|
|
Post by liane on Feb 20, 2016 11:20:03 GMT -5
The nice thing about using Afrezza is that lower amounts of basal will be needed. So between meals, there will be less insulin floating around.
|
|
|
|
Post by liane on Feb 20, 2016 11:42:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Feb 20, 2016 12:42:19 GMT -5
The nice thing about using Afrezza is that lower amounts of basal will be needed. So between meals, there will be less insulin floating around. That's quite a well known phenomena and you often see it when people move to pumps where their basal drops dramatically. With shots people tend to use part of the basal to cover meals, this is formalized by Mix pens that include both basal and bolus in a fixed ratio. Commonly basal gets set once and then ignored (guilty!) when it should be reset every six months which would avoid this problem and reduce the basal used. |
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Feb 20, 2016 13:03:41 GMT -5
It's an interesting paper but has one big issue in that it is an in-vitro study. What it says is that there are no immediate ill effects on the cell arrays, which is good, but what it doesn't (and cannot) say is that there will be no long term ill effects. The paper specifically calls out the risk of long term adverse effects since those are beyond the scope of the paper. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris-C on Feb 20, 2016 14:53:14 GMT -5
It's an interesting paper but has one big issue in that it is an in-vitro study. What it says is that there are no immediate ill effects on the cell arrays, which is good, but what it doesn't (and cannot) say is that there will be no long term ill effects. The paper specifically calls out the risk of long term adverse effects since those are beyond the scope of the paper. Duly noted, and the reason that the FDA required the longitudinal study on pulmonary function. It's also worth noting that nearly every new product regulated by the FDA (unless it's a food supplement with ingredients generally regarded as safe) starts with a requirement for scientific safety data or doesn't get approved. That is to say, the long term risks of numerous products currently in use in the market are unknown. Time will reveal the longitudinal safety profile for all of them. I suspect inhaled products are held to a different standard than other drugs for numerous reasons. |
|
|
|
Post by dictatorsaurus on Feb 20, 2016 18:18:46 GMT -5
Cancer is a strong buzz word that's easy to throw randomly out there to create fear and suspicion. Afrezza went through extensive trials. More extensive than many readily available drugs with KNOWN risks such as stroke, heart failure and other fun health risks.
Afrezza's issue is not the possibility of cancer, it's the major pharma that we partnered up with us that dragged us along close to bankruptcy.
The electric car from the 90's was killed. Afrezza will not go down easy. The electric car was a vehicle, where Afrezza is a life changing drug. Big difference. You can slow down progress, but you can't completely stunt it.
|
|
|
|
Post by benyiju on Feb 21, 2016 2:11:43 GMT -5
Cancer is a strong buzz word that's easy to throw randomly out there to create fear and suspicion. Afrezza went through extensive trials. More extensive than many readily available drugs with KNOWN risks such as stroke, heart failure and other fun health risks. Afrezza's issue is not the possibility of cancer, it's the major pharma that we partnered up with us that dragged us along close to bankruptcy. The electric car from the 90's was killed. Afrezza will not go down easy. The electric car was a vehicle, where Afrezza is a life changing drug. Big difference. You can slow down progress, but you can't completely stunt it. Actually, at this point it looks like Sanofi took Afrezza down pretty easily! Too bad our CEO is no Elon Musk. It should also be noted that (unless I missed something) Hippie did not suggest there was a serious cancer risk with Afrezza, only that doctors are wary of prescribing new drugs that later could prove to increase cancer risk, esp when drug comes freighted with concerns about cancer already. And pace your assertion that it is only Sanofi that is causing problems for Afrezza, reluctance of doctors to prescribe is almost certainly one of the headwinds Afrezza is facing. |
|
|
|
Post by benyiju on Feb 21, 2016 2:25:53 GMT -5
benyiju , Your posts are getting quite tiresome. It's perfectly OK to state your point of view - positive, negative, or whatever. But you really need to quit labeling the other posters on this board. Word to the wise... My apologies (to all concerned). I will try to be wise and play nice. However, I do hope that you don't find it tiresome to enforce this policy in all directions, Liane. The number of posts whining about critical questions and labeling them the devious work of 'shorts' or 'FUDsters' etc far outnumber testy responses from the Reality Based Investing Community.  |
