• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

C-Peptide AND insulin deficiency????

apothecary

Member
Messages
7
Location
East Anglia
Dislikes
western diet and the "food" industry. ignorance (others AND mine!)
Hi World. This my first post. I have typeI for 40 years. My brother has had for 20 years. My Mum had insulin on diagnosis in her 40s.
I am a health professional and shocked with the realisation that - I suffer from Aspergers syndrome and currently a very severe depression which a kind colleague pulled me to one side one day and said go and get help. I am trying. I have a lot of aches pains cramps - taken statins for 5 years and had to stop as my waist was balloning and then became isulin resistant with lantus levels climbing to 100% previously ( I have heard this happen to others - will come back to this later) I stopped statins and muscle problems improved a bit.

My muscles ache and are weak I did have bilateral frozen shoulders about 4 years ago and what I found called a cheiro-arthropathy even though my diabetes specialist seemed not interested in this and I had to give up on my rheumatologist who seemed un-interested because my inflammatory markers were not raised.......

I used the skills I have been born with to read and analyze data from several research centres since about 1988 and the results have just shocked me. I have searched c-peptide on this forum and found very few mentions - except it's use in the diagnosis of the type of diabetes you have BUT:

1)Islet cells store BOTH insulin AND c-peptide and guess what - they release insulin AND c-petide - this implies BOTH are essential - our modern insulins, since monocomponent times, have had all of the other peptide fragments removed (or they were never there in the first place......)

2)patients with type 1 who continue to produce basal levels of c-petide (yes this can happen) seem to be protected from the complications of diabetes ( interesting because binding site of c-peptide to the K+ATPase is saturated at LOW levels in normal and diabetic subjects (the amounts of insulin these people produce are also small but because of the different receptor site binding of insulin I suspect this effect is negligable - implying a "honey moon" period for C-peptide which would be longer for type1s).

3)I have also found trials concerning TREATING "diabetic complications" with c-peptide which is being fast tracked through the FDA ..... results concer nerve conduction studies but also other "complications"

4) trials about control of diabetes have had dissappointing results in terms of clearly correlating good control with reduced complications - there is no doubt that a normal glucose level is essential to aim for BUT I have personally known well controlled and reasonably controlled type 1s who seem to struggle with complications ( I am attending the funeral of another family member next week who died form renal failure in early 50s. the youngest diabetic with type 1 who died from complications that I know about was 22 and the sibling developed type 1 and had to undergo dialysis aged 18.
5) c-peptide seems to have a crucial role in a membrane protein with a specific receptor site in many tissues mainly connective tissues including fibroblasts and smooth muscle - the active site in c-peptide (-COOH end and made up of glycine rich region of 6AA)is conserved throughout many mammal species studied although like with insulin the structural components do differ between species

I understand a consultant nephrologist in leicester( on youtube) is looking to raise funds for research - my shock is how little the medical profession I have encountered seems to understand the significance of this. Does this help to explain wy this forum is littered with people whose symptoms get worse on the synthetic insulins and yearn a return to the older insulins???? Maybe islet cell transplants return normal c-peptide functioning so those folks are treating the wrong condition with the right treatment.??

I have an interest in a whole load of peptide fragments released by the gut which serve endocrine and paracrine functions and c-peptide seems to be one of the more important of these. This all fits a pattern and seems like a "Banting and Best moment" in my understanding of type 1 diabetes may not just be a deficiency of insulin BUT also of c-peptide deficiency......

BTW - starting metformin gave me expected change in bowel habit ( now normal again.....) does metformin alter peptide production in the bowel - this would fit with it being the major contributor in improving mortality in all the large trials DESPITE not having a major effect on HbA1c!!!
- I have stopped statins - it felt like I was developing type2 diabetes on top of type 1 my lantus level is now down to 50% which must be good as high levels of insulin cannot be good.

I have posted this to try and get some discussion. I am sorry it is a long post - I have tried to stick with reporting factually on various trials but am aware I have not given references. I apologise if this discussion is being held elsewhere in the forum but it would be of particular interest to type1s mainly. thank you for your patience, I have been really ill recently - it makes me laugh when they ask patients with diabetes are you low or unhappy - " yeah I am fed up sticking needles in me every day!!"

apothecary
 
Hi, very interesting post. I was diagnosed type 1 only a few years ago so constantly trying to find more info. This is not the first time I have come across concerns regarding c peptide. I think although type 1 I am still in a very long honeymoon period as I don't require much basal as bolus. It is one of my concerns about what other functions had my body lost as a result of not producing its own insulin. I'm sure that is the reason other people.get much worse as time passes. Although concentrating on treating blood sugar levels I don't know if other tests are being done on other functions the body loses over time as a result which could be treated to prevent thing s getting worse.

