Saturday, August 30, 2014

Many Women Have Died Unnecessarily Because of surgery with MORCELLATORS

Why does Morcellation surgery continue when we know it kills women?   Why do doctors continue to do the surgery?  The answer: profits for medical device companies, profits for doctors.

How Many People Have To Die To Show A New Surgery Technique Isn't Worth It?
By Harriet Brown
Prevention Magazine
May 2014

"...Noorchashm stayed up nights writing strongly worded letters, posting comments on every website remotely relevant to the cause, and having strategic conversations with anyone who would talk to him. The only resulting change he saw was in his own reputation. He'd gone from star surgeon to social leper, shut out of the operating room at his own hospital (though he can't prove it was because of the campaign) and avoided by colleagues and former friends. "They closed ranks on me," he says now, with sadness in his voice. "I broke the white code of silence; I hung out our dirty laundry."..."


Dr. Noorchashm asks: "When new technology makes
medicine cheaper and more convenient, how many
patients have to die to prove it's not worth it?"

Petition by Hooman Noorchashm, MD, PhD:

My wife [Dr. Amy Reed] had a surgical procedure that spread cancerous cells throughout her body. She now has stage 4 cancer. Please sign my petition demanding the FDA stop a procedure that has spread cancer in thousands of women.

My wife Amy is a mother of six, and an accomplished anesthesiologist who helped treat victims of the Boston Marathon bombing last year.

Now, because of a dangerous, but standard, gynecological procedure her early stage cancer was spread -- causing stage 4 cancer. 
Last Fall, Amy went in for a routine hysterectomy to treat what we thought were benign fibroids, and had a minimally invasive “morcellation” procedure to remove her uterus. Little did we know that this procedure would end up spreading malignant cancer cells throughout Amy’s belly. What's more is that “morcellation” is totally avoidable and it has devastated thousands of women and families by spreading and upstaging dangerous cancers of the uterus and ovaries. 
Now we’re taking a stand in hopes of banning this surgery for good, and saving the lives of countless women and mothers. And the momentum is on our side.
Because of the momentum of this petition, numerous hospitals around the country have stopped performing this type of hysterectomy. Last week, a major health insurer -- Blue Cross Blue Shield -- announced that they would no longer cover the procedure. And Johnson & Johnson, which manufactures some of the surgical tools used in this procedure, issued a worldwide voluntary recall of the tools called "power morcellators," saying that they couldn’t guarantee that the procedure was safe for women to undergo.
The reason this surgical procedure is so controversial is that doctors have no reliable way of testing whether patients are at risk of having cancerous cells spread throughout their body during the surgery. That was the case with Amy -- in the process of removing her uterus, undetected cancer cells were spread throughout her abdomen region, and stage 4 cancer developed. The same has happened to scores of other women, globally. Women who went in thinking they were having a “minimally invasive” procedure, left the operating room with an advanced stage of cancer.
Last month, the FDA held public hearings on this surgical procedure. Amy and I traveled down to Washington, D.C., to talk about this petition and to bring Amy’s story to the attention of FDA and congressional regulators. They are currently debating whether to ban this procedure or not, and that’s why I need your help today.
I cannot tell you what this means to my wife, to me, and to our family. Together, we can help potentially save the lives of thousands of women moving forward. No other woman should ever have her uterine cancer upstaged to an advanced stage by a gynecologist practicing this totally avoidable procedure they call "morcellation."
Thank you,
Hooman Noorchashm, MD, PhD
Boston, MA

Health Alert: Many Women Have Died Unnecessarily Because Dangerous Cancers of the Uterus and Ovaries Are Being Spread using MORCELLATORS. Stop MORCELLATION in Minimally Invasive Gynecological Surgery. 


Friends of the Public,

Many women have been harmed and have died prematurely or unnecessarily because of a routine but avoidable gynecological practice known as MORCELLATION. This world-wide practice has devastated many families for well over two decades now.

