Search

Our tax code is stuck in the Middle Ages. The Internal Revenue Code (“the Code”), codified at 26 U.S.C., uses the concepts of addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division, as one might expect of a tax code. But, disdaining the 1500s invention of the elementary math symbols ‘+,’ ‘–,’ ‘×,’ and ‘÷,’ the Code instead uses complicated English constructions such as “any amount of X which bears the same ratio to that amount as Y bears to Z.” I propose that we use these elementary math symbols in our tax laws. To see whether this would increase the laws’ legibility, I conducted a preregistered, randomized, controlled trial involving 161 participants. One group received the actual Code, the other, a translation using math symbols. Both groups were asked to solve the same two Code-based tax problems. For the first problem, use of the translation with math symbols increased answer accuracy from 25% to 70%. For the second problem, answer accuracy increased from 11% to 50%. This result, I argue, can be extrapolated to the broader population and to the Code as a whole, confirming the plausible intuition that math symbols would increase the understandability of the Code. I then argue that this would be a good thing, answering various objections along the way, with a particular appeal to the rule of law and the spirit of democracy. People ought to be able to understand the laws that govern them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In high-income countries, rates of atherosclerotic complications in type 2 diabetes have declined markedly over time due to better management of traditional risk factors including lipids, blood pressure, and glycemia levels. Population-wide reductions in smoking have also helped lower atherosclerotic complications and so reduce premature mortality in type 2 diabetes. However, as excess adiposity is a stronger driver for heart failure (HF), and obesity levels have remained largely unchanged, HF risks have not declined as much and may even be rising in the increasing number of people developing type 2 diabetes at younger ages. Excess weight is also an underrecognized risk factor for chronic kidney disease (CKD). Based on evidence from a range of sources, we explain how excess adiposity must be influencing most risks well before diabetes develops, particularly in younger-onset diabetes, which is linked to greater excess adiposity. We also review potential mechanisms linking excess adiposity to HF and CKD and speculate on how some of the responsible pathways—e.g., hemodynamic, cellular overnutrition, and inflammatory—could be favorably influenced by intentional weight loss (via lifestyle or drugs). On the basis of available evidence, we suggest that the cardiorenal outcome benefits seen with sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors may partially derive from their interference of some of these same pathways. We also note that many other complications common in diabetes (e.g., hepatic, joint disease, perhaps mental health) are also variably linked to excess adiposity, the aggregated exposure to which has now increased in type 2 diabetes. All such observations suggest a greater need to tackle excess adiposity earlier in type 2 diabetes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: To determine the extent to which changes in plasma proteins, previously predictive of cardiometabolic outcomes, predict changes in two diabetes remission trials. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We applied SomaSignal predictive tests (each derived from ∼5,000 plasma protein measurements using aptamer-based proteomics assay) to baseline and 1-year samples of trial intervention (Diabetes Remission Clinical Trial [DiRECT], n = 118, and Diabetes Intervention Accentuating Diet and Enhancing Metabolism [DIADEM-I], n = 66) and control (DiRECT, n = 144, DIADEM-I, n = 76) group participants. RESULTS: Mean (SD) weight loss in DiRECT (U.K.) and DIADEM-I (Qatar) was 10.2 (7.4) kg and 12.1 (9.5) kg, respectively, vs. 1.0 (3.7) kg and 4.0 (5.4) kg in control groups. Cardiometabolic SomaSignal test results showed significant improvement (Bonferroni-adjusted P < 0.05) in DiRECT and DIADEM-I (expressed as relative difference, intervention minus control) as follows, respectively: liver fat (−26.4%, −37.3%), glucose tolerance (−36.6%, −37.4%), body fat percentage (−8.6%, −8.7%), resting energy rate (−8.0%, −5.1%), visceral fat (−34.3%, −26.1%), and cardiorespiratory fitness (9.5%, 10.3%). Cardiovascular risk (measured with SomaSignal tests) also improved in intervention groups relative to control, but this was significant only in DiRECT (DiRECT, −44.2%, and DIADEM-I, −9.2%). However, weight loss >10 kg predicted significant reductions in cardiovascular risk, −19.1% (95% CI −33.4 to −4.91) in DiRECT and −33.4% (95% CI −57.3, −9.6) in DIADEM-I. DIADEM-I also demonstrated rapid emergence of metabolic improvements at 3 months. CONCLUSIONS: Intentional weight loss in recent-onset type 2 diabetes rapidly induces changes in protein-based risk models consistent with widespread cardiometabolic improvements, including cardiorespiratory fitness. Protein changes with greater (>10 kg) weight loss also predicted lower cardiovascular risk, providing a positive outlook for relevant ongoing trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: The incidence of diabetes may be elevated following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but it is unclear whether this is specific to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection, associated with shared risk factors for severe COVID-19 and diabetes, and/or a generic risk following illness. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: People admitted to the hospital for COVID-19 and/or pneumonia between 1 April 2020 and 31 August 2020 in England were linked with the National Diabetes Audit to identify incident diabetes after discharge up to 31 March 2021. Comparator cohorts admitted with pneumonia over the same dates in 2017, 2018, and 2019 were followed until 31 March 2018, 31 March 2019, and 31 March 2020, respectively. Poisson regression models were used to calculate adjusted diabetes incidence rates. RESULTS: Using the cohort of people discharged from the hospital following a diagnosis of COVID-19 without pneumonia in 2020 as the standard population (incidence rate 16.4 [95% CI 12.8–20.7] per 1,000 person-years), adjusting for age, sex, ethnicity, and deprivation, gave incidence rates of 19.0 (95% CI 13.8–25.6) and 16.6 (95% CI 13.3–20.4) per 1,000 person-years for those admitted for COVID-19 with pneumonia and pneumonia without COVID-19, respectively, in 2020. These rates are not significantly different from those found after hospital admission for pneumonia in 2019, 2018, and 2017, at 13.7 (95% CI 10.8–17.3), 13.8 (95% CI 10.9–17.4), and 14.2 (95% CI 10.9–18.3) per 1,000 person-years, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our data do not support a clear impact of COVID-19 on the incidence of diabetes compared with risks in several comparator groups, including contemporaneously assessed risks in people hospitalized with pneumonia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: People with type 2 diabetes can enter remission but may relapse or develop legacy complications. This analysis assesses whether people with remission from type 2 diabetes continue receiving annual care processes recommended in national guidelines and the potential impacts of formal recognition of remission. Methods: People with type 2 diabetes with and without formal recognition (diagnostic code) of remission, and with and without evidence of remission (HbA1c < 48 mmol/mol without prescription for glucose‐lowering drugs in preceding 26 weeks), included in the 2018/19 National Diabetes Audit (NDA) for England and Wales were followed up to identify care processes received between 1 January 2019 and 31 March 2020. Results: Of the 2,822,145 people with type 2 diabetes in the cohort, 16,460 (0.58%) were coded with remission in the 2018/19 NDA. After adjustment for age, sex, socioeconomic deprivation and ethnicity, people coded with remission were less likely to receive each care process than those without such coding irrespective of HbA1c measurements (relative risk (RR) of receiving all 8 care processes 0.70 (95% CI 0.69–0.72)). For the 339,235 people with evidence of remission, irrespective of diagnostic coding compared to those without such evidence, the RR for receiving all 8 care processes was 0.94 (95% CI 0.93–0.94). Conclusions: People coded with remission of type 2 diabetes were less likely to receive diabetes care processes than those without such coding. People with evidence of remission had only a slightly reduced likelihood of receiving care processes. Formal recognition of remission may affect the provision or uptake of care processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Growth differentiation factor (GDF)-15 is attracting interest as a biomarker in several areas of medicine. We aimed to evaluate the reference range for GDF-15 in a general population, and to explore demographics, classical cardiovascular disease risk factors, and other cardiac biomarkers associated with GDF-15. GDF-15 was measured in serum from 19,462 individuals in the