Researchers Uncover Potential Breakthrough Cure for Type 1 Diabetes

Exciting possibilities but we also have to remember these studies/results are based on MICE (not humans). Definately keeping an eye on this one.

----------------

"We've all been brought up to think insulin is the all-powerful hormone without which life is impossible, but that isn't the case," says Dr. Roger Unger from UT Southwestern Medical Center....

In this published study, UT Southerwestern Medical Center researchers obtained normal blood sugars when they prevented the release of glucagon from the liver and the release of insulin from the beta-cells.

The new findings suggest that Type 1 diabetes could be converted to an asymptomatic, non-insulin-dependent disorder by eliminating the actions of a specific hormone.

As we have learned from the thousands of diabetes studies and the coming and going of cures for diabetes, there are many mechanisms and reactions involved in the conversion of glucose to energy, so caution needs to be taken with the results of this study, until it can be duplicated especially in human subjects.

Scientists at UT Southwestern Medical Center studied the hormone glucagon, which prevents low blood sugar in healthy people and causes high blood sugar in people with Type 1 diabetes. When glucagon was suppressed in mice, the hormone insulin became unimportant. Glucose tolerance returned to normal.

These findings in mice show that insulin becomes completely superfluous and its absence does not cause diabetes or any other abnormality when the actions of glucagon are suppressed. Glucagon, a hormone produced by the pancreas, prevents low blood sugar levels in healthy individuals. It causes high blood sugar in people with Type 1 diabetes.

Dr. Unger, professor of internal medicine and senior author of the study stated that, "We've all been brought up to think insulin is the all-powerful hormone without which life is impossible, but that isn't the case." "If diabetes is defined as restoration of glucose homeostasis to normal, then this treatment can perhaps be considered very close to a 'cure.'"

Insulin treatment has been the gold standard for Type 1 diabetes (insulin-dependent diabetes) in humans since its discovery in 1922. But even optimal regulation of Type 1 diabetes with insulin alone cannot restore normal glucose tolerance. These new findings demonstrate that the elimination of glucagon action restores glucose tolerance to normal.

Normally, glucagon is released when the glucose, or sugar, level in the blood is low. In insulin deficiency, however, glucagon levels are inappropriately high and cause the liver to release excessive amounts of glucose into the bloodstream. This action is opposed by insulin, which directs the body's cells to remove sugar from the bloodstream.

Dr. Unger's laboratory research previously found that insulin's benefit resulted from its suppression of glucagon.

In Type 1 diabetes, which affects about 1 million people in the U.S., the pancreatic islet cells that produce insulin are destroyed. As a countermeasure to this destruction, Type 1 diabetics currently must take insulin multiple times a day to metabolize blood sugar, regulate blood-sugar levels and prevent diabetic coma. They also must adhere to strict dietary restrictions.

In this study, UT Southwestern scientists tested how mice genetically altered to lack working glucagon receptors responded to an oral glucose tolerance test. The test -- which can be used to diagnose diabetes, gestational diabetes and prediabetes -- measures the body's ability to metabolize, or clear, glucose from the bloodstream.

The researchers found that the mice with normal insulin production but without functioning glucagon receptors responded normally to the test. The mice also responded normally when their insulin-producing beta cells were destroyed. The mice had no insulin or glucagon action, but they did not develop diabetes.

"These findings suggest that if there is no glucagon, it doesn't matter if you don't have insulin," said Dr. Unger, who is also a physician at the Dallas VA Medical Center. "This does not mean insulin is unimportant. It is essential for normal growth and development from neonatal to adulthood. But in adulthood, at least with respect to glucose metabolism, the role of insulin is to control glucagon.

"And if you don't have glucagon, then you don't need insulin."

Dr. Young Lee, assistant professor of internal medicine at UT Southwestern and lead author of the study, said the next step is to determine the mechanism behind this result.

"Hopefully, these findings will someday help those with Type 1 diabetes," Dr. Lee said. "If we can find a way to block the actions of glucagon in humans, then maybe we can minimize the need for insulin therapy."

Dr. Unger said anything that reduces the need for injected insulin is a positive.

"Matching the high insulin levels needed to reach glucagon cells with insulin injections is possible only with amounts that are excessive for other tissues," he said. "Peripherally injected insulin cannot accurately duplicate the normal process by which the body produces and distributes insulin. If these latest findings were to work in humans, injected insulin would no longer be necessary for people with Type 1 diabetes."

Dr. May-Yun Wang, assistant professor of internal medicine at UT Southwestern, and researchers from the Albert Einstein College of Medicine also contributed to the work. The study was supported in part by the VA North Texas Health Care System, the American Diabetes Association and the National Institutes of Health.

Diabetes January 26, 2011 vol. 60 no. 2 391-397

Sports Nutrition Guru

Got to meet & talk with an idol of mine, Ellen Coleman, RD, MA, MPH.



