Artificial Pancreas Helps People With Diabetes | Hacker News Reader

Artificial Pancreas Helps People With Diabetes

engineering.ucsb.edu

21 pointsdenzil_correa35 comments

Helps people with Type 1 diabetes which is about 3-5% of all people who have diabetes (Type 2 accounts for 90%) Although Type 1 is significantly more serious.

Its true that there are far more Type 2 diabetics than Type 1. But there are still 3 million Type 1 diabetics, and there are many Type 2 diabetics who still use insulin pumps and who thus could benefit from such a device.

Yeah, but Type 1 is much harder to treat.

As the husband of a type 1 diabetic, this isn't anything new. The only difference between this and something I've seen a half-decade ago is that it's wireless communication between the pump and the sensor.

Maybe the software is a little better, maybe the sensors are a little smaller, but this isn't a step forward, it's just a step to the side. You still will have to poke yourself with 2 needles (one for the sensor, one for the injector), just not as often. You'll also have to wear this. Call it vanity but my wife would like to wear a shirt without some weird lump under it. A swimsuit might be right out.

Pumps are also prohibitively expensive, even with insurance. We're talking about $8k for the pump itself and the about $500 per month for supplies (for current models). Insurance usually covers about 20% of the pump cost but it will probably have to be replaced every 5 years.

There are more interesting things on the horizon like implanted glucose monitors[1][2]. Since diabetics eventually get used to the needles, they typically need a better way to know when they might need more insulin (or in some cases sugar).

[1] http://www.s4ms.com/products_glucose.htm [2] http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/07/100728144347.ht...

Funny thing: this UCSD page has an embedded video that played me an ad for KY Touch. Too bad UCSD isn't getting the money from that ad - could be a whole new way to solve the funding problem.

So, where do I sign up to beta test?

Man the shit they come up with. A plant based diet helps and in many cases reverses diabetes, but if it's not laden with chemicals or some freak surgery people don't take it seriously. This is some sad world we live in.

A diet can not help the people who need this.

It's a disorder of glucose regulation, so minimizing carbs and maximizing fat (because protein also leads to glucose), can help a lot. Eat more animals and vegetables, less grains.

Glucose regulation is done by bonding oxygen to glucose with insulin.

When the pancreas does not manufacture insulin, no oxygen gets to the brain. Eating anything at all, no matter it's origin, will cause you to require insulin. Period.

Eat anything YOU want, but people who need this CAN NOT be helped by modifying their diet.

Thank you very much for your first sentence. Are there any links you would reommend to better understand the process? I did a paper on "functional hypoglycemia" many years ago, so I am not starting at square one. However, I find good info (like your first sentence) tends to be in short supply.

I'm afraid not (and to clarify the first sentence, the 3 are "bonded" to a red blood cell).

Sometimes an article in a journal about beta cells or diabetic metabolism will have a quick overview, but it's usually fairly technical.

Thank you. I will keep your remarks in mind. Though my first thought is to wonder how that relates to the inflammation component, which is a known factor in both my condition and diabetes generally. I need to think on it.

I need this. Maybe I wasn't precise about "glucose regulation", but obviously it doesn't happen if you don't have insulin.

I would agree that eating can't cure it, but it can help. Eating the standard USDA/ADA diet is loaded with carbs. Reducing carbs, and increasing (healthy, grass fed) fat and protein makes the glucose easier to manage. My average BG reduced by 30%, with fewer lows, and it's easier to do.

A nitpick, but it is an important distinction: people who need this can not be CURED by modifying their diet. They can certainly be helped though. Changing my sugar intake pattern was the single best change I've ever made for my long term health as a type 1 diabetic.

First: this is a treatment for type 1 diabetes. There is no reversing type 1 diabetes.

Second: a _low carb_ diet helps type 1 and 2 diabetes and in many cases reverses type 2 diabetes. It has nothing to do with being "plant based". The greatest improvement in my control of my type 1 diabetes came when I eliminated grains, a type of plant, from my diet.

So, I directly disagree: A meat based, grain free, low carb diet is the single best prescription for anyone with any form of diabetes.

I agree. I went Paleo 2 years ago and it made blood sugar much easier to manage.

Yup. Paleo has been transformative for me. The reason this diet is so great for diabetics is two-fold:

1) Meat gives my body the correct satiety signals, and so staying away from all of the carby treats that I use to find so addictive is no problem. It's easier for me to eat the right foods AND eat the right amounts of those foods.

2) Meat is not made of sugar like high carbohydrate foods are. The protein of meat needs to undergo a slow metabolic process (gluconeogenisis) in order for my body to turn it into sugar. What this means is that my food is "slow release" energy (sugar) as opposed to an instant sharp spike in sugar. Predictability is key when you need to manually inject the correct amount of sugar consuming hormone after every meal.

This diet is also great for EVERYONE... But that's a different discussion.

I'm glad it works out for you, but that diet is not great for everyone. In fact, much like the standard american diet - it's BAD for everyone, especially if the meat you consume is not grass fed. You're basically consuming the toxic soup of GMO corn, soy, and other grains fed to animals that were never meant to eat that. Plus you're consuming animal protein, which is very bad for humans. Unless you're thinking mainstream, those people don't even take issue with aspartame in their regular diet coke intake.

