The Journal of the American Medical Association released a study recently that examined children with a genetic predisposition for Type 1 Diabetes and their Omega 3 fatty acid intake. Specifically the study used cod liver oil, which also contains other vitamins. The entire abstract can be read here.

The final outcome of the study was that there was a definite decreased risk of getting Type 1 Diabetes with proper Omega 3 supplementation. This was a dietary study and so other factors were controlled for including Vitamin D. Originally I suspected Vitamin D caused the decreased risk due to this study about Vitamin D. But Vitamin D was controlled for in this mot resent study which simply analyzed dietary intake.

An interesting study was completed at the University of Texas School of Health Information. It was called Glucose-sensing pulmonary delivery of human insulin to the systemic circulation of rats.

The research team was attempting to create a delivery mechanism for Insulin that would be automatic when sugar was sensed in the blood stream. The insulin was binded to particles that were inhaled by rats with hyperglycemia. Once the particles were in the blood stream and “sensed” the sugar, a reaction caused the insulin in the particle to be released. The study successfully lowered the rat’s glucose levels down to normal.

The next step is going to be finding better delivery molecules for humans that do not cause as much inflammation.

Yet another development in the recent Rosiglitazone controversy has scientists disputing the recent meta-analysis of Rosiglitazone (Avandia). From what I recall, the debate to date has generally taken this form. First there was a controversial meta-analysis study of over 40 studies completed on Rosiglitazone. It concluded that there was an unforeseen heart attack risk associated with use of the drug.

Glaxosmithkline, the manufacturer of the drug came out strongly against the study, pointing out that they tested the study and found no problems with its use. This is not surprising, as Avandia is making huge sales for the publically traded company, Glaxosmithkline (GSK). A massive stock drop followed suit with the Nissen study, as Avandia sales dropped and the comapny was forced to buyback more shares than normal and fiercely defend Avandia’s usefulness and safety.

The FDA panel found that it should be kept on the market, voting 22-1 in favor of keeping in legal. They felt that the drug was still helping more than it was possibly hurting and instead opted for a “black box warning” on the drug. Basically, that means it gets one of those warnings like something you would find on a pack of smokes on each bottle.

I have followed this controversy for a while and I think it points to one of the main problems found in our medical industry here in the US. The drug companies sell drugs, first and foremost. In a capitalistic society such as the US, they are guided by the “invisible hand” of profit and you can see by looking at their stock price what happens when one of their hit drugs is threatened- their stock tanks. Naturally people at GSK would scramble to keep it on the market if they are heavily vested into the stock. I am not saying that these people would act without integrity, but I do think their thoughts would be altered by the lens of GSK. And if they did act without integrity they would be doing so to preserve vast sums of money. They would want to believe that Avandia is safe, because if it wasn’t their livelihood is at stake. Such is one of the many faults of medicine as an industry.