genetic factors in type 1 diabetes - PubMed

Type 1 insulin-dependent diabetes is due to destruction of the insulin secreting cells of the islets of Langerhans. The disease is caused by non-genetic, probably environmental, factors operating in a genetically susceptible host to initiate a destructive immune process. These unknown...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[Burylancs]

Also this:

"Type 1 diabetes presenting in adults, in contrast to children, is predominantly determined by non-genetic factors with a reduced role for protective and susceptibility HLA alleles. Thus, the evidence is that genes involved in genetic susceptibility to type 1 diabetes operate predominantly in children not adults and in both amplify the immune response and the rate of disease progression."

So, yes type 1 can be genetic and non genetic. Given we are all born, not manufacturered, we all have genes, those genes are human and perhaps just being human is the conditon that predisposes us to the risk of developing disease, not always the case that we inherit specific "disease" genes per se?

Impact of genetic and non-genetic factors in type 1 diabetes - PubMed

Type 1 insulin-dependent diabetes is due to destruction of the insulin secreting cells of the islets of Langerhans. The disease is caused by non-genetic, probably environmental, factors operating in a genetically susceptible host to initiate a destructive immune process. These unknown...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

I read one paper years ago that said to be dxed Type 1 you had to have been given two bad copies of a particular gene that regulates glucose use, one bad copy from each parent. The parents themselves didn't need to be Type 1, they could have a bad copy of the gene and good copy of it.
But then again a Professor at Exeter, I think, also maintained that there is a bundle of genes that predispose to Diabetes and which type you get depends which combination of them you get and how it is triggered.
Basically we don't know what causes Type 1 or Type 2 but there is almost certainly a genetic disposition which can be triggered by various stimuli e.g. onset of Type 1 theorised as being triggered by first exposure to Cow's milk or dog bites ( yes the theorising is that desperate !) In the 1990s the theory was mooted that the genes for Type 2 are beneficial genes from the Paleolithic era - having raised bgs in middle age would help in a regime of feast or famine then. The advocates of that theory suggest the genes for Type 2 Diabetes must have been beneficial once because they have been so well conserved and passed on over millennia.