Lovely woman. We had a short but interesting conversation about Paleo. We're both on the same page.

I'll explain Paleo next time I'm blogging here.

Chocolate Good for the Heart

Summary: In a cross-sectional study involving 4,970 participants aged
25-93 years who participated in the National Heart, Lung, and Blood
Institute (NHLBI) Family Heart Study, results indicate an inverse
association between chocolate consumption and risk of coronary heart
disease (CHD). After adjusting for potential confounders, chocolate
intake 5+ times/week was associated with a 57% reduced risk of CHD,
compared with no chocolate intake.

Chocolate consumption is inversely associated with calcified atherosclerotic plaque in the coronary arteries: The NHLBI Family Heart Study. Djoussé L, Hopkins PN, Arnett DK, Pankow JS, Borecki I, North KE, Curtis Ellison R.

Division of Aging, Brigham & Women Hospital and Harvard Medical School, 1620 Tremont Street, 3rd Floor, Boston, MA 02120, USA; Massachusetts Veterans Epidemiology and Research Information Center and Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Center, Boston Veterans Affairs Healthcare System, Boston, MA, USA.

Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: While a diet rich in anti-oxidant has been favorably associated with coronary disease and hypertension, limited data have evaluated the influence of such diet on subclinical disease. Thus, we sought to examine whether chocolate consumption is associated with calcified atherosclerotic plaque in the coronary arteries (CAC).

METHODS: In a cross-sectional design, we studied 2217 participants of the NHLBI Family Heart Study. Chocolate consumption was assessed by a semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire and CAC was measured by cardiac CT. We defined prevalent CAC using an Agatston score of at least 100 and fitted generalized estimating equations to calculate prevalence odds ratios of CAC.

RESULTS: There was an inverse association between frequency of chocolate consumption and prevalent CAC. Odds ratios (95% CI) for CAC were 1.0 (reference), 0.94 (0.66-1.35), 0.78 (0.53-1.13), and 0.68 (0.48-0.97) for chocolate consumption of 0, 1-3 times per month, once per week, and 2+ times per week, respectively (p for trend 0.022), adjusting for age, sex, energy intake, waist-hip ratio, education, smoking, alcohol consumption, ratio of total-to-HDL-cholesterol, non-chocolate candy, and diabetes mellitus. Controlling for additional confounders did not alter the findings. Exclusion of subjects with coronary heart disease or diabetes mellitus did not materially change the odds ratio estimates but did modestly decrease the overall significance (p = 0.07).

CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that chocolate consumption might be inversely associated with prevalent CAC.

Its a Matter of National Security

US Obesity rates is now a matter of National Defense. Smaller pool of potential recruits. Not to mention the growing number of current members who are not "fit to fight" any more (e.g. weight creep, poor nutritional habits, inactivity, injuries).




More Military-Aged Americans Are Too Fat to Fight
Released: 10/15/2010 7:05 AM EDT
Source: Cornell University


Newswise — At a time when American military forces are stretched thin overseas, a growing number of potential recruits are too fat to enlist, according to an analysis by Cornell University researchers.

In the past half-century, the number of women of military age who exceed the U.S. Army’s enlistment standards for weight-to-height ratio and body fat percentage has more than tripled. For military-age men, the figure has more than doubled.

As of 2007-08, 5.7 million American men and 16.5 million women of military age were ineligible for duty because they were overweight or obese, according to John Cawley, Cornell associate professor of policy analysis and management, and a Cornell economics doctoral student Catherine Maclean.

The findings, published in September by the National Bureau of Economic Research in a working paper titled, “Unfit for Service: The Implications of Rising Obesity for U.S. Military Recruitment,” are cause for alarm for the four U.S. military branches, which together must attract more than 180,000 new service members each year.

“Almost one in four applicants to the military are rejected for being overweight or obese – it’s the most common reason for medical disqualification,” Cawley said. “It is well-known that the military is struggling to recruit and retain soldiers. Having a smaller pool of men and women who are fit enough to serve adds to the strain and creates even more problems for national defense.”

The study follows a similar report last spring by retired generals and admirals. But Cawley and Maclean chart the climbing obesity rates over a much longer period, using data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys spanning 1959-2008. Moreover, the Cornell study estimates the number of civilians who meet the body fat requirements of each military branch, which had not been tracked previously.

“It’s another example of the underappreciated public consequences of obesity,” Cawley said. “We tend to think of obesity as a personal, individual health problem. But the fact that U.S. military leaders view it as a threat to national security and military readiness shows its far-reaching impact.”

