Scientists from all over the world will meet up in Seattle October 22-23 to attend the Warren G. Magnuson Congress for a Global Diabetes Alliance. The initiative is intended to help fight the rapid rise of type 2 diabetes worldwide. International Diabetes Federation past president Pierre Lefebvre, who will be a speaker at the conference, says the need for such an alliance to fight the T2 global epidemic "could not be more urgent."

More than one hundred diabetes experts hailing from over twenty countries will attend the congress. There's one main goal: the discussion of how to help under-served populations, such as indigenous peoples. However, the more general problems - prevention, treatment and the possibility of a cure - will also be on the table. It is also hoped that the alliance can help change public perception of type 2 diabetes as a disease associated with affluence, when in fact it is spreading faster in poor, developing countries where people frequently lack access to medical care.

Organizers say this is the first global alliance on diabetes. Speaking of organizers: who's behind this anyway? Well, it's being convened by the Pacific Northwest Research Institute (PNRI). Incoming president of the American Diabetes Association, Dr. Paul Robertson, is president and scientific director of the PNRI. Warren G. Magnuson, for whom the conference is named, was a US senator and supporter of the sciences who died from diabetes complications in 1989.

The ADA and PNRI's Dr. Robertson is optimistic the organization can effect change: "The response from top experts from around the world to develop a global, multidisciplinary, collaborative endeavor focused on clinical research on diabetes has been overwhelming."

Eight-year-old Sam Murray of Massachusetts has become an official face of type 1 diabetes for the Joslin Diabetes Center. Sam and one other child will appear on billboards throughout his home state. The billboards promote diabetes awareness and that ever-critical (yet never-ending!) task, fundraising.

The ad campaign is a year-long endeavor by Joslin, paid for using $500,000-worth of billboard space donated by ClearChannel. In one of the designs, Sam poses with a glucose monitor in his outstretched hand, a chalkboard in the background, with the slogan "Let's erase diabetes from his future."

Sam Murray was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes only last year. His parents say the diagnosis might have taken longer to secure if not for the fact that another local boy had been diagnosed with the disease not so long before, so Sam's mom and dad were already somewhat familiar with the symptoms.

And, no, he's not shy about taking such a public role: "I thought it would be pretty cool to have my picture all over the place," remarks Sam. Says dad Dan, "Sammy from the get-go has really adapted to this much better than we could have possibly imagined. He's kind of taken on this role as ambassador."

Click here to see a Boston Globe photo of the billboard image.

Chicago has a long way to go when it comes to diabetes awareness amongst the general public, says pharmaceutical company Abbott. And if the picture in Chicago is representative of the nation as a whole, we should all be very concerned. Or should we? Yes, diabetes awareness - or lack thereof - is a problem. But is Abbott painting an overly pessimistic picture of the situation?

Abbott's comments about Chicago came as it announced the results of a poll sponsored to evaluate public understanding of diabetes in the city. The initiative was in preparation for the American Diabetes Association's Scientific Sessions, which begin June 22 in Chicago. (Abbott's North American home base is in Abbott Park, Illinois, near Chicago.)

Abbott's conclusion? Most people surveyed flunked out big-time when it came to basic facts like how diabetes affects the body and how the condition can be managed. The findings are as follows: twenty-eight percent of Chicagoans know little or nothing about diabetes, while thirty-five percent of non-diabetics say they are not prepared to manage diabetes should they themselves be diagnosed in the future. My view: the former is a problem, but at least it means a majority do know something about it. And what of the the latter (preparedness)? So what if many Average Joes say they're unprepared to deal with diabetes themselves. I'd bet very few people indeed would be prepared to manage a chronic condition with which they have not yet been diagnosed! Other findings portrayed by Abbott as problematic: twenty-three percent believe glucose monitoring involves pain, while eighteen percent believe diabetics cannot eat carbohydrates at all. Again, is the glass half empty or is it half full? Quite honestly, I'm pleasantly surprised that most of those polled know better. On the up-side, Abbott does acknowledge the good news that eighty-eight percent believe having diabetes does not necessarily preclude living a long and healthy life. Another factor to keep in mind: only five hundred people participated in the poll.

Bottom line: Abbott's press release paints an extremely, and I would say overly, dire picture of the situation. Yes, many people are still pretty darn ignorant about diabetes. They may not be able to write you an essay describing its exact cause or all the treatment options. However, most now grasp that it is a serious chronic condition. Is it hopelessly optimistic to believe that things can only get better from here?

For more the more than 300,000 users that once relied on animal-derived insulin, the final chapter of animal insulin is finally ending for the US market. In December 2007, Novo Nordisk has officially decided to discontinue making animal-insulin. Their explanation doesn't go into great detail why they chose to discontinue it. But the supporting evidence they use to warrant the decision is a little weak.

Novo says, animal insulin is derived from the pancreas of slaughtered animals. This statement is as true as the statement "human insulin is derived from the pancreas of slaughtered humans". Novo continues, since that time there has been significant improvement of insulin quality and formulation. Absolutely true! In fact, a Novo pork product was shown to be greater than 99% pure, while an Eli Lilly human insulin only exceeded the 97 percentile. As a consequence, demand for these old animal insulins has declined by as much 20% in the last year to a point where approximately 2% of all insulin users are currently using these products. Largely due to the fact doctor's were advising their patients they must prepare to switch to GM insulin because animal-derived insulin would be nearly impossible to obtain. True. The research that introduced GM insulin (back in the 80s) was preemptive, at best. The claims supporting it was better than the existing insulin choices was clearly debatable .A telling similarity to the discovery about Avandia.

The long-term results of GM insulin and its analogs would prove to be a nightmare if the right questions were asked, and the data properly collected. Is it fair for any of the companies to ask us to change from an insulin product we have grown to love? No, but much like the off-Broadway play suggests: We love you (as a customer). Your diabetes is perfect (for our bottom line). Now change your insulin (we don't feel like making that kind anymore). Too bad type 1 diabetics forced to change to GM insulin didn't have the outspoken advocates like those taking Avandia.