A lot of people I know avoid foods that list high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) as an ingredient. Apart from the calories they add to foods, there's a growing belief that lab-devised products like HFCS are simply unnatural and may be harmful. Wikipedia has an interesting article on the origins and controversy surrounding HFCS, if you want to learn more.

Not surprisingly, the food industry has always defended HFCS against claims that it is harmful. But here's the latest contradiction of that claim: a recent study found that HFCS is "astonishingly" high in reactive carbonyls, which are thought to contribute to the development of diabetes. The study was led by Dr. Chi-tang Ho, head of Rutgers University's Department of Food Science, and colleagues. They concluded that one can of HFCS-sweetened soda contains five times the reactive carbonyls that are normally found in the blood of a person with diabetes.

A news release by the American Chemical Society, announcing Dr. Ho's findings, notes that previous studies have already linked HFCS to cell and tissue damage. They suggest that HFCS consumption may raise the risk of diabetes, not to mention obesity. Say's Dr. Ho: "People consume too much high-fructose corn syrup in this country. It's in way too many food and drink products and there's growing evidence that it's bad for you."

Our guts don't really have a tongue, but researchers have identified two taste receptors in the human intestines -- T1R3 and G protein gustducin. The receptors operate within taste cells that sense glucose within the intestine. These same receptors are used by our tongues to taste sugary stuff, even artificial sweeteners. Turns out the research team hypothesized the sugar sensors in the tongue might also be the same ones in the gut. They were right. Hey, nice guess!

That Snickers bar you're eating? Your gut tastes it, too. Even the artificially sweetened glass of chilled Crystal Light is tasted by the gut. It is important to understand how the gut is sensing, since these taste cells regulate secretion of insulin and hormones that control appetite.

Researchers say discovering the identity of the gut's sweet tooth receptors may pave the way for new treatments for obesity and diabetes. Lead author, Dr. Robert F. Margolskee, stated the study may explain why today's artificial sweeteners may not help with weight loss. New zero-calorie sweeteners could be developed to better control weight. The findings were published online in the August 20, 2007 "Early Edition" of the proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Read the full article in Medical News Today.

Shhh. Big Pharma scientists hard at work. On what, you ask? Why, on Novo's new "baby" - a drug designed to treat type 2 diabetes. Liraglutide, a hormone analogue, is supposed to improve blood sugar control. It's also supposed to get you that coveted magic bullet (a la Byetta): weight loss. Ooh, baby. Now that's medication!

Novo Nordisk has been working on Liraglutide for a while now. Here's the latest: Novo announced Monday that two Phase III studies were successful in demonstrating the aforementioned blood sugar control and weight reduction. Novo is riding high on the news: its shares rose six percent on the announcement. According to a pharmaceutical industry analyst quoted by Reuters, the shares surged so healthily because the positive news was expected.

The powers-that-be at the drug giant say they hope Liraglutide can be submitted for regulatory approval by mid-2008. They hope it will become another blockbuster, with estimated annual sales topping one billion. Stay tuned.

Indignation, frustration. It's all growing stronger amongst diabetics over the fact that most people don't understand this basic fact: type 1 and type 2 diabetes are two very different conditions. When, oh when (or ever?), will we get more appropriate names.

"Type 1" and "type 2" are so meaningless to most non-diabetics and probably to a lot of type 2 diabetics as well. "Juvenile" or "childhood onset" are, these days, likewise, quite meaningless when so many kids are getting T2DM due to atrocious lifestyle/eating habits.

A recent editorial caught my eye. I want to share, because I think it's a good example of how the media helps add to this ignorance when journalists fail to make a distinction between T1 and T2. "In our view: Targeting Diabetes," was published August 16 in The Columbian of Vancouver, WA. "Diabetes is everywhere...Diabetes lasts a lifetime," it reads, "and there is no cure, even though steps involving diet and exercise can lower many risks." Not true! It goes on to say, "With generous gifts and more education, fewer of us will get the disease." Again, not true! You and I know that statement does not apply to T1s. But I'll wager an overwhelming majority of non-diabetic and T2 diabetic readers would not bat an eye at such a comment.