Generation Scotland Scottish Family Health Study. Associations of cardiometabolic risk factors with GDF-15 were tested using adjusted linear regression. Among 18,507 participants with no heart disease, heart failure, or stroke, and not pregnant, reference ranges (median and 97.5th centiles) were derived by decade age bands and sex. Among males in the reference range population, median (97.5th centile) GDF-15 concentration at age <30 years was 537 (1,135) pg/mL, rising to 931 (2,492) pg/mL at 50–59 years, and 2,152 (5,972) pg/mL at ≥80 years. In females, median GDF-15 at age <30 years was 628 (2,195) pg/mL, 881 (2,323) pg/mL at 50–59 years, and 1847 (6,830) pg/mL at ≥80 years. Among those known to be pregnant, median GDF-15 was 19,311 pg/mL. After adjustment, GDF-15 was higher in participants with adverse cardiovascular risk factors, including current smoking (+26.1%), those with previous heart disease (+12.7%), stroke (+17.1%), heart failure (+25.3%), and particularly diabetes (+60.2%). GDF-15 had positive associations with cardiac biomarkers cardiac troponin I, cardiac troponin T, and N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP). These data define reference ranges for GDF-15 for comparison in future studies, and identify potentially confounding risk factors and mediators to be considered in interpreting GDF-15 concentrations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To assess the incidence of remission of type 2 diabetes in routine care settings.Research Design and Methods: People with type 2 diabetes (HbA1c ≥48 mmol/mol [6.5%] or <48 mmol/mol [6.5%] with a prescription for glucose-lowering medications) alive on 1 April 2018 were identified from a national collation of health records in England and followed until 31 December 2019. Remission was defined as two HbA1c measurements of <48 mmol/mol (6.5%) at least 182 days apart, with no prescription for glucose-lowering medications 90 days before these measurements.Results: In 2,297,700 people with type 2 diabetes, the overall incidence of remission per 1,000 person-years was 9.7 (95% CI 9.6-9.8) and 44.9 (95% CI 44.0-45.7) in 75,610 (3.3%) people who were diagnosed <1 year. In addition to shorter duration of diagnosis, baseline factors associated with higher odds of remission were no prescription for glucose-lowering medication, lower HbA1c and BMI, BMI reduction, White ethnicity, female sex, and lower socioeconomic deprivation. Among 8,940 (0.4%) with characteristics associated with remission (diagnosed <2 years, HbA1c <53 mmol/mol [7.0%], prescribed metformin alone or no glucose-lowering medications, BMI reduction of ≥10%), incidence of remission per 1,000 person-years was 83.2 (95% CI 78.7-87.9).Conclusions: Remission of type 2 diabetes was generally infrequent in routine care settings but may be a reasonable goal for a subset of people who lose a significant amount of weight shortly after diagnosis. Policies that encourage intentional remission of type 2 diabetes should seek to reduce the ethnic and socioeconomic inequalities identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Type 2 diabetes has been associated with high dementia risk. However, the links to different dementia subtypes is unclear. We examined to what extent type 2 diabetes is associated with dementia subtypes and whether such associations differed by glycemic control.Research Design and Methods: We used data from the Swedish National Diabetes Register and included 378,299 patients with type 2 diabetes and 1,886,022 control subjects matched for age, sex, and county randomly selected from the Swedish Total Population Register. The outcomes were incidence of Alzheimer disease, vascular dementia, and nonvascular dementia. The association of type 2 diabetes with dementia was stratified by baseline glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) in patients with type 2 diabetes only. Cox regression was used to study the excess risk of outcomes.Results: Over the follow-up (median 6.8 years), dementia developed in 11,508 (3.0%) patients with type 2 diabetes and 52,244 (2.7%) control subjects. The strongest association was observed for vascular dementia, with patients with type 2 diabetes compared with control subjects having a hazard ratio [HR] of 1.34 (95% CI 1.28, 1.41). The association of type 2 diabetes with nonvascular dementia was more modest (HR 1.10 [95% CI 1.07, 1.13]). However, risk for Alzheimer disease was lower in patients with type 2 diabetes than in control subjects (HR 0.94 [95% CI 0.90, 0.99]). When the analyses were stratified by circulating concentrations of HbA1c, a dose-response association was observed.Conclusions: The association of type 2 diabetes with dementia differs by subtypes of dementia. The strongest detrimental association is observed for vascular dementia. Moreover, patients with type 2 diabetes with poor glycemic control have an increased risk of developing vascular and nonvascular dementia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To conduct an analysis to assess whether the completion of recommended diabetes care processes (glycated haemoglobin [HbA1c], creatinine, cholesterol, blood pressure, body mass index [BMI], smoking habit, urinary albumin, retinal and foot examinations) at least annually is associated with mortality. Materials and methods: A cohort from the National Diabetes Audit of England and Wales comprising 179 105 people with type 1 and 1 397 790 people with type 2 diabetes, aged 17 to 99 years on January 1, 2009, diagnosed before January 1, 2009 and alive on April 1, 2013 was followed to December 31, 2019. Cox proportional hazards models adjusting for demographic characteristics, smoking, HbA1c, blood pressure, serum cholesterol, BMI, duration of diagnosis, estimated glomerular filtration rate, prior myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, respiratory disease and cancer, were used to investigate whether care processes recorded January 1, 2009 to March 31, 2010 were associated with subsequent mortality. Results: Over a mean follow‐up of 7.5 and 7.0 years there were 26 915 and 388 093 deaths in people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, respectively. Completion of five or fewer, compared to eight, care processes (retinal screening not included as data were not reliable) had a mortality hazard ratio (HR) of 1.37 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.28‐1.46) in people with type 1 and 1.32 (95% CI 1.30‐1.35) in people with type 2 diabetes. The HR was higher for respiratory disease deaths and lower in South Asian ethnic groups. Conclusions: People with diabetes who have fewer routine care processes have higher mortality. Further research is required into whether different approaches to care might improve outcomes for this high‐risk group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: To investigate type 2 diabetes as a risk factor for COVID‐19 death following hospital admission in Kuwait. Methods: A retrospective cohort study using data from a central hospital that cared for all hospitalized COVID‐19 patients in Kuwait. We investigated the association between type 2 diabetes, with COVID‐19 mortality using multiply imputed logistic regression and calculated the population attributable fraction. Results: A total of 5333 patients were admitted with COVID‐19, of whom 244 died (4.6%). Diabetes prevalence was 24.8%, but 53.7% of those who died had diabetes. After adjusting for age, sex, ethnicity and other comorbidities, diabetes was associated with death (OR 1.70 [95% CI 1.23, 2.34]) and admission to the intensive care unit more than 3 days after initial admission (OR 1.78 [95% CI 1.17, 2.70]). Assuming causality, the population attributable fraction for type 2 diabetes in COVID‐19 death was 19.6% (95% CI 10.8, 35.6). Conclusion: Type 2 diabetes is a strong risk factor for COVID‐19 death in the Middle East. Given the high prevalence of type 2 diabetes in the Middle East, as well as many Western countries, the public health implications are considerable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Results of cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) suggest Asians may derive greater benefit than Whites from newer classes of antihyperglycemic medications.Purpose: To provide summary hazard ratio (HR) estimates for cardiovascular efficacy of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) stratified by race (Asian vs. White).Data Sources: A systematic review performed in PubMed from 1 January 2015 to 8 December 2020.Study Selection: Randomized placebo-controlled CVOTs of SGLT2is and GLP-1RAs that reported HRs (95% CIs) for 1) major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) in patients with diabetes and 2) cardiovascular (CV) death/hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) in patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).Data Extraction and Synthesis: HRs (95% CIs) for selected outcomes in Asians and Whites were extracted from each trial, adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to examine differences between the selected outcomes in Asians versus Whites.Results: In four SGLT2i trials in type 2 diabetes, the MACE outcome HR (95% CI) in 3,298 Asians versus 20,258 Whites was 0.81 (0.57, 1.04) vs. 0.90 (0.80, 1.00), respectively (Pinteraction = 0.46). In two SGLT2i trials in patients with HFrEF, the CV death/HHF outcome HR in 1,788 Asians versus 5,962 Whites was 0.60 (0.47, 0.74) vs. 0.82 (0.73, 0.92), respectively (Pinteraction = 0.01). In six GLP-1RA trials, the MACE outcome HR in 4,195 Asians versus 37,530 Whites was 0.68 (0.53, 0.84) vs. 0.87 (0.81, 0.94), respectively (Pinteraction = 0.03).Limitations: Lack of individual patient-level data, relatively short duration of trial observation, and lack of granular categorization of race within broadly defined Asian subgroups.Conclusions: Compared with Whites, Asians may derive greater CV death/HHF benefit from SGLT2is in patients with HFrEF, and MACE benefit from GLP-1RAs in patients with type 2 diabetes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This editorial refers to 'Estimation of recurrent atherosclerotic cardiovascular event risk in patients with established cardiovascular disease: the updated SMART2 algorithm', by S.H.J. Hageman I et al i . https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehac056. Indeed, in the 2021 ESC guidelines,[6] it is recommended that all patients living with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) should be offered lifestyle advice and target LDL-cholesterol (to <1.8 mmol/L) and systolic blood pressure (SBP) (to <140 mmHg), as well as antithrombotic therapy (STEP 1). [Extracted from the article]

SUMMARY: The Executive Order expanded immunity from liability for volunteer health care workers as emergency management workers performing emergency management activities. The Order was not limited to only COVID-19-related activities. When the legislature reconvened, legislators passed the Georgia COVID-19 Pandemic Business Safety Act, which provided liability limitation to businesses against tort claims arising from the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents an editorial on the Prevention the risk cardiovascular (CV) outcome and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with dulaglutide an antihyperglycaemic drug. It mentions the treatment algorithms and Guidelines of European Society of Cardiology and American Diabetes Association; It also mentions details on the Cardiovascular Outcome Trials.

Aims/hypothesis: The reasons underlying a greater association of premature mortality with early-onset type 2 diabetes relative to late-onset disease are unclear. We evaluated the clinical characteristics at type 2 diabetes diagnosis and the broad trajectories in cardiometabolic risk factors over the initial years following diagnosis in relation to age at diagnosis.Methods: Our cohort consisted of 100,606 individuals with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes enrolled in the Swedish National Diabetes Register from 2002 to 2012. The average follow-up time was 2.8 years. Analyses were performed using a linear mixed-effects model for continuous risk factors and a mixed generalised linear model with a logistic link function for dichotomous risk factors.Results: The individuals diagnosed at the youngest age (18–44 years) were more often male and had the highest BMI (mean of 33.4 kg/m2) at diagnosis and during follow-up compared with all other groups (those diagnosed at 45–59 years, 60–74 years and ≥75 years; p < 0.05), being ~5 kg/m2 higher than the oldest group. Although HbA1c patterns were similar between all age groups, there was a difference of about 5 mmol/mol (0.45%) between the two groups at 8 years post-diagnosis (p < 0.05). Additionally, individuals diagnosed younger had ~0.7 mmol/l higher triacylglycerol, and ~0.2 mmol/l lower HDL-cholesterol levels at diagnosis relative to the oldest group. Such differences continued for several years post diagnosis. Yet, although more of these younger individuals were receiving oral glucose-lowering agents, other cardioprotective therapies were prescribed less often in this group. Differences in BMI, blood glucose and lipid levels remained with adjustment for potential confounders, including marital status, education and country of birth, and, where relevant, differential treatments by age, and in those with at least 5 years of follow-up.Conclusions/interpretation: Individuals who develop type 2 diabetes at a younger age are more frequently obese, display a more adverse lipid profile, have higher HbA1c and a faster deterioration in glycaemic control compared with individuals who develop diabetes later in life. These differences largely remain for several years after diagnosis and support the notion that early-onset type 2 diabetes may be a more pathogenic condition than late-onset disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]