| Lost password
164 users onlineYou are not loggend in.  Login
High Glucose and Insulin Resistance
 1 .. 4 5 6 7 8
 1 .. 4 5 6 7 8
06/21/05 02:07
Andrew 
06/21/05 02:07
Andrew 
More on Reykjavik

Concerning the figures for occupation of the Icelandic men, I should perhaps add that the researchers classified about 20% of the 1297 men as manual labourers (labourers, seamen, farmers) or having a learned trade (carpenters, blacksmiths, masons), and about 11% as having an occupation requiring a university degree; the remaining 70% had other occupations. The probability of the variation in Dupuytren's incidence among the labourers and craftsmen happening by chance (after allowing for smoking and age) was calculated as 1 in 100; the probability of the variation happening by chance among the degree-holding men was greater (since the numbers were smaller) and was calculated as 1 in 5.5.

09/02/05 02:49
Andrew 
09/02/05 02:49
Andrew 
Alcohol

I read in a medical article: 'Alcohol increases blood flow to the skin - the alcohol flush effect - but this causes the break-up of delicate capillaries and blood vessels leading to permanently flushed skin which is difficult to disguise.' In view of what we read earlier in this thread about the connection between dammaged capillaries and Dupuytren's, it gives one pause for thought, no?

09/03/05 02:19
Michael L.

not registered

09/03/05 02:19
Michael L.

not registered

Epidemiologists: scientists or charlatans?

Andrew,

The Reyjavik study is in some respects contradicted by the Uppsala study (see link below). For example, the Reykjavik study concludes that someone who develops Dup's before age 50 has a near-doubled chance of dying from cancer, even when controlling for factors like smoking and diabetes;
while the Uppsala study shows a much smaller increase in cancer mortality, most of which is accounted for by controllable lifestyle factors.

So who knows? The Uppsala study had a much larger sample size, so I guess at this point it has to be given the greater weight. But even within the Uppsala study, the results seem (to this layman, anyway) to be sometimes contradictory, or at least confusing.

In general, trying to get to the truth with these epidemiological studies can be incredibly maddening. My sister once told that she had heard that regular aspirin use was linked to an increase in the risk of pancreatic cancer. So I went to the internet, found one study by reputable researchers that showed there was indeed an increase, another equally reputable study that showed there was actually a decrease, and a third that showed that aspirin had no effect one way or the other. So, let's face it, there's a lot of guesswork in health matters.

http://www.diva-portal.org/diva/getDocument?urn_nbn_se_uu_diva-1794-1__fulltext.pdf

09/03/05 02:44
Michael L.

not registered

09/03/05 02:44
Michael L.

not registered

correction


Correction to the previous post: The Reyjavik concludes there is a near-doubled risk of dying from cancer for people who contract Dup's before the age of 60, not 50 - MML

09/04/05 02:50
jim h

not registered

09/04/05 02:50
jim h

not registered

Dupuytren~sq~s and alcohol

"... a near-doubled risk of dying from cancer for people who contract Dup's before the age of 60.."

Agreed that these statistical studies often seem have little value and the conclusions unravel pretty easily. People with Dupuytren's are more likely to die from cancer - is that because Dupuytren's protects them from heart disease? I'm joking of course but, bottom line is that your chance of dying is 100% from one cause or another. Do people with Dupuytren's actually have shorter lifespans?

09/04/05 02:15
Andrew 
09/04/05 02:15
Andrew 
Dupuytren~sq~s and alcohol

Michael,

Thanks very much for the reference to the Uppsala article - I had not seen it before. I quote here one of the conclusions of that study:

"The overall relative for cancer in patients treated surgically for DC was increased by 24%. There were significantly increased risks for malignancies related to smoking, e.g. buccal, oesophageal, gastric, lung and pancreatic cancers. Significantly increased risk were also observed for prostate and rectal cancer in men and for breast cancer in women one year or more after surgery for DC. The study emphasises smoking and alcohol abuse as probably risk factors for DC."

This does not contradict what I wrote in my last posting about alcohol. It seems to me that if Dupuytren's is a sign that one has an increased risk of getting these cancers, the best course of action is to remove those factors which are likely to lead to cancer (e.g. smoking and alcohol) and increasing those factors which are known to protect against cancer (e.g. eating vegetables). By improving one's general health one may surely not only reduce the risk of cancer but also slow down the course of the Dupuytren's.

Don't be put off by the apparent contradictory nature of the findings of different studies, or make it an excuse for inaction! The general trend is clear from all the studies. Doing things which damage your body in one way will also damage it in another way!

09/04/05 02:38
Michael L.

not registered

09/04/05 02:38
Michael L.

not registered

Don~sq~t worry, be happy


Andrew,

You're right, I got a little off your point regarding alcohol. Yes, it is plausible (but not proven) that the bursting of blood vessels caused by alcohol abuse can hasten the onset of Dup's. This is one of the points made by the study I quoted in my post of 5/22/05. And of course I agree that Dup's sufferers should be careful to keep healthy habits, but so should everyone.

But it is true that these epidemilogical studies cannot be taken unreservedly as the God's truth. In this week's (Sept. 3-9, 2005) issue of 'The Economist', in the Science and Technology section, there's an article about this very matter. It turns out that an amazingly high proportion (more than half) of medical research papers prove to be wrong in the long run. Truth is usually established only after long Darwinian process of claim, counter-claim and refutation.

However, to Jim H. I must regretfully say that the evidence is overwhelming that people with Dup's do have shorter lifespans. But it isn't clear whether this because of Dup's per se, or because people with other bad conditions tend to get Dup's at a higher rate. Reykjavik concludes the former, Uppsala seems to conclude the latter - although Uppsala isn't written very clearly.

So maybe conflicting studies are an excuse for inactivity - or at, for not worrying.

Regards, MML

01/21/06 01:52
max lacey

not registered

01/21/06 01:52
max lacey

not registered

DDand diabetes

I have had DD since my mid forties I am now 57. No one in my family has DD except me. I don't drink or smoke. I do have diabetes. I need to prove to the VA that my DD is a result of my diabetes. Can anyone out there help me. thanks max

01/21/06 01:39
Graeme

not registered

01/21/06 01:39
Graeme

not registered

Diabetes

the connection between Diabetes and DD is all over the internet on various medical sites. I suggest you make copies of these reference pages. I saw Dr Lermusiaux recently and one of his first questions was I diabetic?

01/21/06 01:24
Melissa

not registered

01/21/06 01:24
Melissa

not registered

DC and Atkins/low carb

Not to step on toes, but I have eaten a modified (i.e. not strict Atkins) low carb/no sugar diet for more than 4 years. I brought my cholesterol to healthy levels, lost 30 lbs, and have healthy blood sugar and pressure.

That said, I did not develop DC until last Spring. I had rapid nodule growth and *very* rapid recurrence post surgery.

My case is complicated by other factors (see "Women under 40 w/DC" thread) but I don't think it's dietary for me.

Melissa

 1 .. 4 5 6 7 8
 1 .. 4 5 6 7 8
Glucose   Hypoglycemia   Insulin   factors   hypoglycemic   diabetics   interesting   Studies   dupuytrens-a-new-theory   alcohol   another   smoking   website   Dupuytren   because   disease   between   Resistance   diabetes   diabetic