Meat quality is a huge component of eating Paleo. Grassfed and pastured meats may be more expensive but they pay dividends in health benefits.

Which brings me to your second statement that "consuming animal protein" is "very bad for humans". Do you realize that humans and the ancestors of humans have been consuming animal protein for 2 million years? Our metabolisms EVOLVED for eating animal proteins. Consuming animal proteins is the only way our species has been able to survive and thrive in ALL climates from the north to south poles, many places where vegetation is only available three months out of the year. Animal proteins are the only food available to us which include all 20 amino acids necessary for optimal health. Pound for pound, meats are drastically more nutrient dense than any other form of food. What the hell are you smoking?

My wife is a type 1 diabetic. Type 1 diabetes is a disorder not caused by diet or by any particular moral failing you might imagine, and people with it are the primary target of a device like this.

Your ignorance is insulting to millions of people who suffer due to diabetes. Please educate yourself rather than spouting nonsense.

Hey, do you happen to have any links you would recommend explaining the difference? I have been keeping my mouth shut out of respect for the fact that a closed mouth gathers no feet. I am at high risk for CFRD -- cystic fibrosis related diabetes -- which is neither type 1 nor type 2, or so I understand. I have reversed a lot of my symptoms, something doctors say cannot be done. Trying to better understand the topic.

Thanks.

Sure - this is a pretty good explanation: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/7504.php .

tl;dr: Type 1 diabetes is an autoimmune disorder in which your body kills the insulin-producing cells in the pancreas, leaving you with no ability to produce insulin. Type 2 sufferers, on the other hand, can usually produce a normal amount of insulin, but their cells don't respond to it sufficiently.

Thank you. Working on reading it now.

(Though I think "auto immune disorder" is utter bullshit and generally means the same thing as the phrase "dumb luck" -- basically, that they don't really have a logical explanation.)

Generally auto immune disorder means your body is so full of toxins it can't work properly. That's why your first order of business is to cleanse it and stay away from everything your doctor says is fine: genetically modified foods, food dyes, pesticides, vaccines, fluoride, benzine and paragons in everyday products (think shampoo), artificial sweeteners, processed foods, animal protein and load up on vegetables, fruits, legumes, quinoa, super foods and antioxidants, etc. The information is out there, people just would rather listen to their doctor who will be out of a job if you just took better care of your body. There's no Spinach Foundation or Kale lobbyists paying doctor each time you walk in the door.

Me thinks you didn't bother to check my profile or you would know I run an alternative health site. While I generally agree with you, your approach is insulting, unnecessarily provocative and childish. Further, my experience is that while toxin load matters, it isn't everything. It is more complicated than that. Last, given your handle, it seems pretty clear you have an agenda. I would appreciate it if you don't drag me into your agenda. I have been whored out by other people enough in my life.

Thanks.

But "auto-immune disorder" does describe whats happening. What most doctors can't say is what causes that: so they can't say more than "dumb luck".

One explanation I've heard is leaky gut caused by grain sensitivity, followed by dairy proteins leaking out, causing the immune response, which then mistakes the pancreas which has similar looking proteins. I don't know how much evidence there is for that.

But there are causes for leaky syndrome and they are treatable. And leaky gut at least tells you descriptively what is happening. Auto immune simply assumes the body mysteriously attacks itself, for no apparent reason.

Anyway, thank you for the feedback. It fits with some things I know and is something I can follow up on.

Why do you think "mysteriously" is part of the definition of auto-immune? If we don't know what causes a particular auto-immune response doesn't make it not auto-immune.

My condition gets referred to that way. It doesn't make sense to me as a mental model. Unfortunately, I have had a really long day so probably cannot explain my views in an effective manner.

You are wrong. Has your wife ever tried a plant based diet, or is it just more convenient to believe your mainstream doctor? I guess the latter.

Have you ever understood physiology or biochemistry, much less endocrinology? While I'm sure you think you do, your comments reveal that you do not.

The weight of evidence you've brought to bear is, it has to be said, overwhelming.

If someone wants to leave their comfy mainstream bubble, google is only a tab away.

You know what, I searched google.

About the best I could find when it comes to type 1 diabetes was someone saying that a plant based diet had helped reduce the volatility of their blood sugar levels. No mention of no longer needing insulin, or their pancreas magically repairing itself. Nothing that would make the device in the OP substantially less helpful.

This is all hardly a surprise, because plant-based diets tend to be low in refined carbohydrates, large quantities of which make diabetes harder to manage. People have achieved similar effects eating lots of other diets that aren't too high in carb (and this is, indeed, one area where mainstream science on the subject is in the process of updating itself).

Please, tell me of the people with type 1 diabetes who have had their condition reversed by a change in diet. I'd genuinely love it if it were true, but it's not. It's complete BS.

By the way, calling something 'mainstream' when it comes to medicine is not the insult you seem to think it is. It generally means 'credible people have performed studies with a credible methodology, and they have found stuff out'. You'll have to forgive me if I don't find anecdotes on the internet a particularly compelling alternative.

This is not to say that fringe opinions are all bad - occasionally one of those opinions will be right, the mainstream will be wrong, and the mainstream will be updated. Usually, though, we try to have some kind of credible evidence before stating wild leaps as fact - because most of these fringe opinions are wrong.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com