Posted on 07/16/2006 7:03:22 PM PDT by neverdem
Several new studies suggest that diabetes increases the risk of Alzheimer’s disease, adding to a store of evidence that links the disorders. The studies involve only Type 2 diabetes, the most common type, which is usually related to obesity.
The connection raises an ominous prospect: that increases in diabetes, a major concern in the United States and worldwide, may worsen the rising toll from Alzheimer’s. The findings also add dementia to the cloud of threats that already hang over people with diabetes, including heart disease, strokes, kidney failure, blindness and amputations.
But some of the studies also hint that measures to prevent or control diabetes may lower the dementia risk, and that certain diabetes drugs should be tested to find out whether they can help Alzheimer’s patients, even those without diabetes. Current treatments for Alzheimer’s can provide only a modest improvement in symptoms and cannot stop the progression of the disease.
The new findings were presented today at a six-day conference in Madrid by the Alzheimer’s Association and attended by 5,000 researchers from around the world.
Alzheimer’s affects one in 10 people over 65, and nearly half over 85. About 4.5 million Americans have it, and taking care of them costs $100 billion a year, according to the association. The number of patients is expected to grow, possibly reaching 11.3 million to 16 million by 2050, according to the Alzheimer’s Association.
But those projections do not even include a possible increase from diabetes.
“Alzheimer’s is going to swamp the health-care system,” said Dr. John C. Morris, a neurology professor at Washington University in St. Louis, and an advisor to the Alzheimer’s Association.
In the past decade, several large studies found that, compared to healthy people of the same age and sex, those with Type 2 diabetes were twice as likely...
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
More recently Type II has been associated with three gene variations. They are of the recessive variety, so somewhere about 5% of the population is at risk ~ almost certain risk ~ and that's with or without obesity.
Notice that 10% of the population over 65 has Alzheimers (according to this article). That's double the incidence of Type II diabetes, so folks who thought this article would hold no interest to them really oughta' lissen' up.
NY Terrorist Tipsheet. Good one.
Fructose is just another sugar that the body can and will convert into the sugar form it likes best. Think of the human body as being much more like that of the honeybee than you ever thought. We take stuff and turn it into sugar. Then we store it. The honeybee pukes it up and puts it in a wax comb. We use insulin to stuff it in fat cells. Bzzz, bzzzz, bzzzz.
Here's what I do ~ I restrict my vegetable and fruit intake to 17 low glycemic index types. I never drink juice, nor ripe fruit of any kind, not even lemons or grapefruit ~ after a couple of years without artificial sweeteners or sugar you can eat an unripe lemon and it will taste sweet to you (if no one else).
I read every label to see what the carbohydrate content is.
Obviously I'm not worried at all about suffering from cornsyrup poisoning.
Apparently, they've found a fancier name for what we used to call senility. I don't think Alzheimer's is anything new. I think they just found a new name to help their never-ending search for research money.
Hey, I say more steak and beer and cut down on the sweets.
I do occasionally drink juice, a nice Chianti.
That fanatic attention to detail faded over time. He started eating tons of carbs. His eyesight began to fail. He became mean for no apparent reason. The day he checked into the hospital for the final time, we learned that he had brain scans and other diagnostic work in his charts that he never told anyone about. We suspected Alzheimer's as his gait moved from "normal" to "shuffling" over the last 18 months he was alive. He was still driving a car 3 days before he went to the hospital. He never had a formal diagnosis of Alzheimer's, but all the outward signs were present.
My wife's mother-in-law has been confined to a hospital for the last 3 years. Diagnosed Alzheimer's. She just had another stroke last week. Now she doesn't recognize anyone and has ceased eating enough to survive. The doctors give her 2 weeks at this point. She was a nice, intelligent lady when I met her 20 years ago.
Still too much sugar in there, plus alcohol puts a load on your kidneys, and you may already have suffered damage due to too high blood sugar.
How many of these are over 85?
After all, you don't end up with plugged/clogged/collapsing arteries in one or two years of funny dieting.
Plus, you should have done more exercise!
SOY!
http://www.mercola.com/2004/apr/21/soy_health.htm
Think Soy is Healthy? Here’s Why it’s Not as Good as You Think
By Dr. Joseph Mercola
Soy has gained the reputation as a health food, in large part, because of the numerous health claims surrounding its products. Interestingly, a friend of mine forwarded a pro-soy article to me to refute and I was surprised to find my name mentioned in it as "an ardent advocate of eating beef, chicken, turkey, ostrich, and other meats."
The article is What About Soy? by John Robbins, who I believe is one of the most avid soy supporters out there. He brings up dozens of points, and even mentions me in the article, so I thought refuting his article would be a good way to answer the other critics out there as well.
