New Genes Point to Type 2 Diabetes Risk

http://diabetes.org/diabetesnewsarti...althewEDIT.xml

or

http://tinyurl.com/22rq96

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Researchers said on Sunday they had homed in on
five areas of DNA that could account for 70 percent of the genetic
risk for type 2 diabetes.

"Our new findings mean that we can create a good genetic test to
predict people's risk of developing this type of diabetes," said
Philippe Froguel of Imperial College London, who worked on the study.

"Kurt" <kurtwheeling1965@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1171425829.254463.103980@a34g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
> http://diabetes.org/diabetesnewsarti...althewEDIT.xml
>
> or
>
> http://tinyurl.com/22rq96
>
> WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Researchers said on Sunday they had homed in on
> five areas of DNA that could account for 70 percent of the genetic
> risk for type 2 diabetes.


<snip>

Hi Kurt,
here is the news release :

http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/newsandev...13?newsid=5233

Imperial College London News Release

Under strict embargo for 18.00 London time / 13.00 US Eastern time Sunday 11
February 2007

The most important genes associated with a risk of developing type-2
diabetes have been identified, scientists report today in a new study. The
research, published online in Nature, is the first time the genetic makeup
of any disease has been mapped in such detail. It should enable scientists
to develop a genetic test to show an individual their likelihood of
developing diabetes mellitus type 2, commonly known as type-2 diabetes. The
researchers identified four loci, or points on individuals' genetic maps,
which corresponded to a risk of developing the disorder. The scientists,
from Imperial College London, McGill University, Canada, and other
international institutions, believe their findings explain up to 70% of the
genetic background of type-2 diabetes. In addition, one of the genetic
mutations which they detected might further explain the causes behind type-2
diabetes, potentially leading to new treatments. The research revealed that
people with type-2 diabetes have a mutation in a particular zinc transporter
known as SLC30A8, which is involved in regulating insulin secretion. Type-2
diabetes is associated with a deficiency in insulin and the researchers
believe it may be possible to treat it by fixing this transporter.

Here is the abstract from the original publication :

Nature Advance online publication 11 Februari 2007

A genome-wide association study identifies novel risk loci for type 2
diabetes

Type 2 diabetes mellitus results from the interaction of environmental
factors with a combination of genetic variants, most of which were hitherto
unknown. A systematic search for these variants was recently made possible
by the development of high-density arrays that permit the genotyping of
hundreds of thousands of polymorphisms. We tested 392,935 single-nucleotide
polymorphisms in a French case-control cohort. Markers with the most
significant difference in genotype frequencies between cases of type 2
diabetes and controls were fast-tracked for testing in a second cohort. This
identified four loci containing variants that confer type 2 diabetes risk,
in addition to confirming the known association with the TCF7L2 gene. These
loci include a non-synonymous polymorphism in the zinc transporter SLC30A8,
which is expressed exclusively in insulin-producing b-cells, and two linkage
disequilibrium blocks that contain genes potentially involved in b-cell
development or function (IDE-KIF11-HHEX and EXT2-ALX4). These associations
explain a substantial portion of disease risk and constitute proof of
principle for the genome-wide approach to the elucidation of complex genetic
traits.

hth
Gys

"Kurt" <kurtwheeling1965@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1171425829.254463.103980@a34g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
> http://diabetes.org/diabetesnewsarti...althewEDIT.xml
>
> or
>
> http://tinyurl.com/22rq96
>
> WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Researchers said on Sunday they had homed in on

Gee, they can't get the verb right. It is hone in, not home in. Home in I
guess means to go to your house for the night.

> five areas of DNA that could account for 70 percent of the genetic
> risk for type 2 diabetes.
>
> "Our new findings mean that we can create a good genetic test to
> predict people's risk of developing this type of diabetes," said
> Philippe Froguel of Imperial College London, who worked on the study.

The 70% is probably way overstated. It is not even mentioned in the
abstract. Plus, the population studies was probably not representative.
However, this is a good advance. If you are able to determine the people who
are most at risk, they can begin diet and lifestyle changes earlier,
preventing or delaying the onset of diabetes. This also involves cool new
technology.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...ture05616.html

http://www.muhc.ca/media/news/?ItemID=23838

Jeff

Geoff <news@googlemail.com> wrote:

> "Kurt" <kurtwheeling1965@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1171425829.254463.103980@a34g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
>> http://diabetes.org/diabetesnewsarti...althewEDIT.xml
>>
>> or
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/22rq96
>>
>> WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Researchers said on Sunday they had homed in on

> Gee, they can't get the verb right. It is hone in, not home in. Home in I
> guess means to go to your house for the night.