More than 600,000 hysterectomies are done in the US every year. By the age of 70, one out of every three American women will have had a hysterectomy. About 90% of these surgeries are done for what is presumed to be a benign condition called fibroids. More and more of these surgeries are done with minimally invasive techniques.  Usually, to get the uterus out of the body using the "minimally invasive" technique, it is cut into small pieces with a machine called a morcellator.  However, a devastating problem happens if in fact the woman did NOT have fibroids – but if she actually had cancer.  Unfortunately, the tests that are done before a hysterectomy do not identify these cancers well.  Many gynecologists don't even bother getting any tests. In fact, morcellating cancer spreads the cancer inside the woman’s body.

This is called ‘up staging’ the cancer.
 
It is important to understand:

1) The average life span following accidental morcellation of sarcoma is only 24-36 months.
2) Only 15% of woman who have leiomyosarcoma (LMS) that has spread (stage 4) will be alive after 5 years.
3) Women with sarcoma who are morcellated are about 4 times more likely to die from sarcoma than if they had not been morcellated. 

This is an avoidable disaster.

This problem has been recognized for more than two decades.  A review of the literature reveals that 1 in 415 women who go for fibroid surgery actually has sarcoma.  This means that everyday 2-5 women in the US – and more around the world will have a deadly cancer spread because of morcellation.

This catastrophic problem has happened in our own family and we are fighting to stop this dangerous activity called morcellation.  A chance of 1 in 415 for such a devastating outcome is much too high to accept.  Women should be told the truth and the practice should stop.
Please help us bring an end to spreading cancer with morcellation.  There are alternatives.  Some surgeons have begun using a special bag to avoid spreading cancer cells.  Several of the reasons why this has not yet become commonplace are the fact that: a) bag morcellation takes more time – and time is money; b) lack of training; and c) lack of awareness.  Other people opt for a traditional open hysterectomy.  People need to understand their options – but – currently, most women never hear anything about morcellation or about the possibility of cancer upstaging. We need your help.
Please sign our petition so we can get the word out.  We want the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology to change this "standard of care" by ending the needless waste of life caused by spreading cancer with morcellation.

For more information and original references see: http://journals.lww.com/oncology-times/blog/onlinefirst/pages/post.aspx?PostID=188 ) (also see:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23189178) (also see:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21565389).
The attached video below shows an example of morcellation http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMnzQbRMWJ8

The following companies manufacture and distribute uterine morcellator devices:

1) ETHICON: Gynecare morcellator
2) Storz: Rotocut Morcellator
3) Richard Wolf Medical Instrumentation Company
4) LiNA: LiNA Xcise Cordless Laparoscopic Morcellator
5) Blue Endo MOREsolution Tissue Morcellator

Intuitive Surgical's Da Vinci Robot deserves special mention, as the frequency of robotic hysterectomies performed by minimally invasive gynecologists is currently on the rise across the United States. Note that Intuitive Surgical builds and markets the DaVinci robot, which is not itself a "morcellator". However, use of the DaVinci robot almost invariably appears to require that the uterus be minced up, or morcellated, into smaller pieces inside the woman's belly cavity in order to extract from the abdomen. A clear example is shown in the following YouTube video of DaVinci being used to perform a robotic hysterectomy and manually morcellating the uterus using the endo-wrist component of the robot (morcellation is being performed at minute 5:30 of the video).

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6luiX6UQmg

 Without morcellation using equipment manufactured by Intuitive Surgical, robotic hysterectomies would, likely, not be possible using the DaVinci Robot. It is noteworthy that the DaVinci robot does not appear to have a readily available warning label advising against its use to morcellate tumors with malignant potential inside the body. The company's Chief Medical Advisor, Dr. Myriam Curet, a surgeon herself, has been informed and advised of this severe hazard in the use of DaVinci for robotic hysterectomy and the absence of a readily available warning label.

Sunday, August 17, 2014

China watchdogs are going after rampant corruption in healthcare, among other enterprises

 Tread carefully, Dr. Binder!  Make sure the people you do business with in China aren't part of the "rampant graft" in healthcare there.  The anti-corruption watchdog in China has announced five more years of cracking-down on corruption.