Lowering Cholesterol
Robbins ascribes soy’s potential to lower cholesterol as beneficial. However, while this may be helpful in some, it can be certainly cause disease in others. Low cholesterol does not necessarily imply good health. Please review some of the well-documented dangers of low cholesterol if you are not familiar with them
This is because we all need cholesterol and levels below optimal can cause serious problems. Much of the hype about cholesterol has been generated by self-serving research used to support the massive profit structure of pharmaceutical companies supplying drug-based "solutions."
For example, I happen to have a genetically low cholesterol and it has been as low as 75 at times. This is very dangerous and it took me many years to understand how to normalize it and now my cholesterol is about 100 points higher and a far healthier 175.
Robbins also says, "Soy beverages are cholesterol-free, while cow's milk contains 34 mg of cholesterol per cup, which again means that cow's milk is far worse for your heart and cardiovascular system." This is not a strong argument for soy, as, again, we all need cholesterol--without it we suffer major health problems. It is also important to realize that I do not advocate drinking commercial milk, only non-pasteurized raw milk if one is able to tolerate it.
Animal Study Circular Arguments
Robbins cites a number of studies to support the concept that different animal species respond uniquely to soy or other variables. No argument here.
But, Robbins uses a circular argument that doesn’t hold water by giving examples of drugs that were safe in animals but dangerous in humans. For instance:
"When the arthritis drug Opren was tested on monkeys, no problems were found, but it killed 61 people before it was withdrawn. Cylert was fine for animals, but when it was given to hyperactive children it caused liver failure."
This doesn’t prove the converse that soy that is safe in animals is safe in humans.
Phytic Acid
According to Mary Enig and Sally Fallon, soybeans are high in phytic acid, which, in large amounts, can block the uptake of essential minerals like calcium, magnesium, copper, iron and especially zinc in the intestinal tract. This is one area where I disagree with Enig and Fallon partially in that the phytic acid in soy (and other plant products like beans, nuts and seeds) may be beneficial or detrimental, it just depends.
For men phytic acid is probably very helpful as nearly all adult males have excess iron as we never had menstrual periods. I personally take a phytic acid supplement to lower my iron levels. However, in menstruating women and children the phytic acid in soy can be a serious negative.
In his arguments Robbins correctly points out that fermented soy products have lower phytic acid than commercial soy products. However, he does so as to contradict Fallon and Enig, but this is exactly what they also state. They have no problems with fermented soy products and encourage their consumption.
Osteoporosis
Robbins’ comments that people consuming soyfoods have reduced rates of osteoporosis are a red herring as there are many factors other than soy consumption that are far more powerful influences on optimal bone density. I actually have a book in progress in this area.
For instance, vitamin K is one of the most important nutritional interventions for improving bone density and vitamin K2, which is made in your body and also produced by fermented foods, is a superior form. Fermented soy products may indeed be beneficial, but the typical store-bought soy, like soy meat substitutes, soy milk, soy ice cream and so on, will not produce this effect. You can also get this beneficial form of vitamin K by making your own fermented foods.
Cancer
I would never recommend or encourage non-fermented soy for cancer prevention. However, you can certainly include fermented soy as part of a healthy diet that contributes to cancer prevention.
The exception here is if you already have cancer. In this case, certain constituents from soy can certainly be used therapeutically to help treat the cancer, but that is a completely different application than consuming commercial soy products.
Even Robbins admits that it is wise to avoid large doses of isoflavones:
"When manufacturers of soy protein isolates and supplements recommend that people consume 100 grams of soy protein a day (the equivalent of 7 or 8 soyburgers), they are ignoring the unknown effects of overdosing on isoflavones. I believe it's probably safer, until more is learned, to avoid concentrated soy supplements entirely."
Birth Defects
At least one study has found that soy phytoestrogens appear to increase the risk of birth defects by as much as 500 percent. Further, soy formula exposes infants to very high levels of hormones that can have negative influences on them as they grow older.
The link between soy and birth defects does need to be studied further, as this connection may or may not be true. However, the uncertainty of the association in no way detracts from the other arguments presented here and in other sources against the use of non-fermented soy.
Alzheimer’s Disease
One study of close to 4,000 elderly Japanese-American men found that those who ate the most tofu during midlife had more than double the risk of later developing Alzheimer's disease.
Similar to the birth defects and soy argument above, soy may or may not increase the risk of Alzheimer’s, as more studies should be done to truly prove this association. But whether or not this is true does not make non-fermented soy any better to consume.
(much more at link)
I am a type 2 diabetic,, My a1c is less than 7..I feel that I control it with diet and Actos Last time I saw my doc.. Who once said less than 7 was great now wants it less than 6.. She put me on another pill and a week later I had to stop by a quick shop once to get orange juice because my BS was like low and was feeling sweety out of it and having a hard time driving and was having an adverse reaction to the additional pill.. I mean this is crazy I quit taking that pill and when I test its like 93 to 120.. Tell me what to do.. I have to see her in a week..