Sent from my GT-S5360 using DCUK Forum mobile app
 
they release insulin AND c-petide - this implies BOTH are essential
No it does not imply this.
2)patients with type 1 who continue to produce basal levels of c-petide (yes this can happen) seem to be protected from the complications of diabetes
Basal c-peptide only? As, in zero insulin production? That would be interesting but your conclusion (c-peptide treatment would improve outcomes) remains invalid - a person naturally producing some c-peptides is not the same as a diabetic given c-peptide injections.
4) trials about control of diabetes have had dissappointing results in terms of clearly correlating good control with reduced complications - there is no doubt that a normal glucose level is essential to aim for BUT I have personally known well controlled and reasonably controlled type 1s who seem to struggle with complications
That's because you don't understand risk; lower risk does not mean "invincible".

5) c-peptide seems to have a crucial role in a membrane protein with a specific receptor site in many tissues mainly connective tissues including fibroblasts and smooth muscle - the active site in c-peptide (-COOH end and made up of glycine rich region of 6AA)is conserved throughout many mammal species studied although like with insulin the structural components do differ between species
That will be of interest to pharmaceutical companies looking for better treatments.

But yes, research is being done into the role of c-peptide which used to be considered irrelevant. Whether it's the cure for diabetes remains to be seen.

I am a health professional
No offence, but but please excuse me for not taking your word for that.
 
AMBrennan said:
they release insulin AND c-petide - this implies BOTH are essential
No it does not imply this.
2)patients with type 1 who continue to produce basal levels of c-petide (yes this can happen) seem to be protected from the complications of diabetes
Basal c-peptide only? As, in zero insulin production? That would be interesting but your conclusion (c-peptide treatment would improve outcomes) remains invalid - a person naturally producing some c-peptides is not the same as a diabetic given c-peptide injections.
4) trials about control of diabetes have had dissappointing results in terms of clearly correlating good control with reduced complications - there is no doubt that a normal glucose level is essential to aim for BUT I have personally known well controlled and reasonably controlled type 1s who seem to struggle with complications
That's because you don't understand risk; lower risk does not mean "invincible"


Thanks Mr Brennan for your for your comment - I love the scepticism and view it as healthy.

I think you misunderstand me; insulin manufacture, storage and release is normally controlled by tight homeostatic mechanisms that seem to be MEANT to be releasing c-peptide at the same time(ie NOT by accident).

There are 2 kinds of possible interactions for c-peptide: 1) as a modifyer of insulin/ glucose homeostasis by an interactive effect with the known insulin/receptor binding [ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16845606 ] but also 2) by a specific mechanism of binding to a receptor site (or a variety of less specific receptor sites [ http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=%22c-peptide%22%20receptor%20apt&source=web&cd=12&ved=0CDcQFjABOAo&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdownloads.hindawi.com%2Fjournals%2Fedr%2F2003%2F759317.pdf&ei=Fi0NUYuVEYOI0AXt_oCADA&usg=AFQjCNEzM-75hdgkH1JYCl35K5X8e-4ucw&bvm=bv.41867550,d.d2k&cad=rja ] ) present on the membranes of a variety of connective tissue cells. The fact that c-petide seems to play a part in BOTH types of mechanism is beyond doubt, seriously, the only questions is how helpful c-peptide is in the management of insulin resistance/obesity/ and complications of type 1 and also (though I chose not to mention) some of those with type2....

I thank you Mr Brennan but I am well aware of the nuance of language in dealing with chance and risk however I value your perspective of them :)

c-peptide is NOT a waste product but one of a GROWING family of peptide fragments whose role has to be elucidated. Surely there must be a reason for fast tracking the slow release preperation of this in the american system - the trials involving it's usefulness are published.... I know one has to be careful of drug company Blurb and it helps to be cynical in reviewing them.

I instinctively feel that refining all the islet cell secretions to extract only insulin and then only to prepare the new insulin only insulin analogues to prevent the evolved over millions of years 3D arrangement of natural insulin was a little niave in view of the complex way in which receptor complexes on cell surfaces operate....It would be nice to have a discussion over what other people think before the another drug company with an agenda monopolises both the evidence and a discussion. For my part I truely think that the c-peptide for me brigade are on to something ......

I am sure a better measure would be to include as many of the active components in islet cell secretions, lost in type 1 because we learn that the chemistry is more complicated and the solution yet more simple than we imagined.

from my own point of view it feels to me as if my c-peptide honeymoon is over - I am waiting to discuss getting levels done and then the pros and cons and posibilities of starting treatment all over again..........

