- advertisement -

Why Is Type 1 On The Increase In Children?

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Richard157, Aug 7, 2010.

  1. Richard157

    Richard157 Approved members

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Messages:
    524
    It's no secret that type 1 diabetes is on the rise in children. If current trends continue, new cases in kids younger than 5 could double by 2020.

    Below are five hypotheses that explain why. All of them presume that the person has some genetic tendency towards developing type 1 diabetes

    1. Too big too fast. The "accelerator hypothesis" theorizes that children who are bigger and grow more quickly are more likely to develop type 1 diabetes.
    2. Too little sun. The "sunshine hypothesis" comes from data showing that countries situated closer to the equator have lower rates of type 1 diabetes.
    3. Too clean. The "hygiene hypothesis" is the notion that cleanliness ? lack of exposure to certain germs and parasites ? may increase susceptibility to diseases like diabetes.
    4. Too much cow's milk. The "cow's milk hypothesis" states that exposing babies to infant formula containing cow's milk in the first six months of life damages their immune systems, and can trigger autoimmune diseases such as type 1 diabetes.
    5. Too much pollution. The "POP hypothesis" alleges that being exposed to pollutants increases diabetes risk.

    http://health.usnews.com/health-new...plain-why-type-1-diabetes-is-on-the-rise.html
     
  2. Lisa P.

    Lisa P. Approved members

    Joined:
    May 19, 2008
    Messages:
    5,380
    None if these is convincing to me. It's not that there can't be exceptions to the rule, but I see too many kids who are diagnosed after only breastfeeding, or who get plenty of sun, or are petite or slow growers, all that.

    My personal inclination is to think the trigger is a common virus that a diabetic's system misreads and reacts to by creating antibodies not just to the virus but to the beta cells of the body.

    Coxsackie virus (did I spell that right) is very often asymptomatic, or has such mild symptoms the parent doesn't know the kid has it. I think it's more than possible that kids pick up this virus and it triggers a predisposition.

    As for why there would be an increase of cases and especially in the "First" world countries, developed Western countries have cultural habits that other places and times have not so much had. We tend to send all our adults to offices and workplaces where they congregate and swap bugs, all our kids to daycares and schools where they swap bugs, then everyone goes home and swaps bugs and brings em all back the next day. This doesn't mean a kid has to be in school or daycare -- mine wasn't, but her sisters were in school, we went to church, we had playgroups, my husband worked in a building with several hundred people. So my kid was much more likely to get exposed to a large range of viruses than if she had grown up Little House on the Prairie style, no?

    But, that's just my pet theory. . . .
     
  3. MadeleinesMom

    MadeleinesMom Approved members

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2010
    Messages:
    35
    My daughter has coxsackie two weeks before her diagnosis.....:(
     
  4. Kaylas mom

    Kaylas mom Approved members

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2010
    Messages:
    1,306
    I think that autoimmune diseases are on the rise so it makes sense that type 1 is also on the rise.
     
  5. shirley83006

    shirley83006 Approved members

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Messages:
    1,148
    the only ones that i believe that could be the reason is the cow milk because of the hormones in milk and polution. Chemicals in food and air in many products, like carpet, plastic, many others . its all around. and lets not forget the one , that i believe is a good reason too. That is could have been caused by a virus. The polution has played a role in how our immune system reacts.
     
  6. StillMamamia

    StillMamamia Approved members

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2007
    Messages:
    13,195
    I'll take another road and say that I think the disease itself is becoming more understood, so more docs are picking up on its signs, and society itself communicates more, so more cases are known.

    I think there was a lot of undiagnosed Type 1 D in the past. People simply didn't know what it was and maybe "treated" it to no avail.:(
     
  7. Christopher

    Christopher Approved members

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2007
    Messages:
    6,771
    I am surprised to see Dan's unsubstantiated theories rehashed here...
     
    Last edited: Aug 9, 2010
  8. funnygrl

    funnygrl Approved members

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2005
    Messages:
    2,324
    I'm really sick of seeing these ideas repeated again and again. I have no idea why this guy wrote a book on theories that really have no evidence backing them.

