Mad Money is a stock show on CNBC hosted by Jim Cramer - a well-known iron fist on Wall Street. He has a following of stock enthusiasts who regard his recommendations (buy or sell) as gospel. Why is he so good at what he does? He just wants to help you make money.

And to this end -- the reason I bring Cramer's passionate drive to The Diabetes Blog is simple: last week he called Novo Nordisk as a SELL. Cramer said he's beginning to worry about a backlash on drug stocks. He advised that viewers should not be greedy and should take gains in Novo Nordisk (NVO).

Perhaps the NY Times article raised some eyebrows at Big Pharma. It appears doctors are receiving handsome gifts and stipends for handing out samples of drugs that were not all that safe for most patients. The payments give physicians an incentive to prescribe the medicines at levels that might increase patients' risks of heart attacks or strokes. In light of this blood curdling synopsis Novo got a dishonorable mention. Novo Nordisk professes to operate their company in two parts: biopharmaceuticals and Diabetes Care. The Diabetes Care segment provides insulin analogues, human insulin and insulin-related products, and oral antidiabetic drugs.

The cross examination of the C-peptide disappearing act and mysterious insulin auto-antibodies appearing where they shouldn't is just getting started. Thanks for making them sweat, Cramer!

The film "Children of Men" depicts a dystopian society, bereft of almost all sense of civility and functioning social norms, facing the tiny little problem of human extinction. For whatever reason, babies have stopped being born, and the furtherance of the human race is in question.

Good flick. Solid acting. Interesting premise. But it's just a movie.

Or is it?

Well, yes, it is just a movie -- so I may as well end the over-dramatized direction in which I seem to be sending this post. What's eerily thought-provoking about the film, though, is the concept of not being able to conceive any more children. Fortunately, this is an impossibility.......right?

Maybe not. Researchers from Northern Ireland have found that diabetes may damage the DNA in men's sperm, thus affecting their fertility. When studying the quality of DNA in the sperm of men with diabetes and men without diabetes, the researchers found that the DNA in the nuclei of the sperm cells had greater levels of fragmentation in men with diabetes than men who do not have diabetes (52% versus 32%). Also, there were also more deletions of DNA in the mitochondria.

Couple this research with: A) The fact that there has been an overall decline in semen quality (related to diabetes or not) over the past 50 years, B) Rates of diabetes seem to be rising considerably with each passing decade, and C) There are sometimes safety concerns for women with diabetes to have children -- and the idea of a newborn-less society becomes scarily possible.

Fortunately it's just a movie. And, fortunately the study in Northern Ireland was, even by the researchers' own admission, very preliminary and in need of further examination before anything can even begin to be considered conclusive.

Off-label use is the practice of prescribing drugs for a purpose outside the scope of the drug's approved label. The FDA requires numerous clinical trials to prove a drug's safety and efficacy in treating a specific symptom. Once deemed safe and effective, physicians exercise discretion for the use of the drug. It is entirely legal in the United States and in many other countries to use drugs off-label.

More physicians are discovering that many drugs are effective for off-label uses and apply to the needs of their patients. Off-label prescription drugs have become so popular that, today, 1 out of every 4 prescriptions written is off-label. The antiseizure drug gabapentin (Neurontin) is used off-label to treat people with diabetic neuropathy. Another drug used off-label is Lucentis, manufactured by Genentech. It was originally approved for age related macular degeneration, but is now in FDA trials for the treatment of diabetic macular edema. If Lucentis is approved, it would be the first drug to treat this debilitating complication of diabetes.

There are advantages and disadvantages to off-label uses. First (and foremost) is the risk versus reward. You could be the first to experience a breakthrough treatment or you could suffer irreparable consequences from the off-label use. Another consideration is feasibility - often times an off-label treatment may cost you substantially more than the other treatments approved for use. For example, without enrolling in an FDA trial to receive intravitreal injections of Lucentis - it would cost me $2,000 a pop. My peepers are precious, but my pockets aren't that deep! What off-label drug would you consider for use?(With your doctor's blessing, of course).

Research conducted by an anthropology professor at the University of California Irvine calls into question the imperfect science behind labeling ethnic groups for classifying and studying chronic illness. Paying specific attention to the problematic nature of linking health inequalities and so-called predisposition to genetic variation rather than social factors such as poverty and access to adequate health care, the research raises questions about the established, inexact methods of establishing race and ethnicity.

After following the trail of DNA samples from when they were first donated by people living along the US-Mexican border, to the eventual publication of findings based on these samples in scientific journal, the researchers found that the resulting data utilized by U.S. and British scientists used social and historical explanations -- not biological differences -- to define race and ethnicity for their research. Arbitrary labeling systems such as these, and their attendant genetic studies, are behind data suggesting that certain ethnic groups are predisposed to chronic illnesses like diabetes. In fact, this very thing was suggested of Mexican Americans, sparking international debate.

