Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Science

Air Pollution Raises Risk of Type 2 Diabetes, Says Landmark Indian Study (theguardian.com) 38

Posted by msmash from the tough-luck dept.
Inhaling polluted air increases the risk of type 2 diabetes, the first study of its kind in India has found. Research conducted in Delhi and the southern city of Chennai found that inhaling air with high amounts of PM2.5 particles led to high blood sugar levels and increased type 2 diabetes incidence. From a report: When inhaled, PM2.5 particles -- which are 30 times thinner than a strand of hair -- can enter the bloodstream and cause several respiratory and cardiovascular diseases. The study [PDF] is part of ongoing research into chronic diseases in India that began in 2010. It is the first to focus on the link between exposure to ambient PM2.5 and type 2 diabetes in India, one of the worst countries in the world for air pollution. The average annual PM2.5 levels in Delhi was 82-100ug/m3 and in Chennai was 30-40ug/m3, according to the study, many times the WHO limits of 5ug/m3. Indiaâ(TM)s national air quality standards are 40ug/m3.

There is also a high burden of non-communicable diseases, including diabetes, hypertension and heart disease in India; 11.4% of the population -- 101 million people -- are living with diabetes, and about 136 million are pre-diabetic, according to a paper published in the Lancet in June. The average diabetes prevalence in the European Union was 6.2% in 2019, and 8.6% in the UK in 2016. The Lancet study found India's diabetes prevalence to be higher than previous estimations and showed a higher number of diabetics in urban than rural India.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Air Pollution Raises Risk of Type 2 Diabetes, Says Landmark Indian Study More

Air Pollution Raises Risk of Type 2 Diabetes, Says Landmark Indian Study

Comments Filter:
  • Its really hard to do a good apples to apples comparison here with all the variables. I know that in Delhi they are more vegetarian leaning. They consume a metric fuck-ton of grains, legumes, and other high starch foods. Does this other location traditionally consume the same foods in the same quantities?

    • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

      by internetd00du ( 7659518 )

      Why are you asking us?
      Get a copy of the study :]

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by gtall ( 79522 )

      Ya, professional scientists would Never think of that. Maybe you could tell them, I'm sure they'd listen to you. BTW, which professional science degree do you have?

      • You mean big pharma scientists would never twist statistics to favor the sale of drugs?

      • Professional scientists need to hype their papers in the media in order to attract funding. The more stories in the media, the higher the chance you get cited and thus funded even if your paper completely got debunked.

        The question is not without merit, if you live in a city like Delhi, youâ(TM)re likely to be richer than people living in the country, on average people that are richer have more problems with diabetes and heart disease. If there was any link between obesity and air pollution coal miners

      • Can you find where they control for dietary changes in the study? What about where they track how much sugar is being consumed in the subject cites? Where are the sales figures for foods known to contribute to diabetes?

        Everyone makes mistakes, no matter how well trained. Especially if there are other motivating factors involved.

    • Re:Same diet?? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by hey! ( 33014 ) on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @03:58PM (#63972486) Homepage Journal

      Legume and whole grain consumption aren't associated with Type 2 diabetes risk, in fact the opposite is the case for legumes at least, which feature in the Meditteranean Diet. Obviously there's many ways to be a vegetarian, and some of them (Med Diet) are better than others (living on white bread). In any case the study estimate exposure groupusing 1x1 km grid system in both cities, and both cities saw a correlation between exposure and increases in T2D. The paper also claims to have included diet as a covariate in their model although the details are not given. Altogether this should address concerns that cultural dietary differences between Delhi and Chennai was a serious confounding factor.

      This isn't the first study to find a correlation between PM 2.5 and T2D, it's just the first to attempt to characterize this relationship in such a polluted place. The paper cites systematic reviews of similar results from the US and Europe. A T2D correlation is not a surprising result because correlations have been found between PM 2.5 exposure and atherosclerosis, autoimmune diseases and obesity. The common denominator between these things and T2D is chronic inflammation, and a correlation between PM 2.5 and inflammatory markers like C-reactive protein is long established.

      I don't think it's radically outrunning to evidence to suggest we should all try to avoid air pollution. Insofar as diet is a contributor to inflammation it certainly makes sense to alter it, especially if you are unavoidably exposed to other risk factors. The problem is that there's a lot of really bad information out there about anti-inflammatory diets -- like avoiding nightshades. In some cases this bad diet advice might sense for a subset of the population (e.g. avoiding gluten) but has been marketed into a moral panic (e.g., I saw "gluten free beef broth" in the store the other day). Avoiding legumes or vegetarian diets is a new one on me. I think Michael Pollan hit the nail with this advice: eat real food, not too much, and mostly plants.

