Re: Dioxin and diabetes

[ttweed@wildrockies.org (Tony Tweedale)]

david--on 2nd thot and after sending the below to you, I want to take the
discussion back to the list, so that people can benefit from it or
contribute or critique..  Hope you don't mind then, that I'm reposting it
to dioxin-list!
---

david--agree w/ what you say.  Seveso single sex/lack of exposure data
finding for diabetes is weird, but since diabetes is hormonally mediated,
it doesn't seem (quite) beyond the bounds of probability...   for VA to
approve diabetes as an Agent Orange caused illness deserving VA medical
coverage, it has to be a strong association, I imagine! (they haven't
approved many Agent Orange ilnesses).

The deVito et all review published in _EHP_ (103:9:820-31 ('95))--ie, a
summary of EPA's draft Dioxin Reassessment findings--groups diabetes (as
altered glucose homeostasis) as a possible effect (ie no definitive causal
effect yet, but some human and controlled animal evidence).  @ studies are
cited that show altered g. homeostasis in humans at 99-140 ppt body burden
(~20 times. higher than average body burdens, but given hormones ocassional
ability to exert stronger effect at lower dose...).  One is an exposed
worker's study (Sweeney, Hornung  et al.), the other a Ranch Hand study
(Wolfe, Michalek et al.), oth presented at the 12th  Int'l Symp. on
Diosnins & Related Compounds, Tampere Finland 24-28 Aug '92.
---

>Hi Tony
>I looked up the Ranch Hand and Seveso studies.
>
>The Seveso study is in the BMJ, and the results for diabetes are
>outstandingly weak. There is no measurement of exposure; people are simply
>stratified by area of origin, a proxy of exposure. The weakest thing is the
>actual type of association with diabetes. Thus males in highest, medium and
>low exposure zones show no effect on diabetes. Females in the high zone, and
>the low zone, show no effect on diabetes. The only positive is for females
>in the medium zone. Since this is single-sex, and non dose-related, it looks
>a dodgy positive.
>
>By contrast, the Ranch Hand data looks strong. Clearly, the veterans were
>also exposed to substantial amounts of other chemicals, and dioxin may be
>serving as an indicator of exposure to something else which was toxic !
>Nonetheless, the results are strong, and consistent with a dioxin effect.
>
>Given that the relative risk for diabetes is 1.5 in veterans exposed to
>massive amounts of dioxin, I think it is unfortunate to suggest that
>dioxin-induced diabetes is a massive problem (not your suggestion, I know).
>It detracts from some of the real problems with this chemical.
>
>cheers
>david
>
>
>
>
>>the recent dioxin & diabetes post by G Jeffries I gues David Bell was
>>responding to probably has the references for the Seveso & Ranch Hand
>>(agent orange et al) epidem. studies that found strong associations of
>>dioxins w/ diabetes.
>
>______________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com