The paper is available online: http://www.nber.org/papers/w16408

Best Tasting Health Cereals from Bon Appetit

This blog on Bon Appetit Magazine is doing a taste test tour of supermarket foods. I love the Quaker Oat Squares for dry snacking. Kashi GoLean is a great high protein (soy) cereal that works for breakfast & snacking. Barbara's Bakery also have gluten-free Puffins.

Supermarket Standoff: Healthy Cereals
4:00 PM / August 10, 2010 / Posted by Julia Bainbridge

Call them healthy, call them grown-up; whatever you want to call them, this group of cereals doesn't include Fruit Loops and Cap'n Crunch. We wanted to find out which were the best tasting out of the so-called "healthy" cereals sold in national supermarkets. So we compiled a list of thirteen boxes, picked them up along with some milk, and settled in our conference room early this Monday morning to crunch, much, and scribble on score sheets. Flakes, squares, clusters--all shapes and sizes were included. We also got nutritionist Sandra Frank to weigh in, breaking down which three cereals are the best for you out of the already good-for-you pack. Find both our winners for taste and Frank's picks for health after the jump.

The Results:

Our Favorites for Flavor

TIED FOR #1

Quaker Oatmeal Squares
Nutrition: Serving size 1 cup = 210 calories, 2.5g fat, 250mg sodium, 210mg potassium, 44g carbs, 10g sugars, 6g protein, 10% vitamin A, 50% vitamin C, 0% calcium, 10% iron, 100% vitamin E, etc.
Cost: $4.29 at Stop & Shop in Glen Cove, NY
Blind Tasting Notes: "Hearty and substantial"; "Not too sweet"; "Nice crunch/density"; "A good snacking cereal"


Barbara's Bakery Shredded Spoonfuls
Nutrition: Serving size 3/4 cup = 120 calories, 1.5g total fat, 200mg sodium, 125mg potassium, 24g carbs, 5g sugars, 4g protein, 0% vitamin A, 8% vitamin C, 2% calcium, 4% iron, 4% vitamin E
Cost: $3.69 at Whole Foods in New York, NY
Blind Tasting Notes: "Has some sweetness but not a ton"; "Crispy"; "Crunchy and slightly sweet"


Barbara's Bakery Puffins
Nutrition: Serving size 3/4 cup = 90 calories, 1g total fat, 190mg sodium, 85mg potassium, 23g carbs, 5g sugars, 2g protein, 0% vitamin A, 25% vitamin C, 0% calcium, 2% iron
Cost: $3.49 at Whole Foods in New York, NY
Blind Tasting Notes: "Delish!"; Cinnamon-y"; "Surprisingly good if it's healthy"; "Wonderfully crisp texture and light sweetness"; "Light but crunchy"

#2

Whole Foods Market 365 Everyday Value Raisin Bran
Nutrition: Serving size 1 cup = 200 calories, 0.5g fat, 210mg sodium, 210mg potassium, 44g carbs, 15g sugars, 6g protein, 0% vitamin A, 0% vitamin C, 2% calcium, 15% iron
Cost: $2.69 at Whole Foods in New York, NY
Blind Tasting Notes: "Like Raisin Bran with more heft"; "A very crunchy flake"; "Nice sweetness"; "Like the raisins, but flakes are tough to chew"


TIED FOR #3

Cheerios
Nutrition: Serving size 1 cup = 100 calories, 2g fat, 190mg sodium, 170mg potassium, 20g carbs, 1g sugars, 3g protein, 10% vitamin A, 10% vitamin C, 10% calcium, 45% iron, 10% vitamin D
Cost: $4.49 at Whole Foods in New York, NY
Blind Tasting Notes: "Yummy"; Classic"; "Almost burnt grainy flavor--tastes healthy"; "Light"; "This is what I ate as a kid"; "The old standby; a workhorse"

Fiber One Honey Clusters
Nutrition: Serving size 1 cup = 160 calories, 1.5g fat, 230mg sodium, 180mg potassium, 44g carbs, 6g sugars, 3g protein, 20% vitamin A, 0% vitamin C, 10% calcium, 25% iron, 15% vitamin D, 70% vitamin E
Cost: $4.99 at Stop & Shop in Glen Cove, NY
Blind Tasting Notes: "Caramel/butterscotch flavor"; Nice maple syrup note"; "Good crunch, good cluster, nice plain flake"

Nutritionist Sandra Frank's Picks
Note: "Adding variety helps you obtain the different nutrients you need, as well as keeping your meals interesting," says Frank. In other words, these cereals are healthy, but eating them every morning is not.

#1 Cheerios
Nutrition: Serving size 1 cup = 100 calories, 2g fat, 190mg sodium, 170mg potassium, 20g carbs, 1g sugars, 3g protein, 10% vitamin A, 10% vitamin C, 10% calcium, 45% iron, 10% vitamin D
Cost: $4.49 at Whole Foods in New York, NY
Frank's Comments: "Cheerios is lowest in calories per one cup serving. It is considered low in fat and a good source of fiber. For those watching your waistline, this is the best choice. In addition, Cheerios provides 45% of the daily value of iron."
Our Assessment: We ranked this in third place, so it's good news that it's also healthy. We should note, though, that some of us weren't fans of this cereal, commenting that it tastes like cardboard or sawdust.