The researchers fear that the current methods of labeling race for research purposes will produce dissimilar and inconclusive results from study to study. This could effect the way a disease such is diabetes is treated for any given race, as it may be viewed as a genetically predisposed problem, for example, when in reality the problem is rooted more in social inequity.

In the summer iof 2004, research funded by JDRF revealed that a mutation of the SUMO-4 gene is a strong factor in the development of type 1 diabetes and the potential associated complications, such as kidney failure.

The gene called SUMO-4 is responsible for signaling the proteins that regulate the intensity and duration of the immune response. When the gene is mutated, it has an increased response to the stimulants of the immune system, that cause it to overreact. This overreaction results in a person's inability to distinguish between self and foreign cells, thus causing type 1 diabetes. The mutated SUMO-4 gene may exacerbate the inflammatory process, influencing the complications of diabetes.

The most influential genes in the development of type 1 diabetes are found in the HLA or human leukocyte antigen region. These genes help regulate the immune system by guiding it to differentiate between self and non-self. Variants of the DR and DQ genes in the HLA region are found in 95% of type 1 diabetics. Another gene that increases the chances of developing type 1 diabetes has been found in the region immediately preceding the insulin gene. This region contains a VNTR or variable number of tandem repeats. This refers to specific chemical bases that make up DNA. Inheritance of certain VNTR's increases the risk of developing type 1 diabetes.

Again I reiterate this research was unveiled in 2004. SUMO-4 was identified as a prime target to control the inflammatory process leading to the destruction of islets. As I search Google for, "sumo4, drugs, JDRF" I am terribly disappointed to see that my yearning for answers remains unrequited. Did SUMO-4 fall too hard too fast?

Shane Ellison, an organic chemist known as the people's chemist, warns the public about a popular sweetener. He bravely hypothesizes that a commonly used sweetener may "explode internally". He uses this term to describe the potential to damage many parts of the body such as our genetic map known as DNA - deoxyribonucleic acid.

Manufacturers of the popular sweetener were furious over his accusation. They claim that the information included in Shane's article contains many inaccuracies and false information. They asked him to discontinue any further dissemination of these false and damaging statements. They continued by saying that if he fails to take these actions promptly, that they would consider the need for further legal action. Undeterred by such threats, Shane asserts that he is entitled to his own "hypothesis." Readers should understand that he is making no definitive statements. Instead, he is expressing his grave concern over this drug disguised as a sweetener. He feels that consumers have a right to know the whole story behind what may be a very dangerous scam in the artificial sweetener business - or not.

Shane holds a master's degree in organic chemistry. He is internationally recognized as an authority on therapeutic nutrition. Check out his life saving health briefs and natural cures to see for yourself if he's crying wolf or if he's got a scientific leg to stand on.

New research is revealing that cells passed from mother to child during pregnancy could be used to treat diabetes. Scientists found these cells can develop into functioning islet beta cells which produce insulin in the pancreas.

Scientists studied 172 individuals and took pancreatic tissue from four deceased males. They found small numbers of female islet beta cells able to produce insulin. There was no evidence the mother's cells were causing damage or becoming the target of an immune response. However, the team found more maternal DNA in the blood of children and young adults with type 1 diabetes than in healthy individuals. Researchers believe the maternal cells may be helping to regenerate tissue in the pancreas.

I heard about this study last year. It sounded quite promising and led me to wonder if I had a child - could the stem cells from the umbilical cord become healthy beta cells for me? Sure. However, the big question still remains - how can I stop the killer Ts from spanking my islets in the first place?

Genomas has identified potential DNA markers for risk factors involved in diabetes-related metabolic side effects from treatment with common antipsychotic drugs. A day late and a few million dollars short, eh Eli Lilly?

The study found that DNA variations could predict a patient's likelihood for developing pre-diabetic side effects such as weight gain. Atypical antipsychotic drugs (AAPs) can induce diabetic symptoms in nearly one third of patients, most notably characterized by increased weight gain in some patients but not in others. However, the side effect profiles for these drugs even within the same drug class may differ, raising the possibility of drug-specific side effects.

Genomas develops systems for DNA-guided diagnosis and treatment of metabolic disorders induced by drugs in cardiovascular and psychiatric medicine. They have the capability to select the safest drug treatment for each patient. A company like Genomas has the right idea. The use of antipsychotic drugs is on the rise, with an estimated 14 million patients for which these drugs are increasingly being prescribed. AAPs are a dime a dozen. The million dollar question is which of these drugs is NOT the one for you?