Remix.run Logo
RHSeeger 4 days ago

Because it has been commented over and over "oh, type 2 is because you are overweight"...

> We tend to think of type 2 diabetes as a disease that afflicts people who are overweight. But it can also appear in people with perfectly healthy weights—and be more deadly in them. A study published today in the Journal of the American Medical Association indicates that normal-weight people diagnosed with type 2 diabetes have double the risk of dying from heart disease and other causes than overweight people with diabetes.

- https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/diabetes-can-strike-hard...

(Yes, I know this post is about Type 1... but _all_ of the talk in it when I posted this was about Type 2; and basically blaming the people with it for their condition)

spinach 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

But being overweight is a huge risk factor for developing it and absolutely can contribute to it. I don't how it being more deadly in skinny people detracts from that or is relevant at all.

RHSeeger 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

Because people (who don't know what they're talking about) respond with statements like "you can cure Diabetes Type 2 with diet and exercise", and

- That's false. For _most_ people, you can prevent the symptoms of it with those, but not all. Nor does it _cure_ it, it prevents it from presenting symptoms. The same way that avoiding a food you are allergic to doesn't cure the allergy, it just prevents it from impacting you

- It's insulting to a lot of people that _are_ eating and exercising well, but still battling with Diabetes Type 2

It's wrong and it's insulting.

tracker1 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Even if you are overweight... it's NOT easy to lose weight.. especially if you've lost a significant amount of weight in your life. You may well have a really dysfunctional metabolism, and most advice is just bad for this case. Many people actually have to eat more of a reduced menu in order to lose weight.

I'm a pretty big fan of carnivore for this, which has its own detractors, and countering half a century of misinformation of meat and fat isn't the easiest thing in the world. And even then, you may still need some level of supplemental insulin for a long while.

That isn't to say I support general gluttony and laziness... but it isn't that easy, and its even harder when people just assume you aren't even trying or have negativity towards you in general. You try to work out and you get dirty looks and stares... you are eating out (healthy options) but again, dirty looks and stares... it doesn't help.

chips_not_fries 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

it's one factor but weight and diet isn't the only component

4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
chips_not_fries 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

type 2 is more closely associated with genetics than type 1

https://diabetes.org/about-diabetes/genetics-diabetes

mnw21cam 3 days ago | parent [-]

That's not true. From the article, type 2 is more familial than type 1, but not all of that association is genetic.

As a more concrete demonstration, the type 1 genetic risk score (GRS) has good predictability of the risk of someone getting type 1 diabetes. We have linked certain genetic variants to increased or decreased risk of getting type 1 diabetes (and it's mostly in the HLA complex on chromosome 6 that significantly influences the immune system). The AUC (area under curve) of the score's ROC curve is 0.87, which is good. We use the type 1 GRS for patients incoming with type 1-like symptoms to separate out those likely to have rare genetic conditions instead, alongside antibody testing, and it works very well.

The type 2 GRS is very weak in comparison. We haven't found much link between genetics and type 2 risk that we can use to predict the risk. The AUC of the type 2 GRS is only 0.63 in the very best studies, which is a poor predictor.

Having said that, type 2 risk varies quite considerably with race, with South Asians being more susceptible to type 2 diabetes than much of the rest of the world.

Note, an AUC of 0.5 indicates no predictive value whatsoever, and an AUC of 1.0 indicates perfect prediction.