Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Isn't Type 1 largely genetic? (Score 1) 202

The research suggests that the genetic predisposition causes the immune system to act different in response to the virus. If the research is correct, then yes you need both the genetic factor and the virus to get type-1 diabetes.

All diabetes appears to be GbyE. The interaction between both Genetic and Enviromental factors. It's supected that the genetic factors involved with T1 are more general (could be involved with many "auto immue" conditions) than those involved with T2.

Comment Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes (Score 1) 202

Fructose is associated with fatty liver disease, fructose is a monosaccaride that the liver must convert into glucose before it can be utilized, sucrose (table sugar) is a disaccaride composed of fructose and glucose.

The liver converts excess sugars into FATS. The reason it does this is because sugars disolve in blood plasma (water) thus their concentration within the blood must be closely regulated. Where as fats, within VLDL, can circulate in the blood at various concentrations without causing any problems. The association with fatty liver disase would be that the liver is producing fat faster than either VLDL (or cholesterol). (So maybe it's more fructose/galactose without protein.) Converting fructose to glucose would serve no useful purpose in a mammal. (Even glucose to galactose dosn't appear to be a major part of lactation.) Fats are of rather more use, since they can be used "structurally" as well as for "fuel".

Comment Re:Type 2 is a plumbing problem (Score 1) 202

You might also mention that Fructose (while it taste Sweet) is the Stealth molecule.. they body "can't detect".. you can eat a ton of Fructose.. or sugars like Table Sugar, Date Sugar, Maltitol, Sorbitol or 90% Fructose Agave Syrup.. and not raise your Insulin levels one Iota.. the Body it quite literally "Blind" to Fructose.

Manitol and sorbitol are "sugar alcohols" a different type of ogranic compound. "Table Sugar" is sucrose, a disaccharide of fructose and glucose. Fruits tend to contain a mixture of glucose, fructose and sucrose. As plant based foods the will also contain galactan, a galcatose polysaccharide. Some, such as bananas, also contain high levels of the glucose polysaccharides amylose and amylopectin.

The body can't burn Fructose, it has to turn it Into human Fat, then store that Fat, then Break that same Fat down into Glucose before it can burn it to fuel..

Human cells are prefectly able to "burn" frutose (or galactose for that matter). These get turned into fat by the liver since fats are of considerably more use than sugars to mammals. Any glucose which cannot be used in fairly short order is also converted to fats (assuming insulin is available.) The only cells which can't "burn" fats are those without mitochondria there's thus no need for anything other than a fairly low level of GNG even with a zero glucose diet.

you've already filled your Fat cells with the Jellied Fructose Fat.

Fats produced by the liver enter the blood inside VLDL, which are likely to remain in the bloodstream considerably longer than any dietary glucose.

Quite literally makes any Glucose that would have been harmless before.. Toxic and in Life threatening instantly.. congratulations.. you have Type 2 diabetes.

An excess of glucose in the blood is dangerous in itself. This would also be the case with fructose and galactose. But the regulatory mechanism is different here. T2 diabetes occurs when it cannot be removed quickly enough from the blood to keep it below toxic levels (7.6 mmol/l). Doing this is going to be easier with every cell taking up glucose than if only the liver and fat cells are doing so...

Comment Re:Type 2 is a plumbing problem (Score 1) 202

I thought Fructose was the prime candidate for over production of Fatty Acids and Triglycerides that literally "jam up" the mechanism that normally brings high blood sugar down. And that Insulin "resistance" was simply a conservation of mass problem.. literally.. all available Fat cell space is used up.. until the body can make more.. like a Housing Shortage

The human (or any other mammal) body dosn't work that way. Some cells need insulin before they can take up glucose. But more or less all cells can take up fructose and galactose without needing it to be present. What typically happens in practice is virtually all dietary fructose and galactose is changed into fats by the liver. It's impossible to fat cells to become "full up" since they can always undergo mitosis.