China warns again of dark side of the mooncakes
SHANGHAI  
Sep 5, 2014 
(Reuters)

China's crackdown on corruption, a scourge Communist Party leaders fear threatens their hold on power, is likely to last at least another five years, an official said, warning also against the mid-autumn tradition of handing out mooncakes as gifts.
President Xi Jinping has promised to go after "tigers and flies" in rooting out rampant graft, a campaign that has brought down politicians and company executives in industries including oil, cars and healthcare.


UCLA is involved with healthcare company in China:

 ADICON, UCLA, and Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University form Triangle Telepathology services 
Adicon
7.11.2012
   
 UCLA Doctor Scott Binder and friends

In the morning of Apr. 23, ADICON’s COO Janny Yang, the head of UCLA pathology outreach service Scott Binder, and the chair of second affiliated hospital Jianan Wang, signed the telepathology service contract. Three parties will utilize their own resources and advantages to provide high-end diagnosis to the clients. The trilateral leaders attending the signing ceremony included ADICON’s COO Janny Yang, international cooperation manager Ti He; UCLA’s vice director of pathology department and supervisor of dermal pathology discipline Scott Binder, supervisor of gynecological pathology and cellular pathology discipline Professor Qian JianYu; the second affiliated hospital Zhejiang university medical school’s president Wang Jian’an, vice president You Xiangdong, admin office director Wang Kai, medical department vice director Xu Hangdong, medical lab director Chen Gongxiang, pathology department director Chen Derong, International affairs office vice director Yang Mingli.
Each party expressed their good wishes for the collaboration. Dr. Binder hopes to deliver better service capacities, as well as more chances of health education and research. Mr. Wang hopes that the participation of ADICON can reach more patients who need such services. The head of pathology, Derong Chen reiterates that the digital pathology is the trend of pathology services and communications. The involvement of three parties gives this service much more chances to enjoy the high-end resources not only in China, but also abroad. Janny mentioned that much more pathologists and patients can get access of the diagnosis through ADICON’s network and logistics. It will give the final result much bigger than we thought. ADICON expected to realize a “1+1+1>3” everyone-win situation through the collaboration.
UCLA is a leading medical center in US. From the ranking by USNews, multiple areas, such as GI, urology, ophthalmology are in top 5. Through this partnership, UCLA will deliver dermatology, gastrointestinal pathology, hematology, cytology services in China. Consisting of 47 clinical or medical departments, the second affiliated hospital Zhejiang university medical school is a renowned “AAA” hospital with a history of over 100 years. It will combine the existing strong capacities of Second affiliated hospital pathology team and ADICON pathology team to serve the patients.
This partnership also includes the technical training program and quality control program, in order to improve ADICON’s pathology team. ADICON will utilize this contract to solve the difficult-to-diagnosis cases, as well as to provide research chances. It will be a comprehensive platform of “diagnosis, education, research, and service”.

Thursday, August 14, 2014

Ever since Kaiser left its Northern California patients off the list to receive kidney transplants, the evidence seems to be mounting that Kaiser is a particularly bad place for kidney patients.

Kaiser Death Blamed on Recalled Dialysis Fluid
By TISH KRAFT
Courthouse News
August 14, 2014

ALAMEDA, Calif. (CN) - A patient died because Kaiser used recalled dialysis fluid, her distraught daughter claims in an Alameda County Superior Court complaint.

The fluid, made by Fresenius Medical Care, was recalled "after it was found that the products could put patients at risk for cardiac arrest," the complaint states.
v Janal Watkins, individually and as personal representative of the Estate of Janice Rose Watkins sued Kaiser Foundation Health Plan Inc.; Kaiser Foundation Hospitals; Northern California Permanente Medical Group; Fresenius Medical Care; DaVita; Wesley Lesker; Kim Hadley and Satellite Healthcare.

Defendants used Fresenius' GranuFlo and Naturalyte products when they put Janal's mother on dialysis.

