Dean Pomerleau Posted December 4, 2015 Report Share Posted December 4, 2015 Antibiotic Use Linked to Higher Diabetes Risk Note: I'm starting a new generic thread about diabetes prevention with a rather narrowly focused post about diabetes and antibiotics, because I thought the study was interesting and suggested a link I hadn't heard about before. Over time I hope we'll build up posts on this thread dealing with other means of avoiding this important cause of morbidity and mortality. With that background, I thought this recent observational study [1] of a possible link between antibiotic use and subsequent development of type 2 diabetes was quite interesting and potentially relevant for CR Practitioners. It found quite a clear and dramatic dose-response relationship between the number of antibiotic prescriptions a person fills, and their subsequent risk of developing type 2 diabetes, among 5.6 million Danish people tracked for 12 years. Here is the kicker graph from the full text of the paper: As you can see from the graph, 2-4 courses of an antibiotic raised one's risk of developing diabetes by about 20%, and 5-8 courses raised it by about 40%. The authors suggest (warn) that there are two possible ways to interpret this association: There are two competing interpretations of our findings: 1) patients with type 2 diabetes are more prone to develop infections many years before they become diagnosed with type 2 diabetes and therefore have increased demand for antibiotics and 2) antibiotics increase the risk of type 2 diabetes. They suggest it may be a combination of both, but that there is definitely evidence that messing up one's gut microbiome via antibiotics can lead to weight gain, glucose intolerance, etc. So a causal link that goes as follows: antibiotics -> gut dysbiosis -> metabolic syndrome -> Type 2 diabetes seems quite plausible. I'm personally thankful that I haven't needed antibiotics in many, many years, and would be reluctant to take them now unless there was a significant danger of serious health consequences from not doing so. --Dean ---------- [1] J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2015 Oct;100(10):3633-40. doi: 10.1210/jc.2015-2696. Epub 2015 Aug 27.Use of Antibiotics and Risk of Type 2 Diabetes: A Population-Based Case-ControlStudy.Mikkelsen KH(1), Knop FK(1), Frost M(1), Hallas J(1), Pottegård A(1).CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Evidence that bacteria in the human gut may influencenutrient metabolism is accumulating. We investigated whether use of antibioticsinfluences the risk of developing type 2 diabetes and whether the effect can beattributed to specific types of antibiotics.METHODS: We conducted a population-based case-control study of incident type 2diabetes cases in Denmark (population 5.6 million) between January 1, 2000, andDecember 31, 2012. Data from the Danish National Registry of Patients, the DanishNational Prescription Registry, and the Danish Person Registry were combined.RESULTS: The odds ratio (OR) associating type 2 diabetes with exposure toantibiotics of any type was 1.53 (95% confidence interval 1.50-1.55) withredemption of more than or equal to 5 versus 0-1 prescriptions. Although noindividual group of antibiotics was specifically associated with type 2 diabetesrisk, slightly higher ORs for type 2 diabetes were seen with narrow-spectrum andbactericidal antibiotics (OR 1.55 and 1.48) compared to broad-spectrum andbacteriostatic types of antibiotics (OR 1.31 and 1.39), respectively. A cleardose-response effect was seen with increasing cumulative load of antibiotics. Theincreased use of antibiotics in patients with type 2 diabetes was found up to 15years before diagnosis of type 2 diabetes as well as after the diagnosis.CONCLUSIONS: Our results could support the possibility that antibiotics exposureincreases type 2 diabetes risk. However, the findings may also represent anincreased demand for antibiotics from increased risk of infections in patientswith yet-undiagnosed diabetes.PMCID: PMC4596043PMID: 26312581 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean Pomerleau Posted December 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted December 5, 2015 Metaformin's Benefits for Treating Diabetes Mediated by Gut Bacteria? Earlier I reported what I considered to be Useful Insights into Gut Bacteria and Health, suggesting that bacteria that produce the short-chain fatty acid butyrate may be beneficial for keeping systemic inflammation at bay. This new study [1], shared by Al Pater on the CR mailing list (thanks Al!) jibes nicely with this hypothesis, and connects it with the drug metaformin and diabetes, the disease that metaformin was developed to treat. So it makes it relevant for this thread in general (diabetes prevention) and the first post in this thread about the connection between disturbances in the gut microbiome (via antibiotics) and diabetes. In [1], the researchers analyzed previous studies of the benefits of metformin on diabetes progression, looking at microbiome analysis of diabetics both with and without metaformin treatment. They found that in general diabetics have depleted levels of fiber-loving, butyrate-producing bacteria in their gut, which is consistent with my previous post that the butyrate bacteria are health promoting. They found that treatment with metaformin reverses this dearth of butyrate bacteria, and may explain at least in part why & how metaformin is beneficial for the treatment of diabetes. If this is true, then eating a high fiber diet, like many of us do, may provide some of the same benefits as metaformin by promoting the health and wellness of butyrate-producing bacteria in our gut. This is particularly interesting not just for avoiding diabetes, but also because metaformin is also one of the few drugs that are thought to be potential longevity promoting (as a CR mimetic), as the recent news about a USDA-approved anti-aging human trial of metaformin attests. So feed your gut bacteria the fiber it wants and perhaps you'll avoid diabetes and live longer to boot! --Dean ---------- [1] Nature. 