Is MedlinePlus not up to date?
This makes it possible to control your diet most of the time without testing or attention to detail.
On the other hand, you have to make it a regular practice in your life to reduce starch and sugar intake to virtually nothing. Normal intake is 300 grams of carbs per day. You can get your blood sugar under control by reducing that to no more than 100 per day, and the way you do that is set a goal of no more than 20 grams per day (stuff just pops into your mouth when you feel hungry all the time so make sure it's well packed in fiber to slow down digestion).
I suspect your dad had high triglycerides and high cholesterol when they caught him. It's tough to combat that combination, but the anti-cholesterol drugs help.
Makes me want to eat a ripe peach even!
Actually, there has been some very interesting research in the last couple years that strongly suggests that Alzheimer's is to the brain what Type II diabetes is to the pancreas.
You did know that the brain produces insulin, right? Arguably one of the more interesting and unexpected medical discoveries in the last few years. If you think of Alzheimer's in terms of diabetes, many of the research results and characteristics of the disease make a lot of sense.
I'd just read the other day that by the time you're 85 you have a 30% chance of developing Alzheimers or "other dementia".
Unless they find some way to burn that glucose real quick it gets stuffed into their fat cells or into nasty old triglycerides.
If and when I get it down into the 70s (which is still "normal") I can smell a Crispy Cream 10 miles upwind in a 2 inch per hour downpour.
And, lo and behold, vigorous use of your brain/mind complex tends to mitigate the effects of Alzheimers, even if you've got it ~ (I think we have the thread on that research somewhere within the last two weeks).
I was going along with your thesis until I noticed you used the word "too" in front of high blood sugar.
Surely, if you have such a high degree of intelligence, you would not have made such a simple error.
I'll take your advice with a grain of salt, and worry not about my kidneys.
Think of a flat rock.
Enjoy your life filled with spreadsheets and monitoring, immerse yourself in the glycemic index.
I'd encourage you to savor a meal, and don't drive. Why?
It's proven that driving can lead to death, as does walking down stairs, boating, swimming, parachuting, hang gliding, breathing, swallowing, eating pretzels, lighting fireworks, et al.
Your life must be tremendously boring. I hope you live a long, boring life.
Which is the brain equivalent of physical exercise with respect to Type II diabetes. There have been a few studies now that show that heavier brain utilization mitigates/prevents Alzheimer's. Insulin, like oxygen, is not particularly good for us though necessary and a lot of age related damage is caused by it. Idle insulin is the devil's workshop, so keeping the levels low and the hormone occupied prevents a lot of biological mischief. Insulin related damage increasingly becomes the leading cause of cardiovascular disease after 60.
I'm pretty sure I would have heard or read something in the meanwhile. Update Date: 2/9/2005 for the previous link.
Here's what they write at http://familydoctor.org/327.xml
"Testing (also called "screening") is usually done with a fasting blood test. You'll be tested in the morning, so you shouldn't eat anything after dinner the night before. A normal blood sugar test result is below 110 mg per dL. A test result higher than 125 mg per dL suggests diabetes. However, you should have 2 tests that are higher than 125 mg per dL, on 2 different days, before a diagnosis of diabetes is made. Test results from 110 mg per dL to 125 mg per dL suggest that you have a higher risk of diabetes." Reviewed/Updated: 12/05
It's a minor argument on what the cutoff is, over 100 or over 110 for "prediabetes" also known as impaired glucose tolerance. Over 125 fasting blood glucose on 2 different days is still required for the diagnosis of diabetes, unless you can show me a more recent and authoritative link.
If and when I get it down into the 70s (which is still "normal") I can smell a Crispy Cream 10 miles upwind in a 2 inch per hour downpour.
If your in a hospital and your blood glucose is less that 70, but you're asymptomatic, expect a serving of orange juice with 2 packs of sugar.
I sympathize. I'm also Type II and my A1C started out at 7.1. By taking Avandamet (Avandia and Metformin aka Glucophage) and exercising for an hour a day every other day (mostly walking), I lowered mine to 5.7 - 6.0. When my doctor told me the new level was 6.0, not 7.0, I basically said it was BS. If it was truly SCIENCE, why did they drop it from one round number to another round number? Can't they say that 6.8 was the new benchmark or 6.4? No. They jump from 7.0 to 6.0. In short, NIH or CDC or whomever makes these guidelines is full of sh!t.
The problem is that your doctor is always going to want to "play it safe" because they are paranoid of malpractice suits. Therefore, they are bullied into the national guidelines whether they agree with them or not.
Personally, I feel my best when my glucose is around 120. The "experts" claim that's too high. They want it at 90-110. When I get below 100, I feel weak and tired.
