Study suggests Type 2 diabetes "can be cured" by weight loss


#1

[Read the post]


#2

Two co-workers are now 150 lbs less and no longer Type 2. How?, as they say they just stopped eating “sugar” in everything they ingested and exercise. Last year they both did a first crossfit competition, and they are 40ish too. It’s possible and big pharma knows it.


#3

promising, but 18 is an awfully small sample size. Will be interesting to see if the results can be replicated on a larger scale


#4

They will be. I know quite a few examples of this. It doesn’t always work, I’m sure, but it’s certainly not coincidence. The only real obstacle is the difficulty of weight loss.


#5

So, does this work with meth?


#6

And we Americans get ridiculed for our un-metric ways… “Stone”?? ( I had to google it. Apparently a stone is aprox 14 lbs. So the people in the study lost an average of 30 lbs.)


#7

A stone is exactly 14lbs.


#8

Worked for me. Went paleo, lost 75 lbs, H1C dropped like nothing. Am fine now.


#9

Why have all the medically-educated people I know claimed that as a fact for years?

Oh, I know.

From the article:

But now researchers at Newcastle have shown that the disease can be reversed, even in obese people who have had the condition for a long time.

Let’s follow that link. Oh, it’s from 2011. And it doesn’t report on new results, it’s just an “Our experts advise readers” column.

The study that the present article is about just seems to explore some details of how it works.

So do doctors. So did I, and I’m a computer scientist who never had diabetes. It’s just common knowledge, I thought.
What’s your reason for mentioning big pharma? Is this a Philip Morris phenomenon, similar to how the tobacco industry somehow managed to create significant doubt in America about the fact that smoking causes cancer well into the 1990s, while here in Austria the link has been known to every elementary school kid since about 1940?
Type 2 is usually managed without taking insulin, so I don’t quite see a motive here.


#10

You don’t see television broadcasts from the US. They are rife with every manner of prescription drug. A great deal of the drugs peddled are various chemicals to control various type II diabetes issues, none of which appear to be insulin. There’s not a profit motive in countries with single-payer health care, but there’s plenty of profit motive throughout every single facet the US health care industry. With profit motive comes perverse incentive to cut corners, and in health care, that results in drugs getting thrown at patient’s complaints rather than thorough investigation of underlying conditions. Oh, and did I mention there are no effective price controls on any part of any of this?


#11

English pounds or metric pounds?


#12

Avoirdupois.


#13

FWIW, I work in health care, and agree almost 100%.


#14

True*. I’ve spent a while in Canada, though, and pharma ads there are bad enough. And they do have public health care.

I stared with shocked incomprehension at a TV spot that seemed to be based on the idea that if you’re wrists hurt from typing too much on a computer keyboard, the sensible course of action is to take some pain medication and continue typing.

So if I extrapolate, I can imagine what you’re talking about. Okay, so motive exists.


* well, I’ve maybe spent about half a year in the US, but spread over a time of a little over two decades. I was a child at the beginning of that. And the last time I visited, I was too disturbed by all the war-related propaganda (“Support Our Troops! Honor Our Heroes! Donate for Wounded Warriors!”) to notice the pharma ads.


#15

Not troy pounds?


#16

Insulin is relatively inexpensive in any case. It’s well beyond its patent shelf-life and is based on some old technology. The big ticket item is blood sugar test strips which don’t cure anything in and of themselves.

I believe they’re all improved metformin analogs that are patentable. Many are improved insulin therapies. I think you’re wrong about the breakdown in advertising though. I think the most advertised prescription drugs are for erectile dysfunction medications, stroke prevention, and high blood pressure (which is still largely ideopathic, no matter what anyone tells you.)

Either way you slice it, Big Pharma isn’t stopping people from exercising, paying bribes to fast-food companies, or telling doctors not to recommend exercise. The paranoia implied here is a little much.


#17

It is a bit much, isn’t it? I’m an American, but I lived overseas for a while and when I came back it was very obtrusive, and whenever I’ve left the country for a bit and come back, I notice it again. It’s kind of shocking to think about, but it turns out that if you don’t regularly go to war, supporting the troops is not an important national priority. Other countries literally do not have this problem.


#18

Indeed. Just because we have labeled them “Type 1” and “Type 2” diabetes (they’re actually different diseases, just similar symptoms), doesn’t mean there aren’t further subtypes. Could be that some cases of Type 2 can’t be cured so easily.


#19

“I learned it from you, Dad! I learned it from you!”


#20

It depends on the kind of insulin, though, right? There is insulin that can be had inexpensively, but other kinds cost multiple hundreds of USD a month, even with the Affordable Care Act. (If you do the math, it’s possible to figure out how much money you save each time you work out, in terms of the insulin you don’t have to take.)