"Home in" is the older and perfectly correct metaphor, as used for
example in "homing missile". Opinion is divided as to whether "hone
in" is a metaphor of independent origin, or a mistaken "home in" which
has acquired its own post-hoc justification. See for example the
"couldn't care less" & "could care less" controversy.

--
Chris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

On Feb 14, 7:30 am, Chris Malcolm <c...@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> Geoff <n...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > "Kurt" <kurtwheeling1...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:1171425829.254463.103980@a34g2000cwb.googleg roups.com...
> >>http://diabetes.org/diabetesnewsarti...12130&filename...
>
> >> or
>
> >>http://tinyurl.com/22rq96
>
> >> WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Researchers said on Sunday they had homed in on
> > Gee, they can't get the verb right. It is hone in, not home in. Home in I
> > guess means to go to your house for the night.
>
> "Home in" is the older and perfectly correct metaphor, as used for
> example in "homing missile". Opinion is divided as to whether "hone
> in" is a metaphor of independent origin, or a mistaken "home in" which
> has acquired its own post-hoc justification. See for example the
> "couldn't care less" & "could care less" controversy.
>
> --
> Chris Malcolm c...@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205
> IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
> [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]



That is errant pedantry, up with which I will not put.

--Winston Churchill (I think)

Ricavito <newsgroupreader@frontiernet.net> wrote:
> On Feb 14, 7:30 am, Chris Malcolm <c...@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>> Geoff <n...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> > "Kurt" <kurtwheeling1...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >news:1171425829.254463.103980@a34g2000cwb.googleg roups.com...
>> >>http://diabetes.org/diabetesnewsarti...12130&filename...
>>
>> >> or
>>
>> >>http://tinyurl.com/22rq96
>>
>> >> WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Researchers said on Sunday they had homed in on

>> > Gee, they can't get the verb right. It is hone in, not home in. Home in I
>> > guess means to go to your house for the night.
>>
>> "Home in" is the older and perfectly correct metaphor, as used for
>> example in "homing missile". Opinion is divided as to whether "hone
>> in" is a metaphor of independent origin, or a mistaken "home in" which
>> has acquired its own post-hoc justification. See for example the
>> "couldn't care less" & "could care less" controversy.

> That is errant pedantry, up with which I will not put.

> --Winston Churchill (I think)

Not according to

http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/hone%20in (Merriam-Webster on-line)

and

http://www.bartleby.com/68/24/3024.html (The Columbia Guide to
Standard American English)

Nor according to the OED, but I don't know of a free on-line source
for that.

--
Chris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

On Feb 14, 11:35 am, Chris Malcolm <c...@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> Ricavito <newsgrouprea...@frontiernet.net> wrote:
> > On Feb 14, 7:30 am, Chris Malcolm <c...@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> >> Geoff <n...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >> > "Kurt" <kurtwheeling1...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >> >news:1171425829.254463.103980@a34g2000cwb.googleg roups.com...
> >> >>http://diabetes.org/diabetesnewsarti...12130&filename...
>
> >> >> or
>
> >> >>http://tinyurl.com/22rq96
>
> >> >> WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Researchers said on Sunday they had homed in on
> >> > Gee, they can't get the verb right. It is hone in, not home in. Home in I
> >> > guess means to go to your house for the night.
>
> >> "Home in" is the older and perfectly correct metaphor, as used for
> >> example in "homing missile". Opinion is divided as to whether "hone
> >> in" is a metaphor of independent origin, or a mistaken "home in" which
> >> has acquired its own post-hoc justification. See for example the
> >> "couldn't care less" & "could care less" controversy.
> > That is errant pedantry, up with which I will not put.
> > --Winston Churchill (I think)
>
> Not according to
>
> http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/hone%20in(Merriam-Webster on-line)
>
> and
>
> http://www.bartleby.com/68/24/3024.html(The Columbia Guide to
> Standard American English)
>
> Nor according to the OED, but I don't know of a free on-line source
> for that.
>
> --
> Chris Malcolm c...@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205
> IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
> [http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Oh, I wasn't disagreeing with you Chris :-)

Ricavito <newsgroupreader@frontiernet.net> wrote:
> On Feb 14, 11:35 am, Chris Malcolm <c...@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>> Ricavito <newsgrouprea...@frontiernet.net> wrote:
>> > On Feb 14, 7:30 am, Chris Malcolm <c...@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>> >> Geoff <n...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> >> > "Kurt" <kurtwheeling1...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

>> >> >> WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Researchers said on Sunday they had homed in on

>> >> > Gee, they can't get the verb right. It is hone in, not home in. Home in I
>> >> > guess means to go to your house for the night.

