Scientists discover new form of condition suffered by 38million Americans... putting even more at risk
An international team of researchers found that a specific subset of people with type 1 diabetes — which affects about 1.8million Americans — may actually have an entirely new form of the disease that is not caused by the immune system.
Type 1 diabetes affects 8.4million people globally and is caused by the immune system misfiring and destroying cells that help to control blood sugar.
But now scientists in the US and UK say they have detected a new variant of the disease in people of sub-Saharan African descent that does not appear to be linked to the immune system.
Their analysis of nearly 900 people with childhood-onset type 1 diabetes from three African countries revealed that only about 33 percent had the characteristic antibodies — proteins made by the immune system that attack cells used to control blood sugar — seen in type 1 diabetics.
The remaining 66 percent previously diagnosed with type 1 diabetes did not test positive for these antibodies, suggesting they had a new variant of the disease.
Revealing the findings, researchers said it could pave the way for new treatments for the disease to boost health and life expectancy, with type 1 diabetics dying about a decade earlier than their peers on average.
More than 38.4million Americans have diabetes, with the vast majority — around 37million — having type 2 diabetes, a chronic condition where the body can't use the insulin it produces, a hormone used to control blood sugar, leading to high blood sugar levels.
This differs from type 1 diabetes, which is caused by the immune system attacking islet cells that make insulin, causing blood sugar levels to spike. The disease is typically diagnosed by testing the blood for characteristic antibodies against islet cells, indicating the disease.
In the study, a similar analysis was repeated on 107 Americans of sub-Saharan African background with type 1 diabetes. It found 55 percent of them tested negative for typical type 1 diabetes antibodies.
Writing in the study, the team led by the UK's University of Exeter said: 'These findings support the common existence of a non-autoimmune, insulin-deficient subtype of diabetes among children and young adults with diabetes in sub-Saharan Africa.
'[This] is different from classic autoimmune type 1 diabetes, and does not have features consistent with type 2 diabetes or malnutrition-associated diabetes.
'Therefore, alternative causes must be considered in this group of individuals.'
Researchers are not sure what may cause this version of diabetes, but said it might be linked to malnutrition in early life, which could cause cells to become less sensitive to the hormone insulin, which helps to control blood sugar.
They also suggested it may be due to certain genetic variations in sub-Saharan African populations that are not present in white groups.
Of those diagnosed with type 1 diabetes in the US, an estimated nearly 10 percent — or 167,000 — are black. It is not clear what proportion of these can trace their roots back to Sub-Saharan Africa.
For the first part of the study, participants were recruited from Cameroon, Uganda and South Africa.
About half were female, all were black, and participants were diagnosed with diabetes at the age of 15 years on average. They all also had a healthy body weight.
For participants from Cameroon and Uganda, blood samples were collected from patients who had visited private or public hospitals between 2019 and 2022.
These were analyzed for the presence of antibodies that would indicate the presence of type 1 diabetes.
To expand the dataset, the researchers also included participants from South Africa who had their blood tested for the same antibodies between 2007 and 2015.
A total of 312 participants, or 35 percent, tested positive for the antibodies, while the remaining 582 tested negative.
Next, the researchers extracted data from the SEARCH database, which collects data on young people diagnosed with type 1 diabetes in the US.
They extracted information on 3,000 participants, including 2,602 from a white ethnic background and 429 from a black ethnic background.
Among the 107 recorded as being from a Sub-Saharan African background by the database, 55 percent or 59 participants did not test positive for the typical antibodies.
And among those from a black background, 65 participants or 15 percent tested negative for the antibodies.
The researchers said a similar pattern was not detected among those from a white ethnic background.
Dr Dana Dabelea, an epidemiologist at the University of Colorado and co-author of the study, said: 'The identification of this type 1 diabetes in Sub-Saharan African populations and among individuals of African ancestry in the US suggests a potential ancestral or genetic link.