So the Blood Sugar and Fat Triglycerides just sit in the blood stream congealing and eroding the outside of the cells in the arteries and veins and organs exposed to the soup.

Sugars disolve in blood plasma, thus must be cosely regulated to maintain the required physical and chemical properties. Lipids are carried in cell like structures called lipoproteins. The number of lipoproteins in the blood, especially chylomicrons and VLDL can vary greatly.
Usually cells would taking glucose from the blood once the concentration in the cytoplasm exceeds a certain level. (Regardless of how much insulin is present in the blood.) Insulin resistance is the case insulin receptors remaining "off" even after cytoplasm glucose levels fall e.g. due to glycolysis. High levels on insulin and/or glucose tend to inhibit formation of lipoprotein receptors so an insulin resistant cell can't easily switch its ATP production from glycolysis and TCA cycle to beta oxidation or ketosis. Since liver and fat cells have the additional metabolic pathway of converting glucose to fat they don't tend to become insulin resistant.

Comment Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes (Score 4, Informative) 202

I became a type 1 at 28, after I was sick for a week. My father became type 1 at 32. They used to call it Juvenile Diabetes, but obviously that is a misnomer. The later you get exposed to the virus, the later you become diabetic.

Similarly T2 used to be called "Mature Onset Diabetes". Thus you end up with terms such as Latent Autoimmune Diabetes of Adulthood (LADA) and Maturity Onset Diabetes of the Young (MODY). IIRC the oldest person diagnosed T1 was in their 90's and the youngest person diagnosed T2 around 7.
It turns out than many people with MODY actually have a mitochondial abnormaility. Whilst this produces "insulin resistance" the biochemical mechanism is different.

Comment Re:Type 1 v Type 2 diabetes (Score 4, Insightful) 202

It is worth noting this is for type 1 diabetes, not type 2 which is the modern plague resulting largely from bad diet and inactivity. That said, if you know somebody for whom diabetes is a lifelong affliction since childhood, and kids who need shots for diabetes, that's type 1.

Genetics appears to be a strong factor in ALL forms of diabetes.
As for "bad diet" this may well be the low fat, but very high glucose, diet pushed as "healthy" since the late 1970's (in the US). Given that diabetes is the inability to effectivly handle dietary glucose.

Comment Re:A Herring? (Score 1) 159

However the 4th amendment does put some limits on searching the effects and papers or taking of property from citizens:

Except that it dosn't say "citizens" it says "the people".
The second paragraph of Article I, Section 2 states "No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen." Making it rather clear that "US Citizens" are a subset of "the people".
Where does the idea that these are synonyms originate? Nowhere in any of the ammendments is such a redefinition apparent. About the only definitions of "the people" which would make any sense would be "all people anywhere", "all people in US territory plus US citizens elsewhere" or "all people legally in US territiory plus US citizens elsewhere".

Comment Re:And no one is listening... (Score 1) 394

Because "no one ever got fired for buying [big vendor]" matters much less in an organization where people never get fired for being bad at their jobs.

In most federal jobs: politically unpopular activities on your own time can get you fired, being realllly bad at your job generally doesn't.


The thing to remember here is that "buying from [big vendor]" can easily be a politcial activity. Within both governments and big business...

Comment Re:not entirely false (Score 1) 394

You say that as if it doesn't apply to proprietary software as well. Your metric is stupid and if you think it's a good way of measuring, you are stupid. Make no doubt about it: Sturgeon's Law applies to most everything, including proprietary software and FOSS. And it's amazing what kind of garbage people will pay lots of money for in niche usage.

Any actual Total Cost of Ownership would need to address the issue of broken software which is unfixable. Something which is only possible with proprietary software. (Including "It's a feature not a bug" cases.)

Comment Re:Is code all there is? (Score 1) 394

How is the project named? Is it something reminiscent of the function (like PaintShop Pro, Photoshop, Internet Explorer) or something entirely random, forcing more cognitive load on an uninformed user (Gimp, Firefox, Juice)?