#2 Kashi GoLean
Nutrition: Serving size 1 cup = 140 calories, 1g fat, 85mg sodium, 480mg potassium, 30g carbs, 6g sugars, 13g protein, 0% vitamin A, 0% vitamin C, 6% calcium, 10% iron
Cost: $3.49 at Whole Foods in New York, NY

Frank's Comments: "Need fiber? Go with Kashi GoLean. It scored highest in fiber, protein, and potassium and the lowest in sodium per serving. It is defined as a low fat, low sodium, and high fiber food."
Our Assessment: Uh oh. "Tastes about as dull as rice cakes. Does nothing for me"; "Too mealy and dry"; Yuck. No flavor and weird texture." Those were some of the comments we received about Kashi GoLean. Some of us were more into it, though: "Great assortment of textures and flavors"; "Nice sweetness." And some were confessional: "I eat this at home because I know it's healthy, but it really tastes like cardboard."

#3 Barbara's Bakery Puffins
Nutrition: Serving size 3/4 cup = 90 calories, 1g total fat, 190mg sodium, 85mg potassium, 23g carbs, 5g sugars, 2g protein, 0% vitamin A, 25% vitamin C, 0% calcium, 2% iron
Cost: $3.49 at Whole Foods in New York, NY

Frank's Comments: "Barbara's Bakery Puffins came in as the second lowest in calories. It is a low fat and a high fiber food. The ratio of fiber to calories placed it third. The good outweighs the lower iron content, but make sure you include iron-rich foods throughout the day. Some foods rich in iron include: lean meats, liver, seafood, shrimp, salmon, poultry, eggs (yolks contain iron), kidney beans, lima beans, black beans, pinto beans, soy beans and lentils; dark green vegetables (spinach, collard greens, mustard greens, broccoli, asparagus, swiss chard); nuts and; dried fruits."

Our Assessment: Hooray! We ranked this number one! We urge you to go for Barbara's Puffins if you want a healthy cereal that tastes scrumptious.

"There were a lot of factors to consider, so I turned to the labeling laws and the diet manual for assistance," says Frank. Nutrition ratings considered the following:

1.A food is considered low fat if it has 3 grams or less fat per serving.
2.A good source of fiber contains 10 to 19 percent of the daily value for fiber (2.5 to 4.75 grams) per serving.
3.Low sodium is defined as a food containing 140 milligrams or less sodium per serving.
4.Lowest calories per one cup (not per serving).
5.Iron fortification.

NY Times Editorial - Beware Claims About Foods

Snake Oil for Breakfast
Published: June 11, 2010
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/12/opinion/12sat4.html?th&emc=th

More than a century after President Theodore Roosevelt signed the Pure
Food and Drug Act, deception is still a far too popular marketing tool
for food makers.

The Federal Trade Commission barred Kellogg’s last year from running ads
saying Mini-Wheats are “clinically shown to improve kids’ attentiveness
by 20 percent.” To claim “benefits to cognitive health, process or
function provided by any cereal or any morning food or snack food,” was
a no-no, unless the claims were true. But the F.T.C.’s order covered
only cognitive abilities. So just as it was signing its consent,
Kellogg’s was starting a new campaign in which “Snap, Crackle and Pop”
called out to parents from the Rice Krispies box promising to help
“support your child’s IMMUNITY.”

Last week, the F.T.C. said that it had closed that loophole, reaching an
agreement with Kellogg’s that would bar the company from making any
claims about the health benefits of their food unless they were backed
by scientific evidence and not misleading.

Businesses have been making dubious claims about their products at least
since the 17th century, when the British clergyman Anthony Daffy sold
Daffy’s Elixir as a cure for scurvy as well as agues, gout, rheumatism,
rickets, worms and other ailments. Hucksterism — no matter how
implausible the claim — lives on.

In 2004, the F.T.C. barred KFC from saying its fried chicken was
compatible with low-carbohydrate weight-loss programs — because such
diets specifically advise against breaded, fried foods. The Food and
Drug Administration sent letters to 17 food companies in March warning
them about misleading product labels. Dreyer’s claimed there is no
trans-fat in its ice cream but forgot to mention it has lots of
saturated fat. POM Wonderful claimed its pomegranate juice helps treat,
prevent or cure hypertension, diabetes and cancer.

This might be par for the course for an era of swift-boating political
ads and a torrent of television commercials plumping for myriad wonder
drugs (sudden death may result). It leaves the consumer in a quandary:
what part of the label can be believed?