>> >> "Home in" is the older and perfectly correct metaphor, as used for
>> >> example in "homing missile". Opinion is divided as to whether "hone
>> >> in" is a metaphor of independent origin, or a mistaken "home in" which
>> >> has acquired its own post-hoc justification. See for example the
>> >> "couldn't care less" & "could care less" controversy.
>> > That is errant pedantry, up with which I will not put.
>> > --Winston Churchill (I think)
>>
>> Not according to
>>
>> http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/hone%20in(Merriam-Webster on-line)
>>
>> and
>>
>> http://www.bartleby.com/68/24/3024.html(The Columbia Guide to
>> Standard American English)
>>
>> Nor according to the OED, but I don't know of a free on-line source
>> for that.

> Oh, I wasn't disagreeing with you Chris :-)

Ah, good! In that case I won't have to expedanticate on the
arrant/errant thing :-)

--
Chris Malcolm cam@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

Chris Malcolm <cam@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote in
news:53j13sF1t427qU3@mid.individual.net:

> Ricavito <newsgroupreader@frontiernet.net> wrote:
>> On Feb 14, 11:35 am, Chris Malcolm <c...@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>>> Ricavito <newsgrouprea...@frontiernet.net> wrote:
>>> > On Feb 14, 7:30 am, Chris Malcolm <c...@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>>> >> Geoff <n...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>> >> > "Kurt" <kurtwheeling1...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
>>> >> >> WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Researchers said on Sunday they had
>>> >> >> homed in on
>
>>> >> > Gee, they can't get the verb right. It is hone in, not home in.
>>> >> > Home in I guess means to go to your house for the night.
>
>>> >> "Home in" is the older and perfectly correct metaphor, as used
>>> >> for example in "homing missile". Opinion is divided as to whether
>>> >> "hone in" is a metaphor of independent origin, or a mistaken
>>> >> "home in" which has acquired its own post-hoc justification. See
>>> >> for example the "couldn't care less" & "could care less"
>>> >> controversy.
>>> > That is errant pedantry, up with which I will not put.
>>> > --Winston Churchill (I think)
>>>
>>> Not according to
>>>
>>> http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/hone%20in(Merriam-Webster on-line)
>>>
>>> and
>>>
>>> http://www.bartleby.com/68/24/3024.html(The Columbia Guide to
>>> Standard American English)
>>>
>>> Nor according to the OED, but I don't know of a free on-line source
>>> for that.
>
>> Oh, I wasn't disagreeing with you Chris :-)
>
> Ah, good! In that case I won't have to expedanticate on the
> arrant/errant thing :-)
>

And that is the reason why I never try to do the crossword in the London
Times when I'm there.

"Geoff" <news@googlemail.com> wrote in news:z0FAh.1034$hp4.262@trnddc02:

>
> "Kurt" <kurtwheeling1965@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1171425829.254463.103980@a34g2000cwb.googlegr oups.com...
>> http://diabetes.org/diabetesnewsarti...2130&filename=
>> 20070212/reuters20070212health00000008reutershealthewEDIT.x ml
>>
>> or
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/22rq96
>>
>> WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Researchers said on Sunday they had homed in
>> on
>
> Gee, they can't get the verb right. It is hone in, not home in. Home
> in I guess means to go to your house for the night.
>
Not really It's common to use 'homed in' in aviation. I think it came
from the homing pegeon. Pilots 'home into' frequencies,, Home into
beacons, and home into bars.

>> five areas of DNA that could account for 70 percent of the genetic
>> risk for type 2 diabetes.
>>
>> "Our new findings mean that we can create a good genetic test to
>> predict people's risk of developing this type of diabetes," said
>> Philippe Froguel of Imperial College London, who worked on the study.
>
> The 70% is probably way overstated. It is not even mentioned in the
> abstract. Plus, the population studies was probably not
> representative. However, this is a good advance. If you are able to
> determine the people who are most at risk, they can begin diet and
> lifestyle changes earlier, preventing or delaying the onset of
> diabetes. This also involves cool new technology.
>
> http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...ture05616.html
>
> http://www.muhc.ca/media/news/?ItemID=23838
>
> Jeff
>
> This sounds great!!!!