With the likes of Excel, PowerPoint, Access, Outlook, Exchange, even Oracle clearly indicating function?

Comment Re:Yeah, but they nailed the "documentation" part (Score 4, Insightful) 394

Open-source documentation is like an insomniac cat. Theoretically it exists somewhere, but no one's ever seen it.

Plenty of software is poorly documented. Alt least with OSS you always have the source code as documentation. So it's impossible for OSS to have undocumented "features". Unlike the situation with proprietary software.

Comment Re:Moral dilemma for Cowards (Score 1) 411

I've got news for you, friend. Information has never harmed a single soul. It takes action to do that. Information doesn't kill people, people do.

Indeed many things blamed on "The Internet" actually involve people meeting in person.

The NSA does not preempt terrorist threats, and even if they did, the cost to the rest of our lives is too much. They've inundated themselves with data and can't make sense of any of it until after the actions have been performed. Besides, folks could just send post cards with stenographic messages on them, or any other low-tech solution.

Even moderatly good codes (which includes using "slang terms) would more or less ensure that interceptions would be useless in preventing anything.

More folks die of heart disease every year than over fifty 9/11's... 2,996 died in 9/11. 597,689. Two Hundred Times More, Every Year! If the NSA wanted to protect us they'd be making tastier health food.

Similarly it would make more sense for the TSA to spend all it's budget on improving road safety.
As for the issue of "healthy food" they'd probably first need to find out what is healthy for people as opposed to profitable for the food industry.

Comment Re:Moral dilemma for the IT community (Score 1) 411

To put it another way: free speech means some folks will say things that match your opinion (a "good" thing!), but sometimes, they dare to say stuff you don't agree with! And the latter can't be allowed.

Where the ethics gets tricky is "you" (be that an individual, a "majority" or vocal "minority") agreeing with an opinion or not may not be a good metric as to if something should be allowed or not in a society.
Something which is "popular" may be very "bad", whereas something which is "unpopular" may be very "good".

And the reason James Clapper here wants to forbid you to use encryption is pretty nefarious, even if he claims to want only "your good".

Very often those who seek to impose something on people "for their own good" are the most oppressive.

Comment Re:I feel safer... (Score 1) 411

You have to draw a line somewhere and wherever you draw it it'll be arbitrary. Not drawing that line at all would be even sillier.
To me it's best that you draw a single line and get the full power and responsibility at the same age (with exceptions for the severely mentally handicapped).


If you are already making an exception for "severely mentally handicapped" then age is no longer the only criteria anyway. Maybe instead what's needed is someway of testing "mental competence". Or a biological method of testing if someone is "child" or "adult".

Otherwise you have multiple arbitrary lines like in some countries the age you can be conscripted/sign up as a soldier is lower than the age you can vote for the leaders who'd send you to die and which itself is lower than the age you can drink alcoholic beverages. And that to me is even sillier than a single arbitrary line.

There's also things like being able to operate highly dangerous machines in public.

Comment Re:A Justification for Anything (Score 1) 411

If they are already unable to detect and prevent bad things from happening at the hands of terrorists, what justifies attempting to crack one of the few means of privacy we have left?

The whole thing being based on the assumption that mass snooping actually does anything against "terrorism" (or any of the other "threats" used as justifciation.)

They used to do this stuff using human assets - actual members of the CIA going out and recruiting agents, analyzing data received, finding targets and then determining what to do about them, but when they came across the absolute "sexiness" of electronic spying, they cut waaaaaaay back on human spying, turned the problem over the NSA and cut the budget (more likely spend more on the NSA than they did on CIA employees and bribes to prospective agents).

WIth the obvious problem that without humans in the loop it can be impossible to separate "signal" from "noise". Assuming you are even looking at the right communications channel in the fist place. With this being identified as a serious problem over 12 years ago!

Slashdot Top Deals

If the code and the comments disagree, then both are probably wrong. -- Norm Schryer

Working...