After several treatments, Janice had a cardiac arrest due to a condition caused by the high acid concentrates in the products, and died the same day.

The Food and Drug Administration had issued a Class 1 recall on dialysis concentrates GranuFlo and Naturalyte but did not warn outside clinics, which used the products, until an internal memo was leaked, according to the complaint.

A Class I recall indicates that "there is a reasonable probability that the use of or exposure to a violative product will cause serious adverse health consequences or death," according to the complaint.

Janice was not warned of the risks, the complaint states.

Defendants "knew or should have known of the recall or inherent dangers of using the Fresenius Medical Products. Defendants collectively continued to administer such products to decedent, which placed her at increased and greater risk for cardiac arrest. Defendants also used unsafe doses" of the products," according to the complaint.

Prior to Janice's hospitalization, she had "lived at her own home, drove her own vehicle, and performed her own activities of daily living. She controlled her own finances. She functioned independent of others. She was in no way nearing death, an irreversible coma, or a persistent vegetative state," according to the complaint.

Mother and daughter had had an extremely close relationship, spending much of their time with each other and seeing or speaking to each other each day, as they have most of their lives, the complaint states.

Janal seeks punitive damages for negligence, medical negligence failure to warn, willful misconduct and wrongful death.

She is represented by Stephen M. Sirota of the Law Offices of Allan R Frumkin in San Ramon.

Wednesday, June 11, 2014

Unconscious patient's cell phone captures doctors mocking him during colonoscopy

See all posts on colonoscopies.

Unconscious patient's cell phone captures doctors mocking him during colonoscopy.
Sarah Fruchtnicht
Opposingviews.com
22 Apr 2014

A Virginia man is suing after his cell phone captured audio of doctors allegedly mocking him while he was under anesthesia for a colonoscopy.

The plaintiff, D.B., says doctors joked about firing a gun up his rectum and accused him of having STDs during his medical procedure.

"On April 18, 2013, during a colonoscopy, plaintiff was verbally brutalized and defamed by the very doctors to whom he entrusted his life while under anesthesia," the complaint says.

D.B. sued Safe Sedation LLC and Safe Sedation Management in Fairfax County Court for defamation, infliction of emotional distress and illegally disclosing his health records.

The patient said he left his phone on and recorded everything on accident. When he later drove home with his wife, they discovered the recording.

The doctors, Tiffany Ingham and Soloman Shah, are not named as defendants but are accused of mocking D.B. as soon as the anesthetic knocked him out.

"Tiffany Ingham, M.D. started to mock, and then continued to mock, the amount of medicine required to anesthetize plaintiffs," the complaint states. "Referring to plaintiff, Soloman Shah, M.D. commented that a teaching physician known to both him and Tiffany Ingham, M.D. 'would eat him for lunch.'

"Tiffany Ingham, M.D. agreed that plaintiff would be 'eaten alive' and also jokingly discussed a hypothetical of firing a gun up a rectum," it says.

"And really, after five minutes of talking to you in pre-op I wanted to punch you in the face and man you up a little bit," Ingham allegedly said to the patient while he was under.

Doctors allegedly discussed D.B.'s prescription medication and an irritation he had on his penis. v "A medical assistant at GMA touched plaintiff's penis during the colonoscopy," the complaint states. "Although plaintiff's penis is not involved in a colonoscopy, the medical assistant noted there was not 'much of a penile rash.' Tiffany Ingham, M.D. responded, 'No, you'll accidentally rub up against it. Some syphilis on your arm or something.' Solomon Shah, M.D. responded, 'That would be bad. That would be real bad.'"

"Tiffany Ingham, M.D. then stated to all present in the operating suite that, 'It's probably tuberculosis in the penis, so you'll be all right.'"

The lawsuit notes that the plaintiff has neither disease.

In a final remark on tape, Ingham allegedly said she would make a note in D.B.'s file that he had hemorrhoids even though he didn't.

