Human Frailty Is a Cash Cow

Doctor, if you are caring for patients with diabetes, I sure hope you know more about it than I do. The longer I live, it seems, the less I understand.

In a free society, people can do what they want, and that's great except when it isn't. That's why societies develop ethics and even public laws if ethics are not strong enough to protect us from ourselves and others.

Sugar, Sugar

When I was growing up in small-town Alabama during the Depression and World War II, we called it sugar diabetes. Eat too much sugar, you got fat; your blood sugar went up, and you spilled sugar into your urine. Diabetes was fairly rare, and so was obesity. Doctors treated it by limiting the intake of sugar (and various sweet foods), along with attempting weight loss. If that didn't do the trick, insulin injections.

From then until now, note these trends (Table).

Table. Annual Per Capita Sugar Consumption, Obesity Rates, and Prevalence of Type 2 Diabetes in the United States, 1950-2020

Year	Per capita sugar consumption (lb)	Obesity rate	Prevalence of type 2 diabetes
1950	104	13.4%	0.6%
1960	112	16.0%	1.0%
1970	117	19.1%	1.4%
1980	123	23.3%	2.4%
1990	129	26.2%	3.9%
2000	135	30.5%	6.2%
2010	141	33.7%	8.5%
2020	146	42.4%	11.3%

Type 2 diabetes was diagnosed even more infrequently before 1950:

• 1920: 0.2% of the population

• 1930: 0.3% of the population

• 1940: 0.4% of the population

In 2020, although 11.3% of the population was diagnosed with type 2 diabetes, the unknown undiagnosed proportion could be much higher.

Notice a correlation between sugar consumption and prevalence of diabetes? Of course, correlation is not causation, but at the same time, it sure as hell is not negation. Such concordance can be considered hypothesis-generating. It may not be true causation, but it's a good bet when 89% of people with diabetes have overweight or obesity.

What did the entire medical, public health, government, agriculture, nursing, food manufacturing, marketing, advertising, restaurant, and education constituencies do about this as it was happening? They observed, documented, gave lip service, and wrung their hands in public a bit. I do not believe that this is an organized active conspiracy; it would take too many players cooperating over too long a period of time. But it certainly may be a passive conspiracy, and primary care physicians and their patients are trapped.

The proper daily practice of medicine consists of one patient, one physician, one moment, and one decision. Let it be a shared decision, informed by the best evidence and taking cost into consideration. That encounter represents an opportunity, a responsibility, and a conundrum.

Individual health is subsumed under the collective health of the public. As such, a patient's health is out of the control of both physician and patient; instead, patients are the beneficiaries or victims of the "marketplace." Humans are frail and easily taken advantage of by the brilliant and highly motivated strategic planning and execution of Big Agriculture, Big Food, Big Pharma, Big Marketing, and Big Money-Driven Medicine and generally failed by Big Government, Big Public Health, Big Education, Big Psychology, and Big Religion.

Rethinking Diabetes

Consider diabetes as one of many examples. What a terrific deal for capitalism. First, the system spends decades fattening us up; then, it makes massive amounts of money off of the myriad complications of the fattened populace; then it discovers (invents) long-term, very expensive, compelling treatments to slim us down, with no end in sight, and still without ever understanding the true nature of diabetes.

Gary Taubes's great new book, Rethinking Diabetes: What Science Reveals About Diet, Insulin, and Successful Treatments, is being published by Alfred A. Knopf in early 2024.

It is 404 pages of (dense) text, with 401 numbered references and footnotes, a bibliography of 790 references, alphabetically arranged for easy cross-checking, and a 25-page index.

Remember Taubes's earlier definitive historical treatises: Good Calories, Bad Calories (2007), Why We Get Fat (2010), The Case Against Sugar (2016), and The Case for Keto (2020)?

This new book is more like Good Calories, Bad Calories: long, dense, detailed, definitive, and of great historical reference value, including original research information from other countries in other languages. The author told me that the many early research reference sources were only available in German and that his use of generative artificial intelligence as an assistant researcher was of great value.

Nonphysician author Taubes uses his deep understanding of science and history to inform his long-honed talents of impartial investigative journalism as he attempts to understand and then explain why after all these years, the medical scientific community still does not have a sound consensus about the essence of diabetes, diet, insulin, and proper prevention and treatment at a level that is actually effective — amazing and so sad.

To signal these evolved and evolving conflicts, the book includes the following chapters:

• "Rise of the Carbohydrate-Rich and Very-Low-Carbohydrate Diets"

• "The Fear of Fat and High-Fat Diets"

• "Insulin and The End of Carbohydrate Restriction and Low Blood Sugar"

Yes, it is difficult. Imagine the bookend segments: "The Nature of Medical Knowledge" and "The Conflicts of Evidence-Based Medicine." There is also a detailed discussion of good vs bad science spanning three long chapters.

If all that reads like a greatly confused mess to you then you're beginning to understand. If you are a fan of an unbiased explication of the evolution of understanding the ins and outs of scientific history in richly documented detail, this is a book for you. It's not a quick nor easy read. And don't expect to discover whether the newest wonder drugs for weight loss and control of diabetes will be the long-term solution for people with obesity and diabetes worldwide.

Obesity and overweight are major risk factors for type 2 diabetes. About 90% of patients with diabetes have either overweight or obesity. Thus, the complications of these two conditions, which largely overlap, include atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease; myocardial infarction; stroke; hypertension; metabolic syndrome; lower-extremity gangrene; chronic kidney disease; retinopathy; glaucoma; cataracts; disabling osteoarthritis; breast, endometrial, colon, and other cancers; fatty liver; sleep apnea; and peripheral neuropathy. These diseases create a major lucrative business for a wide swathe of medical and surgical specialties, plus hospital, clinic, device, pharmaceutical, and food industries.

In summary, we've just been through 40 years of failure to recognize the sugar-elephant in the room and intervene with serious preventive efforts. Forty years of fleshing out both the populace and the American Medical-Industrial Complex (AMIC). Talk about a sweet spot. The only successful long-term treatment of obesity (and with it, diabetes) is prevention. Don't emphasize losing weight. Focus on preventing excessive weight gain, right now, for the population, beginning with yourselves. Otherwise, we continue openly to perpetuate a terrific deal for the AMIC, a travesty for everyone else. Time for some industrial grade penance and a course correction.

Meanwhile, here we are living out Big Pharma's dream of a big populace, produced by the agriculture and food industries, enjoyed by capitalism after failures of education, medicine, and public health: a seemingly endless supply of people living with big complications who are ready for big (expensive, new) medications to fix the world's big health problems.

Follow Medscape on Facebook, X (formerly known as Twitter), Instagram, and YouTube

Credits:
Lead image: Puhhha/Dreamstime
Headshot: George D. Lundberg, MD

Medscape Internal Medicine © 2023 WebMD, LLC

Any views expressed above are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect the views of WebMD or Medscape.

Cite this: Human Frailty Is a Cash Cow - Medscape - Aug 23, 2023.