Keep in mind that any sugar measurement is a snapshot and not the be-all-end-all your doctors treat it like. The important thing is to watch what foods give you a sugar spike and learn to do without them. Exercise often. See if your medicine may work better by taking 1/2 doses every 12 hours rather than one dose every 24 hours. Check into other types of medication (there's a new one that gives you a 30-day "shot" with some +/- side effects). Bottom line, read everything you can get your hands on so you can take control of your health rather than letting your doctor control it. If you're in the 6's, you don't have that much modification to do but find what works and then stick with it.
Good luck. (Sorry to hijack the thread)
Sounds like symptomatic hypoglycemia to me. I would stop the new pill. Bring one of the new pills to the office next week. You can take it there and she can check your blood glucose if she doesn't believe you. This may take a few hours before it takes effect. You may want to bring a book, run some errands in the meantime, etc. It should take about the same amount of time as it took on the day you described earlier. Then she can document the effect. Docs are often very sceptical of a patient's history. The notion of patient non-compliance is always in the back of their heads.
What have you heard about this?
When I was sticking to Atkins, I would keep my carb target under 20 per day. It easily goes over that even when you are trying to avoid it. I'm very aware of a low blood sugar condition. I would experience hypoglycemic rebounds from a can of real Mountain Dew when I was in my 20's. It still happens today if I foolishly consume high glycemic index carbs. It causes a shaking, nervous feeling that makes it difficult to write with a pencil. A normal low just causes a tired, depressed feeling.
Thanks for the info.. When I was told I was a type2 I was pissed.. I love pasta bread and potatoes but over time like a month I tried to conform,,, and brought it down to 6.9.. I count carbs never eat real sugar but need to exercize more
Thanks stay in touch.. Kay
BTW how many carbs do you eat a day??
Science and Ethics at Crucial Crossroads
FReepmail me if you want on or off my health and science ping list.
Thanks for the post & source.
Does type 2 diabetes also come from consuming a lot of sugar?
Watch it with Mercola, I think he may be a bit of a quack. I have read some of his research papers and I don't think any of them are peer reviewed. If you know differently I'd like to hear what you think.
P.S. Mercola isn't even an M.D., he's an Osteopath.
It's a very complicated subject. Suffice to say, genetic predisposition, lack of exercise and excess calorie consumption equals bad news. The links in comments 16 and 26 might shed some light.
When Osteopaths have unrestricted licenses to practice medicine and surgery, when the federal government provides three and four year scholarships for completing their degrees, what is your problem with any D.O.?
For your comment and references to other posts about type 2 diabetes, much appreciated.
My husband is an Osteopath.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Search&db=PubMed&term=110+mg%2Fdl&tool=QuerySuggestion will give you a start on 876 formal medical references to 110 mg/dl. Take a good look at #24 where a group in Finland evaluated cutting the standard to 100 mg/dl for purposes of reviewing relative morbidity rates.
I've found there's a recovery time ~ working for an hour or two burns out the glycogen faster than it can be replaced, so you need a break for a half hour or so, then things catch up.
Your blood sugar ought to be anywhere from 85 to 95 during that period.
Our natural diet seems to be much more in tune with that of pastoralists ~ herdsmen ~ than hunter/gatherers with their high carbohydrate diets.
I'm with you 100% on that one. I have been in the Long Term Care (PC for Nursing Home) industry for many years.
Alzheimer's is the result of the body out living the brain IMHO.
No offense to you or your husband but Mercola's website appears to be quackery to me. I was wrong to over-generalize and I apologize.
I totally disagree with your opinion of Mercola. He references everything he says.
Oh, I DID disagree with his perception of Bird Flu though :)
Per your suggestion #24
Assessing the preprandial glucose target: 100 mg/dL versus 110 mg/dL.
"OBJECTIVE: To assess the potential value of lowering the impaired fasting glucose (IFG) cut point from 110 mg/dL to 100 mg/dL. METHODS: Data from pertinent published studies are analyzed in an effort to identify the risk of diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and mortality under various glycemic conditions. RESULTS: The risk of developing diabetes increases with advancing age. The relationship is strongest when the 2-hour plasma glucose level is analyzed, whereas the fasting plasma glucose level is generally stable and changes little with aging. The 2-hour plasma glucose level has a linear relationship with cardiovascular disease and mortality. Most patients with acute myocardial infarction have high 2-hour plasma glucose levels but normal fasting plasma glucose values. Increased mortality risk based on the fasting plasma glucose level does not appear until values of approximately 7 mmol/L (126 mg/dL) and remains relatively flat at lower levels. CONCLUSION: Lowering the cut point for IFG from 6.1 mmol/L to 5.6 mmol/L (110 mg/dL to 100 mg/dL) increases the prevalence of IFG but does not predict mortality below 7 mmol/L (126 mg/dL)."
My question: is it normal for FBS to increase as one ages? I already watch my carbs and I exercise.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.