He's seeking $1 million in compensatory damages and $350,000 in punitive damages. COMMENTS

No need to anesthetize everyone
By: Publicgood

I did just fine during my colonoscopy with no anesthesia at all. I think doctors who anesthetize all patients are doing it for the same reason that they refuse to allow patients to have a DVD of the procedure: they don't want to listen to patient's questions either during the procedure or later on.

Colonoscopy souvenir DVDs
By: Publicgood

I am shocked that doctors across the US have stopped providing DVDs of colonoscopies in response to medical records requests. It's okay that they don't automatically give souvenir DVDs, but it's not okay to violate the law regarding patient's rights to access to their medical records. Doctors even claim that it's a cost-cutting measure; this is obviously false since digital memory is getting cheaper by the month and has always been cheaper and more compact than the VHS tapes on which colonoscopies used to be saved.

How Many Die From Medical Mistakes in U.S. Hospitals?

How Many Die From Medical Mistakes in U.S. Hospitals?
An updated estimate says at least 210,000 patients die
from medical mistakes in U.S. hospitals a year.
by Marshall Allen
ProPublica
Sep. 19, 2013

It seems that every time researchers estimate how often a medical mistake contributes to a hospital patient’s death, the numbers come out worse. In 1999, the Institute of Medicine published the famous “To Err Is Human” report, which dropped a bombshell on the medical community by reporting that up to 98,000 people a year die because of mistakes in hospitals. The number was initially disputed, but is now widely accepted by doctors and hospital officials — and quoted ubiquitously in the media.

In 2010, the Office of Inspector General for Health and Human Services said that bad hospital care contributed to the deaths of 180,000 patients in Medicare alone in a given year.

Now comes a study in the current issue of the Journal of Patient Safety that says the numbers may be much higher — between 210,000 and 440,000 patients each year who go to the hospital for care suffer some type of preventable harm that contributes to their death, the study says.

That would make medical errors the third-leading cause of death in America, behind heart disease, which is the first, and cancer, which is second.

The new estimates were developed by John T. James, a toxicologist at NASA’s space center in Houston who runs an advocacy organization called Patient Safety America. James has also written a book about the death of his 19-year-old son after what James maintains was negligent hospital care.

Asked about the higher estimates, a spokesman for the American Hospital Association said the group has more confidence in the IOM’s estimate of 98,000 deaths. ProPublica asked three prominent patient safety researchers to review James’ study, however, and all said his methods and findings were credible.

What’s the right number? Nobody knows for sure. There’s never been an actual count of how many patients experience preventable harm. So we’re left with approximations, which are imperfect in part because of inaccuracies in medical records and the reluctance of some providers to report mistakes.

Patient safety experts say measuring the problem is nonetheless important because estimates bring awareness and research dollars to a major public health problem that persists despite decades of improvement efforts.

“We need to get a sense of the magnitude of this,” James said in an interview.

James based his estimates on the findings of four recent studies that identified preventable harm suffered by patients – known as “adverse events” in the medical vernacular – using use a screening method called the Global Trigger Tool, which guides reviewers through medical records, searching for signs of infection, injury or error. Medical records flagged during the initial screening are reviewed by a doctor, who determines the extent of the harm.

In the four studies, which examined records of more than 4,200 patients hospitalized between 2002 and 2008, researchers found serious adverse events in as many as 21 percent of cases reviewed and rates of lethal adverse events as high as 1.4 percent of cases.

By combining the findings and extrapolating across 34 million hospitalizations in 2007, James concluded that preventable errors contribute to the deaths of 210,000 hospital patients annually.

That is the baseline. The actual number more than doubles, James reasoned, because the trigger tool doesn’t catch errors in which treatment should have been provided but wasn’t, because it’s known that medical records are missing some evidence of harm, and because diagnostic errors aren’t captured.

An estimate of 440,000 deaths from care in hospitals “is roughly one-sixth of all deaths that occur in the United States each year,” James wrote in his study. He also cited other research that’s shown hospital reporting systems and peer-review capture only a fraction of patient harm or negligent care.