'These findings highlight the need to consider alternative etiologies in this group and a deeper understanding of the underlying mechanisms may provide important insights for future prevention and treatment strategies.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
2 hours ago
- BBC News
Hospital worker arrested over assault of patient in Northampton
A member of staff at a psychiatric hospital has been arrested in connection with an alleged assault on a Police said a woman, from Northampton, was arrested on suspicion of assault and ill-treatment or wilful neglect following an incident on 29 June and has been released on bail. St Andrew's Healthcare in Northampton, which is used by the NHS, said it had suspended a number of staff and launched an investigation into the hospital said it was "taking urgent steps to reinforce high-quality care across all wards" after NHS England restricted new referrals to the hospital. A Northamptonshire Police spokesman said: "Detectives are investigating a report of an assault which is alleged to have taken place at St Andrew's Hospital, Northampton, on 29 June.""Due to the vulnerability of the victim in this case, officers conducting inquiries as part of this investigation have been in contact with the CQC and local safeguarding leads," they added. St Andrew's Healthcare is a charity that cares for people with complex mental health hospital cares for about 600 patients and employs more than 4,000 people across four locations. Restricted referrals The CQC said it had carried out an inspection of inpatient services at the hospital on 11 July. A spokesman for the regulator said: "As a result, CQC took action requiring [St Andrew's Healthcare] to make immediate, specific improvements around safety. "They are being monitored closely to make sure this happens, and a report containing the full findings from the inspection will be published on CQC's website when the usual quality assurance processes have been completed," they added. NHS England said St Andrew's Healthcare looked after patients with "very complex mental health needs from all over the UK". "The safety of patients is our first priority and commissioners working together with the CQC have restricted referrals to St Andrew's Northampton site," it England said it had "taken immediate action together with St Andrew's to ensure the charity keeps patients safe, meets contractual obligations, and prioritises a targeted programme of support which operates in line with CQC requirements". Follow Northamptonshire news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X.
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Resident doctors' strike undermines union movement, Wes Streeting says
A strike by resident doctors 'enormously undermines the entire trade union movement', Wes Streeting has argued, urging them not to join industrial action on Friday morning. In an article for the Guardian, the health secretary says the decision by the British Medical Association (BMA) to push for new strikes in England immediately after receiving a pay rise of 22% to cover 2023-24 and 2024-25 is unreasonable and unprecedented. Taking aim squarely at the leadership of the BMA, which represents the medics formerly known as junior doctors, Streeting condemns their demand for a fresh 29% rise over the next few years. He says that while there was 90% backing for the strike, it was on a turnout of just over 55% of members. Streeting says the move to strike after the offer of a 5.4% pay rise for 2025-26, was rushed into and is 'bitterly disappointing' amid efforts to improve NHS services. 'There was a deal here to be done,' he writes. 'Instead, the BMA leadership's decision to not even consider postponing these strikes will place an enormous burden on their colleagues, and hit the recovery we can all see our health service is making. 'Not only that, it enormously undermines the entire trade union movement. No trade union in British history has seen its members receive a such a steep pay rise only to immediately respond with strikes – even when a majority of their members didn't even vote to strike. This action is unprecedented, and it is unreasonable.' The BMA argues that resident doctors have seen their pay fall by a much greater amount in real terms since 2008-09 than the rest of the population. 'Doctors are not worth less than they were 17 years ago, when austerity policies began driving wages down. We're simply asking for that value to be restored,' it said. Streeting says resident doctors have privately contacted him to express their dismay at the decision to strike, saying they 'feel the BMA's leaders are out of lockstep with not just patients but most resident doctors themselves'. The health secretary urges doctors to defy their union and not join in the strike, which runs until 7am next Wednesday. 'I am urging resident doctors to not follow the BMA leadership, who I do not believe are representing the best interests of their members, any further down this path as strikes begin on Friday at 7am,' he writes. The public have been urged to keep coming forward for NHS care during the strike, and NHS England has urged hospital chief executives to keep routine operations and appointments and only reschedule if there is a risk to patient safety. A Department of Health and Social Care blog noted that the NHS was 'taking a different approach' after learning lessons from previous strikes, and would avoid cancelling planned appointments for illnesses such as cancer because this posed 'a risk to patients too'. Sign up to First Edition Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion On Wednesday, the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges urged the BMA to suspend its guidance to resident doctors that they do not have to share their intentions to strike with their employers – as is their entitlement under employment law – to enable hospitals to better plan. It is understood that in previous strikes, healthcare leaders filled rota gaps of unknown size by overstaffing and cancelling procedures, with the result that there was insufficient work for some highly paid consultants. Fewer resident doctors are expected to go on strike on Friday than in the previous round of industrial action that started in 2023 after the BMA achieved a smaller mandate in the strike ballot. Of 48,000 members, 55% voted, of whom 90% supported industrial action – representing less than half of members – compared with a turnout of 71.25% in 2023, of whom 43,440 (or 98.37%) voted to go on strike. The numbers of striking doctors is expected to vary between hospitals and trusts, with anticipated staff rota gaps filled locally by consultants, agency doctors and other NHS staff. Hospital leaders will monitor demand and if they are overwhelmed with patients they will have contingency plans in place, for example cancelling some appointments to prioritise urgent and emergency care, calling in extra bank or agency staff, or requesting derogations – where resident doctors are called in to work – with the BMA. The Health Service Journal (HSJ) reported that the NHS England chief, Sir Jim Mackey, had told trust leaders to crack down on resident doctors' ability to earn money during the strike by working locum shifts.