Oh and thanks Brett - hmmm I think there will be a little more c-peptide noise out there it is difficult to find the genuine c-petide signal amongst all the noise :lol: :)

- jon (PS sorry about google laiden link I do struggle with BBcodes can someone point me to the "how to " section referencing links ( or is posting links a faux pas? )
 
thanks iHs I have read and thought about it and believe that most of the info there is based on a brilliantly comprehensive article that was published by:

The Insulin-Like Growth Factor System and Neurological
Complications in Diabetes
Anders A. F. Sima,1,2,3 Zhen-guo Li,1,3 andWeixian Zhang1,3
Departments of 1Pathology and 2Neurology and 3Morris Hood Jr. Comprehensive Diabetes Center,
Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, Michigan, USA



- this article, published in 2003 tries to draw together knowledge about the place of Insulin-like Growth Factors (IGF) in the development of complications and points out referenced studies into how this seems to be INDEPENDANT OF CLOSE CONTROL OF BLOOD SUGAR for type 1 diabetes.............I am sure that close control is preferable to bad control but I WANT TO MOVE THE WORLD ON FROM QUOTING THIS TO DEATH --- I think there is an URGENT need to re-appraise type 1 from the point of view of loss of other peptides ( insulin + c-peptide + IAPP)


- by the way - IAPP or Amylin is the otrher peptide - identified from complications of type 2 that leads to the destruction of Islet cells ( causing type 1.5???!!!???). Amylin is another peptide that no-one has heard about - also released from Islet cell and has a distict physiological action which I must assume leads to a deficit in type1s that is currently NOT being taken into account......

- this morning I recieved a booklet from Novo Nordisk about degludec - ANOTHER longer acting insulin analogue that is now available as a U200 Has no one yet clicked that these ultra high doses of analogues may prove critically detrimental ............ Please everyone have a read and help me sort this out - I can summarise:

Type1 = Normal - Islet cells therefore Normal -= Type 1 + Islet cells
Islet cells secrete at least 3 peptides and NOT JUST INSULIN

Type 2 = Normal + abnormal insulin homeostasis
Abnormal homeostasis leads to overabundance of peptides which leads to amyloid which eventually (given time) will cause type 2s to transform into type 1s ...............

Should we just be treating type1s with synthetic insulin analogues or should the drug companies be waking up to we need insulin +c-peptide + IAPP ..........

- jon
 
Hmmm 340 views and only a handful of cemments (much appreciated BTW :) ) I wonder why? - is it that - it could be that the mass of evidence out there is beyond reach(low sinal to noise ratio) or it may be that I am not making myself clear please let me know what you think. Here is a sample of interesting articles:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12901702

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2478591/ - I have always blamed my poor memory for names on a prolonged hypo I had in my 20s but actually central nervous system deficits can be seen to be more common in people with type 1. this next one is difficult to follow and suggest that insulin therapy on it's own could help to reverse or slow cognitive decline BUT note the effects of insulin therapy occur over a MUCH shorter time scale that the effects of C-peptide the results have to be interpreted with this in mind, http://diabetes.diabetesjournals.org/content/54/5/1497.full

I could go on - please let say if I should continue - I don't want to be accused of spamming but a lot of the problems posted on here seem to be blamed on insulins or the "complications" of diabetes but seem to be missing the point - the solutions IN addition to optimum control of diabetes might point to a deficit in IAPP and c-peptide and relate to suboptimal control of IGF function in CNS AND musculoskeletal system http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2478609/ ......... thanks for your patience jon
 
You might be interested to read some of Allie Beattie's 'articles'. She is well know member of the diabetes online community and has been campaigning about C peptide since 2007 (there are some early 'rants' on youtube) .
such as this one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DX5BPBnoLA
There are several others including her trying to contact Elily about why there wasn't any C peptide in her insulin. been in contact with the companies involved in C peptide research .

Over the years she's become a bit more measured in her approach but has continued her 'crusade'
She writes for The Diabetes Resource and has recently started a new blog with podcasts.
These are her latest articles on the subject.
http://www.thediabetesresource.com/your ... ent-trial/
a podcast interview with Dr. John Warren, a leading investigator in C-peptide replacement studies, on the possible missing link in T1D treatment
http://www.alliesvoice.com/2013/01/16/c ... es-desert/
 
Thanks phoenix - I don't really use social network sites much but listening to what Allie says SHe ha s a lot of very perinent points - I still haven't heard anyone mention Amylin - even the name of this peptide is tainted with the pathological process it ls renowned for in type 2 - coming from a health background I am shocked that the health community has been SO SLOW at developing a therapeutic response to thi. Shocking that even the mechanism of isulin dependance in type 2 diabetes is explained by the progressive destruction of beta cells by amyloid of a peptide that me and many other type 1s cannot produce..........what should we do to get this back on the agenda of every diabetologist???????????? I don't want to die through their ignorance ....... :x

- jon
 
Back
Top