“Perhaps it is time for a national patient bill of rights for hospitalized patients,” James wrote. “All evidence points to the need for much more patient involvement in identifying harmful events and participating in rigorous follow-up investigations to identify root causes.”

Dr. Lucian Leape, a Harvard pediatrician who is referred to the “father of patient safety,” was on the committee that wrote the “To Err Is Human” report. He told ProPublica that he has confidence in the four studies and the estimate by James.

Members of the Institute of Medicine committee knew at the time that their estimate of medical errors was low, he said. “It was based on a rather crude method compared to what we do now,” Leape said. Plus, medicine has become much more complex in recent decades, which leads to more mistakes, he said. Dr. David Classen, one of the leading developers of the Global Trigger Tool, said the James study is a sound use of the tool and a “great contribution.” He said it’s important to update the numbers from the “To Err Is Human” report because in addition to the obvious suffering, preventable harm leads to enormous financial costs. Dr. Marty Makary, a surgeon at The Johns Hopkins Hospital whose book “Unaccountable” calls for greater transparency in health care, said the James estimate shows that eliminating medical errors must become a national priority. He said it’s also important to increase the awareness of the potential of unintended consequences when doctors perform procedure and tests. The risk of harm needs to be factored into conversations with patients, he said. Leape, Classen and Makary all said it’s time to stop citing the 98,000 number. Still, hospital association spokesman Akin Demehin said the group is sticking with the Institute of Medicine’s estimate. Demehin said the IOM figure is based on a larger sampling of medical charts and that there’s no consensus the Global Trigger Tool can be used to make a nationwide estimate. He said the tool is better suited for use in individual hospitals. The AHA is not attempting to come up with its own estimate, Demehin said. Dr. David Mayer, the vice president of quality and safety at Maryland-based MedStar Health, said people can make arguments about how many patient deaths are hastened by poor hospital care, but that’s not really the point. All the estimates, even on the low end, expose a crisis, he said. “Way too many people are being harmed by unintentional medical error,” Mayer said, “and it needs to be corrected.”

Tuesday, June 10, 2014

Do you want a souvenir DVD of your colonoscopy? So did I.

See all posts re UCSD.

I was scheduled for a routine colonoscopy at UCSD last month.  Nothing controversial about that, right? 

I had had a bizarre experience at Kaiser three years ago when I paid Kaiser $10 for a DVD of the digital video of my VUCG (or "VCUG").  Then suddenly the radiology imaging department claimed that there were no digital images of the procedure--even though the X-rays were done at the brand new Garfield Specialty Center advertised as having all-digital X-rays.  Kaiser said that it only had a few odd thermal paper images of the June 15, 2011 procedure.

So naturally I wanted to make sure that the same thing wouldn't happen at UCSD.  A couple of days before my colonoscopy I called to make sure that I would be able to get a DVD of the procedure.

UCSD's gastroenterology department told me that they don't save any of the digital data generated during colonoscopies.

This is what UCSD claims:

1. The patient can't get a second opinion from any doctor who wasn't watching the computer monitor during the procedure.

2. UCSD is very vulnerable to lawsuits; it can't prove that it wasn't negligent if the patient develops colon cancer that was missed.

3. UCSD can't learn from its mistakes.  It can't go back and see what it was they missed so they can do a better job in the future.

4. A few seconds after the patient leaves, the doctor (and patient) are out of luck if the doctor suddenly thinks, "Hey, what was that I was looking at?  Maybe that was something important.  I'd like to see that again."  Nope.  No chance.   According to UCSD, the images have been flushed from its computers.

5.  UCSD says they don't save the images because it takes up too much space on the hard drive.

Yeah, right.  Digital memory is getting cheaper by the month, so why would UCSD have suddenly stopped saving digital data recently?  They used to give patients DVDs, and before that they gave VHS tapes of colonoscopies.  Those tapes were a lot more expensive and bulky than digital memory.

I asked if I could pay extra to get my procedure saved, but they said NO.  The procedure costs $1300 minimum.  You'd think that would cover a bit of space on the hard drive, wouldn't you?  Well, of course it does.  They just don't want patients to see the images.

These days many doctors in the US are so dead set against patients seeing the images that they sedate everybody, even people who've had colonoscopies before without sedation and didn't have any problem.  They'd rather take the risk of a bad reaction to drugs than to let patients see the video.  I watched doctors on You Tube showing the whole process, and the first thing they asked patients when they woke up was, "Do you remember anything?"  The patients all said NO. 

When I suggested that I didn't believe that UCSD flushed the digital data, UCSD suggested that I go somewhere else if I wanted a DVD.

So I found a doctor who would give me a DVD of my colonoscopy.

The new doctor wants me to get some lab work done, so I went to UCSD today to get blood drawn.

The nurse who drew my blood was very sweet, but it quickly became clear that she had been tasked with finding out who had agreed to give me a DVD of a colonoscopy.  Why would UCSD want to know that?

"Where are you going for your colonoscopy?" she asked.

I didn't want UCSD calling up the doctor and demanding that he not give me a DVD.

"I don't think I should say, since UCSD doesn't approve of patients getting DVDs," I told her.

"Oh, no," she said.  "It's not that.  It's just that we don't do DVDs."

Fine, I thought.  So we're all happy and relaxed about this situation.  I sat back in my chair and the nurse put a pillow on my lap.

"So are you getting it done at a hospital?" she asked.  It seemed that my nurse was not so happy and relaxed about the situation after all.

I didn't want to say YES and I didn't want to say NO.   I didn't want to tell the truth or tell a lie.  So I didn't say anything.  

I was afraid she'd be mad at me and poke me painfully with the needle, but she was very careful. I only felt a tiny pinch.  And then we said friendly good byes.

Message to UCSD: she tried.  She really did try.  But I had planned ahead of time that I wouldn't spill the beans.  So don't blame the very sweet girl who couldn't get the information out of me.

Monday, June 9, 2014

UCSD Researchers Find Protein That Triggers Diabetes


UCSD Researchers Find Protein That Triggers Diabetes


The origins and steps of obesity-related diabetes have been established for the first time, according to a significant set of findings just published by researchers at the UCSD School of Medicine.
The researchers concentrated on a protein, called ANT2, that they believe causes diabetes in fat people.

UCSD Skaggs School of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences
UCSD Skaggs School of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences. Courtesy of UCSD News Center

“We’ve pinpointed the steps, the way the whole thing happens,” said Jerrold M. Olefsky, associate dean for Scientific Affairs and Distinguished Professor of Medicine at UCSD.
“The research is in mice, but the evidence suggests that the processes are comparable in humans and these findings are important to not just understanding how diabetes begins, but how better to treat it and prevent it.”
In a study published this weekend in the medical journal Cell, the UCSD researchers described a sequence that begins at the cellular level, as cells react to high-fat diets. These high-fat diets can then result in obesity- induced insulin resistance, and then diabetes.
Olefsky and others have previously shown that obesity is characterized by low-grade inflammation in fat tissue, and that this inflammation can become chronic and result in insulin resistance and diabetes. In their most recent findings, the scientists describe the earliest stages of the process which begin before obesity manifests itself.
The scientists began by feeding mice a high-fat diet. They noticed that the high levels of saturated fatty acids in the diet activated a protein in the fat cell membranes, which in turn caused increased oxygen consumption in the cells.
The increased oxygen consumption by the ANT2 protein left less oxygen for the rest of the cell.
Without an adequate oxygen supply, the cells go through a process that ultimately launches the immune system’s inflammatory response system. A sustained high-fat diet ensured that the process continued unimpeded, and that led to obesity, chronic tissue inflammation and insulin resistance in the mice.
The researches found that by controlling certain aspects of the process, they could protect the mice from inflammation, insulin resistance and elevated glucose levels that were caused by the high-fat diet.
The researches suggest that by impeding two specific steps in the sequence, they could blunt or even reverse the damaging cellular sequence.
— City News Service