Diabetic and want to help educate people? Long-term, we need new names! Short-term, public education will help. Here's a start: hit the link above to this Columbian editorial and post a comment!

Women who developed gestational diabetes while pregnant are at a higher risk for pancreatic cancer. Unfortunately, that's the word from a new study. According to this report from Canada's CTV News, past studies have linked type 2 diabetes with increased pancreatic cancer. And, of course, having gestational diabetes puts you at risk for type 2 diabetes. However, this is the first time a link has been made between GD and pancreatic cancer.

The study involved an analysis of health records for a whopping 40,000 women, all of whom gave birth in Jerusalem between 1964 and 1976. Phew, that's a lotta diapers... Of 410 women diagnosed with GD, five developed pancreatic cancer in later years. None of the 137 women with type 1 diabetes went on to develop pancreatic cancer. Want the full story? Results have been published in BMC Medicine.

Now, don't panic if you have had GD. Says lead researcher, Mary Perrin of NYU's School of Medicine, the absolute risk for pancreatic cancer is still very low. Nevertheless, she points out that even a small statistical difference is significant since obesity is on the rise. The implication? If trends continue, we can expect to see more and more moms-to-be with GD in the future.

According to a RAND Corporation study, fewer and fewer diabetics are going undiagnosed these days. Specifically, the gap has closed dramatically over the last twenty-five years. So much so that Hispanics and African Americans are now no more likely than whites to be undiagnosed. Good news, to be sure.

And the news is especially good for men. James P. Smith, who authored the study, says that twenty-five years ago about fifty percent of men with diabetes did not even know they had the disease. Jump forward to 1999-2002, however, and the number drops to about twenty percent.

Smith concludes that even though ethnic and gender disparities remain, we are certainly doing a lot better at getting people diagnosed and into treatment. Diabetes programs that target minorities can take a lot of the credit for this shift, Smith believes.

On the down side, the less-educated people among us are much more likely to go undiagnosed and, when diagnosed, are less likely to successfully incorporate lifestyle changes required to manage the disease. Also of concern, Smith says, is the fact that even though obese people are at a high risk for diabetes, they nevertheless are more likely to have undiagnosed diabetes than are slimmer people.

It's a complicated little world, isn't it? For example, type 2 diabetes is a growing problem in Australia, particularly in rural areas. Recently, however, some good news appeared: immigrants from Mediterranean regions living in Australia who stuck with a traditional Mediterranean diet over long periods of time, enjoyed much better health than other segments of the population. And that includes less diabetes.

But now, there's news that Australia's ethnic minorities suffer from type 2 diabetes at much higher rates than the rest of the population. Hardest hit are Asians, Pacific Islanders and people originally from the Middle East. The finding results from a survey of 11,000 Australians. There are some good reasons why immigrants suffer from diabetes more. First, those affected the worst were not able to maintain their traditional lifestyles in the new country. Fatty foods and lack of exercise are a big problem. Second, there are psychological factors contributing to poor overall health, especially the stress involved in learning to live in a new culture with a different language.

Gastric bypass or banding surgery has become known as an effective measure for treating type 2 diabetes. What has put it in the news, of late, is the fact that gastric bypass is incredibly successful. Many recipients who've gone under the knife respond not only with extreme weight loss (of course - that's what the surgery is designed to do!), but also a normalization of blood sugar levels. Sometimes the reaction is so positive that patients can stop taking blood sugar controlling meds.

Case in point: Marlene Zytcer (57) and her daughter Aimee (31) of Phoenix, Arizona. Marlene and Aimee recently both had gastric banding surgery at the University of California, San Diego Medical Center. Prior to the surgery, both mom and daughter were doing poorly health-wise. They were both obese and fighting heart disease and type 2 diabetes. They say they both have a genetic predisposition to those conditions.