|
|
|
Post by mnholdem on Feb 21, 2016 8:38:19 GMT -5
benyiju , Your posts are getting quite tiresome. It's perfectly OK to state your point of view - positive, negative, or whatever. But you really need to quit labeling the other posters on this board. Word to the wise... My apologies (to all concerned). I will try to be wise and play nice. However, I do hope that you don't find it tiresome to enforce this policy in all directions, Liane. The number of posts whining about critical questions and labeling them the devious work of 'shorts' or 'FUDsters' etc far outnumber testy responses from the Reality Based Investing Community. Frankly, I'm more concerned about the sheer volume of your posts, which seem to be appearing in nearly every thread and may be thwarting normal debate on various subjects, aka a wet blanket effect. Even your response to liane carries with it an arrogant tone in which you anoint yourself (and some others, I presume) as "reality-based". The remark is, perhaps, more passive-aggressive than calling a CEO "hair brained" or recommending that family members commit investors who think a $5+ share price is possible [paraphrased] but you are insulting board members who hold a contrarian view to yours, nonetheless. |
|
|
|
Post by tayl5 on Sept 2, 2016 17:09:17 GMT -5
Reviving an old thread, Johns Hopkins researchers recently reported that the combination of a cancer drug and metformin had much bigger effect on pancreatic tumors than the cancer drug by itself. The researchers thought the difference was that metformin limited the tumor cells' supply of glucose. Given that Afrezza does a fine job of eliminating glucose spikes, maybe someday doctors will think of Afrezza as reducing, rather than potentially increasing, cancer risk. BTW, I never responded to peppy's comment about the rationale for the Warburg effect. One plausible explanation is that using fermentation for energy rather than oxidative phosphorylation allows more of the energy and carbon in glucose to be used for the construction of cellular components. Cancer cells are typically growing and dividing faster than non-cancer cells, and it doesn't help to have extra energy if you don't have the parts needed to grow. |
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Sept 2, 2016 20:30:26 GMT -5
Reviving an old thread, Johns Hopkins researchers recently reported that the combination of a cancer drug and metformin had much bigger effect on pancreatic tumors than the cancer drug by itself. The researchers thought the difference was that metformin limited the tumor cells' supply of glucose. Given that Afrezza does a fine job of eliminating glucose spikes, maybe someday doctors will think of Afrezza as reducing, rather than potentially increasing, cancer risk. BTW, I never responded to peppy's comment about the rationale for the Warburg effect. One plausible explanation is that using fermentation for energy rather than oxidative phosphorylation allows more of the energy and carbon in glucose to be used for the construction of cellular components. Cancer cells are typically growing and dividing faster than non-cancer cells, and it doesn't help to have extra energy if you don't have the parts needed to grow. Quote: fermentation reply:
noun: fermentation
the chemical breakdown of a substance by bacteria, yeasts, or other microorganisms, typically involving effervescence and the giving off of heat.
•the process of fermentation involved in the making of beer, wine, and liquor, in which sugars are converted to ethyl alcohol.
In oncology, the Warburg effect is the observation that most cancer cells predominantly produce energy by a high rate of glycolysis followed by lactic acid fermentation in the cytosol, rather than by a comparatively low rate of glycolysis followed by oxidation of pyruvate in mitochondria as in most normal cells.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=bb4FMn-IWEY
The Krebs cycle I learned well once. The citric acid cycle with electron transport way over my head... aerobic 36 atp
anaerobic 2 atp
|
|
|
|
Post by mannmade on Sept 2, 2016 23:47:06 GMT -5
By the way, I believe there is a fairly popular diabetes drug product on the market that has a warning against taking if patient has Thyroid cancer and I seriously doubt many patients get tested for thyroid cancer before taking this drug which as I recall is one of the more popular ones. Not exactly the same thing but patients will take it and doctors do not test for thyroid cancer in most cases as i understand it before prescribing. So does not seem to be a worry in this situation.
