The team used the patient's own peripheral blood mononuclear cells, transformed them into "seed cells," and reconstituted pancreatic tissue.
  • FlihpFlorp@lemm.eeEnglish
    0·
    6 months ago

    As a type 1 diabetic with a type 2 family member I want to be excited but I cannot for the life of me be suspicious, what are the talking about with the kidney. I mean maybe I’m missing something I only have diabetes idk everything about it

    • pingveno@lemmy.mlEnglish
      0·
      6 months ago

      Diabetes can damage the kidneys, so presumably the patient got a kidney transplant. But yeah, looks like the journalist is getting the causation the wrong way round, I can’t think of why a kidney transplant would recover pancreatic islet function.

  • henfredemars@infosec.pubEnglish
    0·
    6 months ago

    I want to believe, but do we have independent third parties that acknowledge the victory? Is it more than just a report?

      • henfredemars@infosec.pubEnglish
        0·
        6 months ago

        Thanks! I don’t really see anything about this patient’s miraculous recovery in the paper, though.

        I haven’t read the entire paper, so I could be being bone-headed enough. It’s good to see some acknowledgement of their work to help support the claims.

    • Patapon Enjoyer@lemmy.world
      0·
      6 months ago

      If I understood this correctly, we had good data from other studies supporting that this method (probably) works, it’s the actually doing it that is the challenge. And of course one study is just one study.

      • henfredemars@infosec.pubEnglish
        0·
        6 months ago

        I’m glad such progress is being made, although I don’t see an actual verifiable report of the impressive claims for this patient. The linked paper doesn’t discuss the report, and no other references to this patient appear to exist from the article.

        I’ve read too many truly impressive reports from Chinese researchers this year that I feel extra need to take such reports with a grain of salt. If I had a dollar for every claim that we’ve just made a major advancement in battery technology that will replace lithium-ion from a Chinese university…

  • Waldowal@lemmy.world
    0·
    6 months ago

    Something isn’t right with this article. I’m suspect:

    • Type 1 is where your islet cells die off and you lose insulin production. Type 2 means your insulin production is fine, but your cells are resistant to the insulin. A Type 2 should have plenty of islet cells so adding more doesn’t seem like it would do anything. Your body should regulate those cells to output the same amount of insulin as before.

    • This same treatment has been done in Type 1s already. It’s not new. The problem is their body eventually kills off the transplanted cells and you have to do it again. Plus, you have to take immune suppressing drugs forever.

    • “Despite a kidney transplant, his pancreas still doesn’t produce insulin.” - This is just nonsense.

    • iawia@feddit.nl
      0·
      6 months ago

      Type 2 can have a reduced insulin production, as well as the insulin resistance. In fact, insulin resistance can put increased demand on production and exhaust the producing islet cells.

      Since type 2 is not an immune system disease, in that case there’s no need for immune suppressing drugs!

      Don’t understand the kidney thing either:-)

    • refalo@programming.dev
      0·
      6 months ago

      China leads the world in academic fraud.

      A common scam is to attribute medical miracles to stem cells - Similar to the cloning scandal from Korea - Because they know other countries legally CAN’T test the findings to either prove or discredit. They do this to fleece foreign institutions out of money and prestige.

    • pingveno@lemmy.mlEnglish
      0·
      6 months ago

      Don’t dismiss it based on that criteria. It’s a particular type of study called a case study where they go more in-depth on a particular case or set of cases. Of course it should be complemented by other types of studies, but that’s just true of science in general. The danger, of course, is when laymen and journalists get excited over something like a case study and start spreading bad advice.

  • takeda@lemmy.world
    0·
    6 months ago

    We saw other similar news from China which turned out to be a bunk. I wouldn’t hold my breath. I would love to be wrong though.