5 ms·
I can think of three categories helpfull when looking for "root causes medicine": 1.Better more in-depth information, using tools like genetic medicine and new
by ippisl 16y ago
I can think of three categories helpfull when looking for "root causes medicine":
1.Better more in-depth information, using tools like genetic medicine and new bio-markers that can give us a more precise diagnosis(using genetic medicine , hypertension can be classified into more then 10 categories , each with his own preferred treatment). with more precise diagnosis , the chances are greater that we treat the core problem.
2. In many cases, we know the core problem, but the tools we can only treat symptoms. For such diseases , a good place to look is emerging technologies focus on the core problem. for example today we treat diabetes type 2 mostly symptomatically, but the core problem is that pancreas cells die or stop functioning. Stem cell therapy is offers big hope as a cure for diabetes type 2 by replacing the bad pancreas cells with new cells.
3.i wonder if prevention, in the general case, is relatively more focused on the core mechanisms, simply because when you prevent something , you have no symptoms and symptoms never appear.
- carbocation 16y agoI agree with 1 and 3. I disagree with point #2. The root problem with Type II diabetes is insulin resistance peripherally. The damage done to the pancrease is actually a secondary problem. If you cure the peripheral resistance to insulin, you fix the problem. If you add back pancreas, you simply end up becoming hyperinsulinemic and, while that will work for awhile, it doesn't get at the core of the problem. In other words, what you are proposing is more symptom oriented than current cause-oriented treatments.
- rsheridan6 16y ago"If you add back pancreas, you simply end up becoming hyperinsulinemic and, while that will work for awhile, it doesn't get at the core of the problem. " That's pretty much what we do now with sulfonylureas and other insulin secretagogues, not to mention insulin therapy.
- carbocation 16y agoAgreed. That's why diabetes treatment sucks so badly (yes, better than nothing). The PPAR agonists seem promising, in theory. In practice they don't seem quite so awesome. I'm still hopeful; GWAS has offered us some new targets that should be exploited in the near future.
- rsheridan6 16y agoThe PPAR agonists stimulate adipogenesis - one of their main effects is to make you fatter so that you have a dumping ground for excess sugars. This doesn't seem like a very good idea, and I'm not surprise that it turns out that they suck (kill people).
- carbocation 16y agoWell, yeah, insulin sensing leads to adipogenesis. Since the PPAR agonists increase insulin sensitivity, you're going to become fatter if you continue overeating. This sort of brings us back to the root cause of most DM (overeating). And while some of the PPAR agonists kill people, it does not seem to be a class effect; pioglitazone looks OK. (CHF is a class effect of the thiazoladinediones, but it's a more balanced tradeoff with diabetes.)