      • Yes, they claim to factor in diet, but how and where? Did they look at sales of sugary foods and beverages (soft drink sales more than doubled during the study period)? Factor in how urbanization causes both increased pollution and increased sugar consumption?

        But let's set that aside. Pollution is bad, and I doubt you'll find many who disagree. Even if this is a perfect study, finding another reason out on the margins that pollution is bad may just be a waste of time and money. It's really bad for y

    • More importantly, the increase in pollution is going to be directly related to economic development, which also has a direct relationship with dietary changes. In other words, increases in pollution and sugar consumption (and fat, junk food, etc.) share a cause, which means they will correlate. The study does mention diet as a confounding factor, but I do not see anything in their data about controlling for it, or even that they tracked changes to food consumption in the studied areas over the study's 13 y

  • Please do the needful (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @03:13PM (#63972402)
    Let's propone our green energy plans to fix this. Please do the needful.

  • Remember, it's important to always state "correlation is not causation!" Literally no scientist account for this, only people on Slashdot are aware of the idea. And yet it's such a powerful tool, totally invalidating any scientific argument. So either post if 4 or 5 times in this article, or make sure to spend your mod points wisely to get the word out.

  • Units of measure. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by slack_justyb ( 862874 ) on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @03:47PM (#63972458)

    When inhaled, PM2.5 particles – which are 30 times thinner than a strand of hair

    Is it just me or does the thickness of a strand of hair "unit of measure" get on anyone else's nerve?

    As for the means of diabetes. It seems the pitch at the moment is that these fine particles require the blood to be moved in and out of the liver more so than had the pollution not existed. This leads to more stress on the liver and pancreas interaction via reduced heptokine production. Heptokines being chemical signals emitted from the liver that regulate fatty liver disease and diabetes particularly adropin peptides in what the paper is suggesting.

    So basically, pollution can stress out the right organs that they focus more on the pollution coming in rather than regulating body function and this can lead to diseases from the poor regulation of those systems.

    Or at least that's what I feel like they're trying to say from the link that was in the story. I could be off mark here, so take my comment with a massive grain of salt.

    • Re:Units of measure. (Score:4, Funny)

      by rossdee ( 243626 ) on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @04:06PM (#63972510)

      "Is it just me or does the thickness of a strand of hair "unit of measure" get on anyone else's nerve?"

      Yeah, how many strands of hair are there in an olympic swimming pool?

    • "Is it just me or does the thickness of a strand of hair "unit of measure" get on anyone else's nerve?"

      Pet peeve?

      Mine is "organic food". If you are not gnawing on a chunk of pyrite for your nourishment you are eating organic food.

      Yes I have a chemistry degree.

      And rare earths has a specific meaning too.

      • And rare earths has a specific meaning too.

        I so wish I had modpoints, that's so true and apparently nobody gets this. You can't get any good rare earth in any lithovore restaurant around here, it's always either still raw or cooked to fuck.

  • Could be localized (Score:3)

    by BranMan ( 29917 ) on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @04:03PM (#63972502)

    Just like almost everything, and I do mean everything, causes cancer in California, maybe air pollution only causes diabetes in India?

    • One of the important things to remember about how California decides that (not if) something is a carcinogen is by testing it on a breed of lab rat with a metabolism that's so fragile that almost anything gives it cancer. The other thing is that they never demonstrate a correlation between how those rats react and how humans would.

    • It's possible. Air quality in India is horrendous. There could be a dose-response curve that isn't going to be reached elsewhere.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Air pollution has lots of other negative health effects. In the UK it's been known to kill people.

  • We have three options before us today on getting energy, fossil fuels, nuclear fission, or energy shortages. If anyone claims there is a fourth option then I'd like to see it put into use. Anyone demonstrating a fourth option is someone I'd expect to have people with money in their hands wanting to buy a piece of this technology.

    Now we have the risk of diabetes to go with the risks that fossil fuels pose. We have a means out from burning fossil fuels but it seems people prefer the risks of fossil fuels t

  • It couldn't possibly be the extreme amounts of sugar and carbs in literally everything sold to you (even the organic shit)

    • Sugar, including fructose, is an organic compound, so any amount of sugar can be added to another organic item and it will still be organic.

      Organic does not mean safe to eat, by the way. Alpha-Amanitin is completely organic and very deadly, as is botulinum toxin and ricin.

    • Yeah, I'm super pissed off at how many carbs they stuff into my organic rice and corn. You'd almost think they were made of carbs!

      And don't even get me started on this organic orange juice. Just loaded with sugar.

  • This ozempic shortage is getting weird.

  • Translation from Hindi: "Stuff that makes you sick will also make you sick."

Slashdot Top Deals

Brain off-line, please wait.

Close