View Full Version : which is worse?

19-04-2005, 13:35:09
A woman has been cured of type 1 diabetes thanks to a donor transplant of insulin-producing cells from her mother.

However, the woman still has to take powerful drugs to stop her rejecting the new cells, said her doctors.


Which would be worse then? Taking tablets to stabalise your blood sugar or taking tablets to stop internal organ rejection?

19-04-2005, 13:37:43
Um type 1 is more than just taking tablets. Even with proper insulin injections there is a high risk for heart, kidney failure, blindness and limb amputation.

19-04-2005, 13:38:54
That's very funny to me.

19-04-2005, 13:39:18
difficult one, on the other hand I would guess she was on daily (or higher) insulin injections rather than pills, which really isnt much fun. Also even with insulin the long term effects of diabetes are pretty horrible. The drugs wont be fun but at least in the case of a rejection it wont kill her, she will just be back to square one.

19-04-2005, 13:39:54
I think I'd have to vote for taking the anti-rejection drugs.

Depends on how severe/difficult to control the diabetes is, and that varies case by case.

19-04-2005, 13:40:47
My mum took tablets until recently. She's had liver and kidney failure and lost a leg.

Having your body regect its insides wouldn't be all that nice either though would it?

19-04-2005, 13:41:54
Everything else rejects me, why not myself?

19-04-2005, 13:43:01
The drugs wont be fun but at least in the case of a rejection it wont kill her, she will just be back to square one.
So it would just reject the pancreas?

19-04-2005, 13:46:06
Side effects include high blood pressure, diabetes, “shakes,” headache, nausea and kidney toxicity,hypertension, joint problems, cataracts, stomach ulcers, acne and weight gain.

19-04-2005, 13:49:59
Yes and they'd have to remove it.

Tablets are generally for type II diabetes. I'm not totally sure about this but type II's produce some insulin but either not enough or it isn't used properly. Type I has no insulin produced

19-04-2005, 13:50:05
Nice catch! Yikes.

Yes to rejecting only the transplanted cells.

19-04-2005, 13:54:31
I know three people with lifelong diabetes that got those insulin pager/pumps and they LOVE them. Its an amazing little gadget that gives them much finer control over their blood sugar.

19-04-2005, 13:59:42
actually they probably wouldnt have to surgically remove the pancreas - they havnt implanted an entire pancreas just some of the cells from a donor, from what I read in a different source they actually infused the cells into the hepatic portal vein and the cells implanted into the liver. Thats one of the nice bits about this - the islets cells dont have to actually be in the pancreas, just anywhere with a good blood supply. Rejection would result in the new islets being destroyed by the immune system but this would be such a tiny number of cells there would be no need to remove them - the immune system would clear it out on its own.

type I is often (always maybe?) a autoimmune disease anyway - the original islets would have been destroyed by the immune system. So it would be debateable wether host rejection or auto-immune action would get them first if the suppressants were stopped.