Far from being inert and unchanging, a mere scaffolding to which the body's muscles and organs attach themselves, bones change constantly. Old bone cells die. New ones are born. But that's not all. According to an exciting new discovery, bones play a role in regulating blood sugar levels and fat deposits.

How is this possible? Bones act like a kind of endocrine organ, releasing osteocalcin, a hormone that influences bone formation. This hormone also increases both insulin production and the body's insulin sensitivity. It also reduces fat stores. Basically, osteocalcin levels in the bones are linked to blood sugar and body fat levels, and there is some sort of interaction back and forth.

It's a surprising finding for the uninitiated. However, some scientists are saying it makes sense when you think about it. Says Ronald Kahn, director of Harvard's Joslin Diabetes Center, "Obviously there does need to be some coordination between skeletal growth and body mass. If you carry around extra weight, your bones need to hold up under the extra pressure, so it's not surprising that your bones have a sense of body fat."

Type 2 diabetes, mate? By crikey. Australia's diabetes epidemic continues to be a problem. News this week indicates the spread of obesity, and with it associated conditions like Type 2 diabetes, in rural areas is far worse than previously realized. A survey of 806 randomly selected adults (okay, not the biggest sample, admittedly) found that a great many are affected by the disease.

Based on their findings from that survey, researchers calculate that almost three-quarters of Aussie men living in rural areas are overweight. They think women in rural areas may be slightly better-off - around two-thirds may be overweight. This puts rural Australians at a very high risk for T2DM. The conclusion, stated in the Medical Journal of Australia: "urgent population-wide action is required to tackle the problem."

As is the case in the US, a big concern is how to treat all those people as they age and their overall health worses. Specifically, what will become of Australia's public healthcare system? "We might get a whole generation, now in their 40s, 50s and 60s, who will do markedly worse than their parents," predicts lead researcher for the study, Professor Edward Janus of Melbourne's Western Hospital.

Pet enthusiasts may know that diabetes is rife amongst domestic cats these days. Why? Same reasons type 2 diabetes is such a problem for people - overeating and a sedentary lifestyle puts us at risk for the disease. But here's a cute story from the UK about some diabetic felines who just got lucky in life...or not, depending on your view.

The Lincolnshire Echo reports that an animal rescue organization called Lincoln Cat Care is trying to place rescued diabetic kitties with diabetic owners. Representatives with the group have appealed to diabetics in the community to come forward and help out one of the formerly-homeless cats. Their rationale is simple: people who have diabetes - or perhaps a family member with the condition - can better care for diabetic cats. They know the signs and symptoms of diabetes, they understand the whys, whens and hows of giving insulin.

Now, I'm involved in animal rescue and I have met tons of devoted pet owners over the years. I just don't buy that diabetics are more likely to make better owners. Nope. Sorry. People who really love their pets make the best owners for diabetic cats and dogs. I've met many wonderful owners of diabetic cats. None of those people are diabetic, but they've gone out, asked questions, read up in books and on the Web, and they are pretty darn knowledgeable. And who's to say a diabetic person would provide that level of care just because they have the disease themselves? Many diabetics out there don't even manage their own blood sugar very well! In short, it's dedication that matters here, not your diagnosis.

Fat. Never a good thing, right? At least not in the US, where food is super-abundant. Instead of being rightly grateful for all that food, we blame it for our weight woes. Yes, there's a growing sense that food is the enemy. Food leads to weight gain, which leads to obesity, which leads to heart disease, type 2 diabetes, and on and on. (Read Michael Pollan's The Omnivore's Dilemma for more on what he terms "our national eating disorder.")