2015 Dec 2. doi: 10.1038/nature15766. [Epub ahead of print] Disentangling type 2 diabetes and metformin treatment signatures in the human gutmicrobiota.Forslund K(1), Hildebrand F(1,)(2,)(3), Nielsen T(4), Falony G(2,)(5), LeChatelier E(6,)(7), Sunagawa S(1), Prifti E(6,)(7,)(8), Vieira-Silva S(2,)(5),Gudmundsdottir V(9), Krogh Pedersen H(9), Arumugam M(4), Kristiansen K(10),Yvonne Voigt A(1,)(11,)(12), Vestergaard H(4), Hercog R(1), Igor Costea P(1),Roat Kultima J(1), Li J(13), Jørgensen T(14,)(15,)(16), Levenez F(6,)(7), DoreJ(6,)(7); MetaHIT consortium, Bjørn Nielsen H(9), Brunak S(9,)(17), RaesJ(2,)(3,)(5), Hansen T(4,)(18), Wang J(10,)(13,)(19,)(20,)(21), Dusko EhrlichS(6,)(7,)(22), Bork P(1,)(12,)(23,)(24), Pedersen O(4).In recent years, several associations between common chronic human disorders andaltered gut microbiome composition and function have been reported. In most ofthese reports, treatment regimens were not controlled for and conclusions couldthus be confounded by the effects of various drugs on the microbiota, which mayobscure microbial causes, protective factors or diagnostically relevant signals.Our study addresses disease and drug signatures in the human gut microbiome oftype 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D). Two previous quantitative gut metagenomicsstudies of T2D patients that were unstratified for treatment yielded divergentconclusions regarding its associated gut microbial dysbiosis. Here we show, using784 available human gut metagenomes, how antidiabetic medication confounds theseresults, and analyse in detail the effects of the most widely used antidiabeticdrug metformin. We provide support for microbial mediation of the therapeuticeffects of metformin through short-chain fatty acid production, as well as forpotential microbiota-mediated mechanisms behind known intestinal adverse effectsin the form of a relative increase in abundance of Escherichia species.Controlling for metformin treatment, we report a unified signature of gutmicrobiome shifts in T2D with a depletion of butyrate-producing taxa. These inturn cause functional microbiome shifts, in part alleviated by metformin-inducedchanges. Overall, the present study emphasizes the need to disentangle gutmicrobiota signatures of specific human diseases from those of medication.PMID: 26633628 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean Pomerleau Posted December 8, 2015 Author Report Share Posted December 8, 2015 Plant Protein Better than Animal Protein for Glycemic Control This new meta-analysis [1] of randomized control trials comparing animal vs. plant protein for glycemic control in diabetics found (not surprisingly perhaps) that plant protein is much better than animal protein. On average, replacing 35% of animal protein with plant protein resulted in a 15% improvement in HbA1c, the standard measure of medium term glycemic control. Similar improvements were seen for fasting glucose and fasting insulin levels. From the free full text, here is the forest plot for the HbA1c data across the multiple studies included in the meta-analysis, to give a feel for the variation and magnitude of the effect: So at least for the control of type 2 diabetes, and likely glycemic control more generally, it looks like a diet of predominantly plant protein is the way to go. --Dean ------------- [1] Nutrients. 2015 Dec 1;7(12):9804-24. doi: 10.3390/nu7125509. Effect of Replacing Animal Protein with Plant Protein on Glycemic Control inDiabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Viguiliouk E(1,)(2), Stewart SE(3,)(4), Jayalath VH(5,)(6,)(7), Ng AP(8),Mirrahimi A(9,)(10), de Souza RJ(11,)(12,)(13), Hanley AJ(14,)(15,)(16,)(17),Bazinet RP(18), Blanco Mejia S(19,)(20), Leiter LA(21,)(22,)(23,)(24,)(25), JosseRG(26,)(27,)(28,)(29,)(30), Kendall CW(31,)(32,)(33), JenkinsDJ(34,)(35,)(36,)(37,)(38), Sievenpiper JL(39,)(40,)(41,)(42). Free full text: http://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/7/12/5509/htm Previous research on the effect of replacing sources of animal protein with plantprotein on glycemic control has been inconsistent. We therefore conducted asystematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) toassess the effect of this replacement on glycemic control in individuals withdiabetes. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases through 26 August2015. We included RCTs ≥ 3-weeks comparing the effect of replacing animal withplant protein on HbA1c, fasting glucose (FG), and fasting insulin (FI). Twoindependent reviewers extracted relevant data, assessed study quality and risk ofbias. Data were pooled by the generic inverse variance method and expressed asmean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity wasassessed (Cochran Q-statistic) and quantified (I²-statistic). Thirteen RCTs (n =280) met the eligibility criteria. Diets emphasizing a replacement of animal withplant protein at a median level of ~35% of total protein per day significantlylowered HbA1c (MD = -0.15%; 95%-CI: -0.26, -0.05%), FG (MD = -0.53 mmol/L;95%-CI: -0.92, -0.13 mmol/L) and FI (MD = -10.09 pmol/L; 95%-CI: -17.31, -2.86pmol/L) compared with control arms. Overall, the results indicate that replacingsources of animal with plant protein leads to modest improvements in glycemiccontrol in individuals with diabetes. Owing to uncertainties in our analysesthere is a need for larger, longer, higher quality trials.TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT02037321.PMID: 26633472 [PubMed - in process] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.