Liane perhaps you know which drug I am speaking about as I can't recall the name.
|
|
|
|
Post by LosingMyBullishness on Sept 3, 2016 4:52:19 GMT -5
Is that even how cancer develops or spreads? Your reasoning seems very generic and non-scientific based purely on assumption. It will not cause a cancer, and it will not help it spread. What it may do is help it grow. Given a pre-cancerous lesion what you are doing is introducing a growth factor into an existing situation where you really do not want things to grow and become established. Think of it like watering a plant - if it's just barren soil no amount of watering will make a plant suddenly appear, but if there is a plant there watering it will keep it alive and now you are adding Babybio in the form of insulin to help it grow. One of the reasons I avoided Januvia is because the mechanism it uses to reduce your blood sugar inhibits the mechanism the body uses to clean up pre-cancers. Aged, Sometimes you do mention this concern. Why are you not convinced by replies or your endo that the very quick disolving on the TS particles and the very residue time on the surface makes this a non issue? Why don't you agreed that flooding the body with basal Insulin has a bigger impact due to the constant exposure. And why do you use 'coat' that gives a incorrect picture? MNKD has been testing Afrezza for many years now and there was not one single incident of induced cancer. If you request 20 years of long term test for every medication for a chronic disease you take away this alternative for many millions of ill people. Why? |
|
|
|
Post by LosingMyBullishness on Sept 3, 2016 7:17:01 GMT -5
Cancer is a strong buzz word that's easy to throw randomly out there to create fear and suspicion. Afrezza went through extensive trials. More extensive than many readily available drugs with KNOWN risks such as stroke, heart failure and other fun health risks. Afrezza's issue is not the possibility of cancer, it's the major pharma that we partnered up with us that dragged us along close to bankruptcy. The electric car from the 90's was killed. Afrezza will not go down easy. The electric car was a vehicle, where Afrezza is a life changing drug. Big difference. You can slow down progress, but you can't completely stunt it. Actually, at this point it looks like Sanofi took Afrezza down pretty easily! Too bad our CEO is no Elon Musk. It should also be noted that (unless I missed something) Hippie did not suggest there was a serious cancer risk with Afrezza, only that doctors are wary of prescribing new drugs that later could prove to increase cancer risk, esp when drug comes freighted with concerns about cancer already. And pace your assertion that it is only Sanofi that is causing problems for Afrezza, reluctance of doctors to prescribe is almost certainly one of the headwinds Afrezza is facing. Wasn't it that he and not his endos are concerned about it? This endos were about pulmonary function. |
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Sept 3, 2016 8:03:22 GMT -5
By the way, I believe there is a fairly popular diabetes drug product on the market that has a warning against taking if patient has Thyroid cancer and I seriously doubt many patients get tested for thyroid cancer before taking this drug which as I recall is one of the more popular ones. Not exactly the same thing but patients will take it and doctors do not test for thyroid cancer in most cases as i understand it before prescribing. So does not seem to be a worry in this situation. Liane perhaps you know which drug I am speaking about as I can't recall the name. Victoza® (liraglutide [rDNA origin] injection), solution for subcutaneous use Initial U.S. Approval: 2010 WARNING: RISK OF THYROID C-CELL TUMORS See full prescribing information for complete boxed warning. • Liraglutide causes thyroid C-cell tumors at clinically relevant exposures in rodents. It is unknown whether Victoza causes thyroid C-cell tumors, including medullary thyroid carcinoma (MTC), in humans, as human relevance could not be determined by clinical or nonclinical studies (5.1). • Victoza is contraindicated in patients with a personal or family history of MTC or in patients with Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia syndrome type 2 (MEN 2) (5.1). ·······································INDICATIONS AND USAGE······································ Victoza is a glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist indicated as an adjunct to diet and exercise to improve glycemic control in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (1). Important Limitations of Use (1.1): www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2010/022341lbl.pdf |
|