But apparently there's a silver lining in all that fat. Says journalist Natalie Angier for The New York Times, "to castigate fat for getting too big and to blame it for high blood pressure or a wheezing heart is like a heavy drinker blaming the liver for turning cirrhotic." That is, if the body couldn't convert energy to fat cells in an efficient manner we'd really be up the proverbial creek. In fact, evolutionary biologists have even speculated that humans' ability to store good-sized quantities of fat has aided the survival of the species and made it possible for our big brains to grow so big and, um, brainy. The fat, you see, helps us through hard times. Food for thought, huh?

I really don't get this, but here goes: according to a report summarized on the website DiabetesHealth, weight gain reduces the severity of heart disease in type 1 diabetics. Huh? How can that be possible, I'm wondering? After all, we live in a world where weight gain is considered a great evil, a threat to individual health, a drain on our healthcare resources etc. etc. And now this!?

The findings come from the Pittsburgh Epidemiology of Diabetes Complications Study, which was conducted over a period of sixteen years and involved the participation of 225 type 1 diabetes patients. The Pittsburgh people agree more fat on the bones adds up to one heck of a big risk factor for heart disease. However, they also say that if you're type 1 and do get heart disease, carrying extra weight makes the heart disease less severe. They also report that this effect is especially true for women. So, the big question: why? The researchers think it's because heavier people may have better insulin control. But don't run for the local Burger Barn; weight gain is not desirable as it does more harm than good in the long run.

What happens when you do "Supersize Me" in reverse? Why, you get a documentary like "Raw for 30 Days." The film-makers of "Raw" got six type 2 diabetics with less than stellar lifestyle habits and persuaded them to switch out hamburgers and fried chicken for a raw, whole foods diet consisting of all-organic, all-vegan foods. Mmm mmm.

You can't see the movie quite yet. But you can see the preview. Just click on over to the "Raw for 30 Days" website. My source says the preview can also be viewed on YouTube or Google Video. The finished product is now in post-production and should be released in time for Spring 2008 film festivals.

The documentary was directed by Sundance Film Festival-winner Aiyana Elliott, but the concept was created by the executive producer, Mark Perlmutter. The idea is to demonstrate that type 2 diabetes can be reversed "naturally" - that is, without the aid of a battery of prescription drugs. Says Perlmutter, "The release of our nine-minute preview may be the first exposure some have to a greater understanding of controlling, if not conquering the disease."

Okay, so the premise is a little shaky. For one thing: how much can be achieved in only thirty days? For another: it's changing lifestyle habits and maintaining them over time that's key in reversing symptoms of t2 diabetes or pre-diabetes. But why be a party-pooper? After all, raising awareness about diabetes is a good thing. I would definitely like to see this film.

Ever noticed that people tend to be around the same weight as spouses and friends? Well, it's not your imagination. A study just out in the New England Journal of Medicine reports that obesity, a major risk factor for type 2 diabetes, acts somewhat like a contagious disease - so when one person puts on weight, others around them follow suit. This, the researchers say, helps explain why Americans have gotten so fat in recent decades.

The study, a summary and discussion of which is featured in The New York Times, involved the analysis of a social network of 12,067 people over a period of thirty-two years (from 1971 to 2003). Researchers tracked not only the health and weight loss/gain of these people, but also who knew whom, who was friends with whom, and who was related to whom. Over time, it became clear that those whose friends became obese were much more likely to grow obese themselves. The likelihood, in fact, tripled in the case of close friends. Interestingly, friendship mattered more as a determining factor than did being related or being neighbors with someone.

It works like this: people tend to share the lifestyle habits of their family and friends. Folks who consider salads delightful and who enjoy frequent jogs around the park generally surround themselves with similarly-minded folks, and it shows in their trim physiques. Likewise, fast-food munchers who enjoy lots of TV tend to hang out with a similar crowd...and their thighs - not to mention waistlines, hearts, blood sugar levels etc. - suffer the consequences. Another factor, says researcher Nicholas Christakis, is the perception of the self in relation to others: "You change your idea of what is an acceptable body type by looking at the people around you."