319
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 04 Feb 2026
319 points (87.9% liked)
Late Stage Capitalism
2727 readers
433 users here now
A place for for news, discussion, memes, and links criticizing capitalism and advancing viewpoints that challenge liberal capitalist ideology. That means any support for any liberal capitalist political party (like the Democrats) is strictly prohibited.
A zero-tolerance policy for bigotry of any kind. Failure to respect this will result in a ban.
RULES:
1 Understand the left starts at anti-capitalism.
2 No Trolling
3 No capitalist apologia, anti-socialism, or liberalism, liberalism is in direct conflict with the left. Support for capitalism or for the parties or ideologies that uphold it are not welcome or tolerated.
4 No imperialism, conservatism, reactionism or Zionism, lessor evil rhetoric. Dismissing 3rd party votes or 'wasted votes on 3rd party' is lessor evil rhetoric.
5 No bigotry, no racism, sexism, antisemitism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, or any type of prejudice.
6 Be civil in comments and no accusations of being a bot, 'paid by Putin,' Tankie, etc. This includes instance shaming.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Rate of diabetes in China “explosive”
This is a consistent pattern in Chinese domestic politics. What a western nation would pick out as a profit center, the Chinese state addresses as a social cost. So the state plows a small fortune into cost-effective medical solutions, rather than squeezing the existing health care system out for therapeutic remedies that never resolve the root problem.
What are other examples?
It should be noted that this treatment sounds likely to be very expensive, and also if someone doesn't change their lifestyle, the newly implanted functional cells are likely to become dysfunctional again over time, requiring another expensive cycle of treatment
Environmental policy was a big one. China took a hard pivot in the '00s, cutting emissions, advancing alternative energy, reforesting deserts, rapidly advancing HSR, building enormous wild life refugees.
Their insourcing of processors was another. Going from Taiwan's biggest customer to it's biggest competitor in a decade and change.
Then there was the housing boom - remember "Chinese Ghost Towns"? All over the news in the early '10s. Now China has more homeowners than any other county on Earth with more than 90% of households owning at least one property.
i've never understood how anyone could think the "ghost towns" wouldn't obviously be filled shortly. One of the most significant facts about China is that they have a stupendously massive population, and consider Boston a quaint medium-sized town.
That population isn't growing like it used to. Those buildings are looking likely to sit empty indeed.
This isn't a cure for type 2, it's a cure for type 1. Lifestyle has very little effect on type 1. You just don't have enough insulin, sometimes you don't have any, and usually it's a result of an autoimmune disease or genetic issue.
The article says T2.
In the actual study, the subject had Type 2 diabetes, and the authors note that treating Type 1 will be much more difficult due to the immunology involved
Agreed, the article says all of this but it doesn't make a lot of sense. This is generally the mindset everyone has been using to treat type 1. Type 1 is about production, type 2 is about resistance. This treatment doesn't address resistance, it just makes more insulin. More insulin is not more better, and has consequences.
I'm sorry, I just assumed that cancer of a site got it wrong, and then went on to assume it was another example where someone had and autoimmune disease, and then had their immune system reset via something like chemo. The pancreas in such cases is still roached, so adding new insulin producing cells makes sense.
Type 2 is caused by insulin resistance. And yeah, more insulin can help, but I'd not call it a cure. A cure is reversing the resistance.
This treatment is for type 1 (still 12 million cases).
This treatment is for T2.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41421-024-00662-3
I stand corrected, it is for both T1 and the 30% of T2 that are insulin dependent. Cool.
No, it's for Type 2
Almost 2 million children with type 1 world wide. So sure, good spend.