    What about just plain darwinism? People with type 1 were told not to have babies in the past, a la Steel Magnolias. Now people with type 1 routinely have babies. While this obviously doesn't account for all of the increase, it certainly seems likely that it is related to some of it.
     
  9. shirley83006

    shirley83006 Approved members

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Messages:
    1,148
    You are right, it is related to some of it, but in my case and many others, it does not run in the family so it has to be some other reason.
     
  10. Melancholywings

    Melancholywings Approved members

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2009
    Messages:
    331
    I think some of this too. We know of no one in our family who has T1D (tons of autoimmune though) - yet go back a couple of generations and it wasn't uncommon for children to die from 'unknown' causes. It's possible some of those unknown deaths were T1D.
     
  11. Darryl

    Darryl Approved members

    Joined:
    May 8, 2008
    Messages:
    4,313
    That means it probably wasn't the virus because T1 takes many months to reach the symptomatic stage.
     
  12. Becky Stevens mom

    Becky Stevens mom Approved members

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    Messages:
    8,719
    Richard have you read Dan's book yet? I finished it awhile ago and will read it over again. He did a great deal of research for the book and of course says that his hypotheses are just that. I think there are many pieces to the d puzzle and until we can put them all together we wont be able to find a cure for type 1 or a way to prevent it from happening before it starts. I have my own hypotheses which of course I have no proof.

    Too many proinflammatory substances being put in the body at a young age, whether they be cows milk, too many omega six fatty acids compared to omega 3's, heavy metals which have probably been found in ground waters since the beginning of time but are much more prevalent now with pollution. The effects of the suns rays being changed by depletion of the ozone layer therefore the rays dont make vitamin D in the body as readily as they used to, using sunblock to block the rays of sun therefore rendering them unable to create vitamin D in the body. Like I said, these are just some of my ideas but I havent done alot of research on them yet.
     
  13. Richard157

    Richard157 Approved members

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Messages:
    524
    No Becky, I haven't read it. What is the title of the book? I want to look at it on amazon, and see the reviews. Thanks!
     
  14. Becky Stevens mom

    Becky Stevens mom Approved members

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    Messages:
    8,719
  15. Jeff

    Jeff Founder, CWD

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 1995
    Messages:
    1,549
    Dan's book is worth reading, but remember, the important words in "discussion of possible" causes are "discussion" and "possible," not "explanation" and "fact."

    Ample epidemiological data shows that the prevelance of type 1 diabetes is increasing, and while there are many theories, science does not have a definitive answer. Other auto-immune diseases are also increasing, and it seems reasonable that the collective increase is somehow related, but that too is conjecture.
     
  16. shirley83006

    shirley83006 Approved members

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Messages:
    1,148
    Not to disagree with you, but let me ask, could it be that this illness could have already been in her systerm, just dorment for a while, or it could have been something else that your child might have had.
     
  17. joshualevy

    joshualevy Approved members

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2008
    Messages:
    654
    I think you are not even listing the most likely reason:
    The entire growth in type-1 diabetes is genetic. There is no environmental growth at all. Obviously, there is an environmental trigger, but that trigger (or triggers) are just the same now as 100 years ago. The difference is that 100 years ago type-1 diabetics died, and almost always before they had children. Now, type-1 diabetics live, so we have a lot more type-1 diabetes in the gene pool.

    As for the reasons you do list:
    I think that several, large well designed studies have shown that 4 is not true. Although one earlier, smaller study suggested it was, the newer, bigger, better studies all show that it is not so. (I don't have those studies right in front of me, however.)
    And 5 is based on the idea that (especially in the US) people are exposed to a lot more pollution now than 20 or 30 years ago, and I don't think that is true. Where I live, air pollution has dropped in the last 20 years (as an example). Many forms of pollution have dropped in the last 30 years. Lead and DDT are two obvious examples, but there are lots more. I do think that if you want to even talk about "pollution" you need to be more specific. Which toxin? Once you target one pollutant, you can at least talk about it specifically. If you just talk about the general "pollution" you can't even talk about it in a reasonable way.