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
This unnecessary doctors' strike will hurt patients, the NHS and doctors themselves. Pull back: don't do it
Over the past 15 years, NHS staff have had a torrid time: they have been overstretched, buffeted by constant chaos and a chronic lack of investment. This government inherited a situation in which too many staff were burnt out, demoralised and simply done in. It's why one of my first acts as health and social care secretary was to get round the table, end the last resident doctor strikes and provide above inflation pay rises for all NHS staff, including a 22.3% rise for resident doctors (plus another 5.4% this year) – the biggest pay hike across the whole public sector. Since then, I've worked closely with NHS staff to deliver record investment and much-needed reforms to the NHS. From getting waiting lists down to hiring 2,000 more GPs, from bringing in new tech and equipment to making staff's lives easier, to starting the shift from sickness to prevention – we are making real progress. When the prime minister launched our 10-year health plan earlier this month, NHS staff celebrated it. I knew from the hundreds of staff that were part of our engagement process – from doctors to nurses, health visitors to consultants, porters to midwives – that they were hungry for change. But their optimism, energy and ambition showed just how much we will be able to achieve if we work together, and the exciting future we can build. That is why the decision by the British Medical Association's resident doctors committee to rush into completely unnecessary strikes is so bitterly disappointing. Not only have we started turning the NHS around, we did it hand-in-hand. The government proposed a range of measures to massively improve the working conditions doctors face – from tackling the costs of mandatory exams, to dealing with exhausting rotations that involve doctors pinging from hospital to hospital, to tackling bottlenecks by bringing in more specialist training places. There was a deal here to be done. Instead, the BMA leadership's decision to not even consider postponing these strikes will place an enormous burden on their colleagues, and hit the recovery we can all see our health service is making. Not only that, it enormously undermines the entire trade union movement. No trade union in British history has seen its members receive such a steep pay rise only to immediately respond with strikes – even when a majority of their members didn't even vote to strike. This action is unprecedented, and it is unreasonable. My focus now is on doing everything to minimise harm to patients. This government is doing all it can to minimise the impact on patients from this strike, including trying to keep as much scheduled care as we can on track, as well as urgent and emergency care. The BMA leadership would rather we just cancel those appointments because they don't recognise that someone with cancer, for example, who has a scheduled operation could end up in a far worse place if surgery is postponed. It is not for them to determine whether they think the bar for patient pain is high enough. This government will prioritise patients and do everything we can to protect them. All the same, these actions won't just cause disruption, anxiety and patient harm. They are likely to cost a huge amount of money, which the NHS simply can't afford. Instead of working with us on their conditions to put money back into the pockets of resident doctors, the BMA committee put their fingers in their ears and rushed out to strike. I know from the many resident doctors who have reached out to me, and those I've met since I became health and social care secretary, that they feel the BMA's leaders are out of step not just with patients, but most resident doctors themselves. It is hardly surprising a majority of resident doctors did not vote for this strike. So I am urging resident doctors to not follow the BMA leadership, who I do not believe are representing the best interests of their members, any further down this path as strikes begin on Friday at 7am. Wes Streeting is secretary of state for health and social care