    Joshua Levy
     
  18. Richard157

    Richard157 Approved members

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Messages:
    524
    Joshua, I found that article in a diabetes magazine and copied and posted it here. I don't believe that all five listed theories are necessarily true. I thought it would generate some interesting discussion, that's all.
     
  19. Danielle2008

    Danielle2008 Approved members

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2008
    Messages:
    1,548
    When it is said it takes many months to reach symptomatic stage, does that mean BG's are still relatively normal in the months leading up, even with the islet cell destruction going on?

    I had a bloodpanel done in March because of my enlarged lymph nodes. I don't remember if I ate that morning or not, but my BG at the time was 151(or around there).

    Obviously, either way, it was slightly elevated, but certainly not completely out of control.

    I was diagnosed the following month with a BG over 700, and the full symptoms. I had what appeared to be the flu (the real flu, not the stomach bug) two weeks prior to diagnoses. Although, I never fully recovered as the symptoms of Diabetes seemed to overlap recovery of the virus. Hence the visit to the Doctor that Monday. I can't recall my exact A1C at the time, I believe it was 8.4-8.7(I say 8.4, parents say 8.7)
     
  20. Becky Stevens mom

    Becky Stevens mom Approved members

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    Messages:
    8,719
    Im not sure if people are aware that the author of the book "Diabetes rising" is himself a long time type 1 diabetic. Dan Hurley was diagnosed with type 1 in 1975. To me he wrote this book after exploring and researching some of the major theories of why type 1 begins and why we are seeing more of it now, some studies suggest that 6% more cases are diagnosed every year. I dont know about all of you but to me that is frightening and sickening. As the Mother of a CWD I can honestly say that along with my hope of a cure is my hope for prevention. I will celebrate the day that the intro section gets no more new posts as there are no more new kids being diagnosed. I cant speak for Richard or Dan but Im sure they would agree with me on that:cwds:

    I'd like to post the following excerpt from the book "Diabetes rising" by Dan Hurley. I found the following passage to be profound and comforting and I appreciate Dans including it:

    " To get some perspective on all these potential therapies, and all five of these hypotheses for why diabetes is rising, I decided that the best person to ask would be Judith Fradkin, MD, director of the Division of diabetes, endocrinology and metabolic diseases at the National Institute of diabetes and digestive and kidney diseases (NIDDK)"
    " You wouldnt want to take something based on speculation without proof that its doing some good" she told me. "All sorts of things are correlated with an increased or decreased risk of type one. But its very hard to seperate out from an epidemiologic study what is actually causitive. Just think about all these approaches being studied. Are parents going to give the highest dose of vitamin D to their children? Are they going to give them pinworm eggs, and hydrolized formula? You cant do all these things until you have a clinical trial to prove its safe and effective. I wouldnt be surprised if none of the current hypotheses were right (bold is mine)


    "To get definitive answers, NIDDK is co-sponsering the Environmental Determinants of diabetes in the Young (TEDDY) study, which is in the process of screening a third of a million newborns in the US and Europe in order to ultimately follow 7,800 children at high risk of developing type 1.
    Using the genomic analysis of stool samples Fradkin told me, "We may find an unsuspected bacteria or virus that promotes or protects against type one. We're also collecting nasal swabs and a sample of their tap water. We're collecting a lot of samples, and then we'll see who develops diabetes and who doesnt. What the triggeris, we want to find it, because we do think it's environmental. The rates are rising. Something has to be behind it. We need to find it. If we find it, that has tremendous implications for prevention (bold is mine)


    "She asked me to add one more note of caution. "Probably a lot of people reading your book will be parents of children with type one" she said. "Parents of children with any disease can feel very guilty. "What did I do wrong?" If you say they should have used hydrolized formula and vitamin D and all these things, theyre going to be blaming themselves and that wouldnt be right. You wouldnt want parents who have kids with type one diabetes saying. "If only I had done something different" (bold is mine)
     

Share This Page

- advertisement -

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice