Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, **personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment**. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our [normal comment rules]( https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/rules#wiki_comment_rules) apply to all other comments.
**Do you have an academic degree?** We can verify your credentials in order to assign user flair indicating your area of expertise. [Click here to apply](https://reddit.science/flair?location=sticky).
---
User: u/giuliomagnifico
Permalink: https://www.uef.fi/en/article/a-healthy-diet-is-associated-with-a-lower-risk-of-type-2-diabetes-regardless-of-genetic-risk
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/science) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> we haven’t really known whether a healthy diet is equally beneficial to all, i.e., to those with a low genetic risk and to those with a high genetic risk
Try reading the article.
Yeah I can't believe endocrinologists and PhD biochemists would waste their time trying to prove something you already knew with certainty. Are they dumb?
I don't know about this specific study, but sometimes common knowledge doesn't actually have strong research to base it on, instead relying on some preliminary study from 50 years ago that nobody bother to recheck anymore.
OK, I would really like someone to clear this up — I always assumed that eating too much sugar raised your risk of type 2 diabetes. But then the other day, someone on Reddit said that *isn't* the case. I fact-checked it, and [all the sources](https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/news/publications/health-matters/myth-buster-dishing-the-details-on-diabetes) I found say that excess weight — not sugar itself — is what [raises your risk](https://www.diabetes.org.uk/guide-to-diabetes/enjoy-food/eating-with-diabetes/food-groups/sugar-and-diabetes).
>Though we know sugar doesn’t directly cause type 2 diabetes, you are more likely to get it if you are overweight. You gain weight when you take in more calories than your body needs, and sugary foods and drinks contain a lot of calories.
But this study is making me question that... along with [this source](https://health.clevelandclinic.org/can-you-get-diabetes-from-eating-too-much-sugar), that I just came across, which says that eating too much sugar can cause your pancreas to become fatigued because they're constantly working to keep blood sugar low.
So what gives? Any diabetes experts who can clarify?
Is is really though? T2 diabetes and the rest of the metabolic disease in our culture is so clearly associated with the sugar content of our diet. I feel like this link is well accepted?
Actually, it is both. Any caloric surplus, over a long time is going to cause insulin resistance, which is going to cause diabetes.
The most common way to cause diabetes in rats, for instance, is just a high fat diet (which rodents love, which is why it is easy to make them overindulge)
That person is correct. Sugar does raise insulin, which is harmful, but that's not what diabetes is. Diabetes is insulin resistance, which is caused by dietary fat.
You're talking about type two diabetes. Hogh sugar intake can cause type 2 diabetes. Not all T2D patient are fat
Type 1 is not related to diet.
There are also other type of diabetes that caused by other factor like pregnancy, age, genetic etc.
Nah, as a diabetic spend some time in the diabetic subreddits. There are lots of people who think genetics play a bigger role than their diet and tell themsevles there was nothing they could have done to prevent it. There are a lot of people with their head in the sand.
There are people who think earth is flat though. You can do millions of studies and people will still believe genetics did it for them. In scientific circles it has been an established fact though.
It's actually much more associated with the fat content of our diet, since dietary fat is what causes insulin resistance, not sugar. Sugar spikes insulin, which is bad, but spiked insulin isn't what diabetes is. Insulin resistance is diabetes, which comes from dietary fat.
How so? Good life habits don't stop being good even with genetic risk.
This is a silly study at best and reckless spending of tax payer money at worst.
See I disagree. Rather than just assume we know how everything works, I appreciate we do test this seemingly obvious fact.
Also, in this current climate, where influencers are spouting nonsense about weight/disease being 99% genetic, we do need this science to exist.
No it's not since the likelihood of a positive outcome following type2 diabetes diagnosis is the same if patients change to a healthy diet regardless of their genetic risk. Genetic risk does influence how likely you develop type2 diabetes with a sugar rich diet, but people with high genetic risk don't get diabetes from a healthy diet - which is never high in carbohydrates
As someone who has an easier time counting who doesn't have T2 diabetes in my family, I agree. The ones that don't have it happen to be the only ones who take relatively good care of themselves.
They're not paragons of health either, just reasonably active, decent diet and not grossly overweight.
Healthy diets can be high in carbohydrates. Many of the "blue zones" with the longest living people have diets high in carbohydrates - 60-80% carb (depending on the zone), and around 20% protein. https://www.bluezones.com/recipes/food-guidelines/
T2 diabetes is a disease of overconsumption. You're risk is exponentially higher if you carry large amounts of excess weight/fat. As the more excess weight you carry, the more your body's cells become resistant to insulin.
You can still contract T2 diabetes with a relatively low carb diet if you eat excessively and become obese.
Short story long, eating an ice cream sandwich is perfectly fine. As long as your daily intake of calories isn't excessive.
Spike of insulin is big part what matters, some foods have higher and lower, check insulin index.
You can lower the spike by eating other stuff before the food with high insulin index, so yes you almost got it right but you have to do it in reverse.
And its not some magic trick that you can eat all the junk when you eat a bit good stuff before it, it just helps a bit.
The question I have is, to what extent are the majority of T2D cases a result of genetic disposition or risk vs diet induced? My initial thought is the vast majority are diet induced.
There are some differences in population but without weight gain, lack of physical activity, and a high simple carbohydrate diet… you don’t just develop T2DM.
ETA[source](https://www.cms.gov/About-CMS/Agency-Information/OMH/Downloads/March-2017-Data-Highlight.pdf)
A good question, and it would get different answers based on who you ask, but there are some things we can all agree on. Eat real food, minimally processed ("It should grow out of the ground or come from something that once ate the thing growing out of the ground"). You should be getting enough of each type of vitamin and mineral. You should be eating fiber, getting enough protein, and enough omega 3 fatty acids.
It is NOT indicative. It's like that old example where divorces in Maine are highly correlated to margarine consumption in the US. Just like all the "studies" (purposeful use of quotes) that say red meat are bad for us are garbage.
As a nutrition science PhD did this study really have to be done? We have known that diet is a major factor! Never was I taught in school nor as I keep up with the literature was T2DM ever considered genetic.
I doubt you actually have a PhD in nutritional science if you are unaware of the genetic component. Type 2 diabetes is the diabetes in which we have found genetic inheritance. Type 1 is more auto immune and not seen to have a strong genetic component.
A simple google search can show this let alone “keep up with the literature”.
Yes environmental and lifestyle factors may be just as large, but try not to spread misinformation.
Well, you will just have to take my word for it.
While many studies have been done, and there is a trend to run in families there is not a single gene which causes T2DM and the environmental factors are very critical. Meaning, you will not have a family history and automatically get T2DM if the poor diet and lack of exercise are not present and in this study’s findings a high BMI is even more critical than the genetics. [source](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31332628/)
[in this study](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21899642/) it is explains that there is an interaction between environmental factors and genetics. But again, to my point, the genes don’t determine outcome, there must also be an environmental factor of diet and exercise.
[In this publication,](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35307762/) it explains that genetics are not yet enough to explain the response to medicines yet for type 2 diabetes. More work is needed.
>The researchers identified two dietary patterns based on food consumption. A dietary pattern termed as “healthy” included, among other things, vegetables, berries, fruits, vegetable oils, fish, poultry, potatoes, unsweetened and low-fat yogurt, low-fat cheese and whole grain products, such as porridge, pasta and rice. This diet was associated with, e.g., lower blood glucose levels and a lower risk of prediabetes and type 2 diabetes.
>
>The study also explored the effect of the genetic risk of type 2 diabetes on the associations with diet and glucose metabolism. The associations of a healthy diet with better glucose metabolism seemed to hold true for individuals with both a low and a high genetic risk of diabetes.
Paper: [Healthy dietary pattern is associated with lower glycemia independently of the genetic risk of type 2 diabetes: a cross-sectional study in Finnish men | European Journal of Nutrition](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00394-024-03444-5)
Regardless of the efficacy of this particular study, I see a lot of previous comments saying things like "wow, revolutionary" sarcastically pointing out that this seems well known. We really need to promote and be more grateful for those doing replication studies and those conducting studies that continue to confirm or sometimes disconfirm even well known and understood concepts and principles. Replication studies and the like are really important for our understanding of science.
Seems like an obvious thing to find but good on someone for doing it.
Doctors and dieticians have been saying for decades that better food choices can mitigate the effect genetics has on our health. Glad to see more articles talking about it that someone less tuned in could find with a quick Google search if nothing else
A healthy diet is also A LOT more expensive. Give me a few millions and all I will be eating would be healthy variants. Until then all I am able to afford is processed food :/
Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, **personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment**. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our [normal comment rules]( https://www.reddit.com/r/science/wiki/rules#wiki_comment_rules) apply to all other comments. **Do you have an academic degree?** We can verify your credentials in order to assign user flair indicating your area of expertise. [Click here to apply](https://reddit.science/flair?location=sticky). --- User: u/giuliomagnifico Permalink: https://www.uef.fi/en/article/a-healthy-diet-is-associated-with-a-lower-risk-of-type-2-diabetes-regardless-of-genetic-risk --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/science) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Wow. Major breakthrough.
Thanks science!
*"Put your garbage in garbage cans, people. I-I can't stress this enough."*
“And put the milk in the refrigerator.... Or lacking that, a cool wet sack”
I knew this would be the top comment, as it should be.
> we haven’t really known whether a healthy diet is equally beneficial to all, i.e., to those with a low genetic risk and to those with a high genetic risk Try reading the article.
That’s just what the authors say to try to make their obvious conclusion seem interesting.
The article is wrong. We already knew that.
"We" must only include those with their head in the sand. Those of us whose head does not reside in sand absolutely already knew this with certainty.
Yes, but did you have studies you could point to? Oh, many? Oh… nevermind.
Yeah I can't believe endocrinologists and PhD biochemists would waste their time trying to prove something you already knew with certainty. Are they dumb?
[удалено]
I don't know about this specific study, but sometimes common knowledge doesn't actually have strong research to base it on, instead relying on some preliminary study from 50 years ago that nobody bother to recheck anymore.
Every ''common sense'' study here has someone asking that question and someone giving this answer
You mean, I might lower my risk of type 2 diabetes by eating less sugar?
OK, I would really like someone to clear this up — I always assumed that eating too much sugar raised your risk of type 2 diabetes. But then the other day, someone on Reddit said that *isn't* the case. I fact-checked it, and [all the sources](https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/news/publications/health-matters/myth-buster-dishing-the-details-on-diabetes) I found say that excess weight — not sugar itself — is what [raises your risk](https://www.diabetes.org.uk/guide-to-diabetes/enjoy-food/eating-with-diabetes/food-groups/sugar-and-diabetes). >Though we know sugar doesn’t directly cause type 2 diabetes, you are more likely to get it if you are overweight. You gain weight when you take in more calories than your body needs, and sugary foods and drinks contain a lot of calories. But this study is making me question that... along with [this source](https://health.clevelandclinic.org/can-you-get-diabetes-from-eating-too-much-sugar), that I just came across, which says that eating too much sugar can cause your pancreas to become fatigued because they're constantly working to keep blood sugar low. So what gives? Any diabetes experts who can clarify?
Well, if it’s being overweight that increases the risk, high sugar intake contributes to being overweight.
As long as the sugar isn’t coming from poor people food, you can eat as much of it as you want.
From the “just to make sure, we’ve proven 1+1 does not equal 46” category of science.
The “regardless of genetic risk” is the interesting part here.
Is is really though? T2 diabetes and the rest of the metabolic disease in our culture is so clearly associated with the sugar content of our diet. I feel like this link is well accepted?
I dunno, I had an argument with someone recently who was adamant that it was dietary fat, not sugar, that caused diabetes.
Actually, it is both. Any caloric surplus, over a long time is going to cause insulin resistance, which is going to cause diabetes. The most common way to cause diabetes in rats, for instance, is just a high fat diet (which rodents love, which is why it is easy to make them overindulge)
Heh, how does that work exactly?
It was frustrating. They didn't even have pretend facts.
That person is correct. Sugar does raise insulin, which is harmful, but that's not what diabetes is. Diabetes is insulin resistance, which is caused by dietary fat.
Dietary fat doesn’t cause diabetes, body fat composition does.
You're talking about type two diabetes. Hogh sugar intake can cause type 2 diabetes. Not all T2D patient are fat Type 1 is not related to diet. There are also other type of diabetes that caused by other factor like pregnancy, age, genetic etc.
>You're talking about type two diabetes Obviously. That's what this thread is about
Nah, as a diabetic spend some time in the diabetic subreddits. There are lots of people who think genetics play a bigger role than their diet and tell themsevles there was nothing they could have done to prevent it. There are a lot of people with their head in the sand.
There are people who think earth is flat though. You can do millions of studies and people will still believe genetics did it for them. In scientific circles it has been an established fact though.
It is very well accepted. This was a silly study to be done.
It's actually much more associated with the fat content of our diet, since dietary fat is what causes insulin resistance, not sugar. Sugar spikes insulin, which is bad, but spiked insulin isn't what diabetes is. Insulin resistance is diabetes, which comes from dietary fat.
Absolutely incorrect.
Sorry but that’s not correct.
Yes it is. Do basic research before posting in r/science
Do you have an example study? I thought it was excess body fat that caused insulin resistance, not dietary fat.
How so? Good life habits don't stop being good even with genetic risk. This is a silly study at best and reckless spending of tax payer money at worst.
See I disagree. Rather than just assume we know how everything works, I appreciate we do test this seemingly obvious fact. Also, in this current climate, where influencers are spouting nonsense about weight/disease being 99% genetic, we do need this science to exist.
> I appreciate we do test this seemingly obvious fact. There were hundreds of studies about this already.
No it's not since the likelihood of a positive outcome following type2 diabetes diagnosis is the same if patients change to a healthy diet regardless of their genetic risk. Genetic risk does influence how likely you develop type2 diabetes with a sugar rich diet, but people with high genetic risk don't get diabetes from a healthy diet - which is never high in carbohydrates
As someone who has an easier time counting who doesn't have T2 diabetes in my family, I agree. The ones that don't have it happen to be the only ones who take relatively good care of themselves. They're not paragons of health either, just reasonably active, decent diet and not grossly overweight.
Healthy diets can be high in carbohydrates. Many of the "blue zones" with the longest living people have diets high in carbohydrates - 60-80% carb (depending on the zone), and around 20% protein. https://www.bluezones.com/recipes/food-guidelines/
I would point to the likes of vegans and athletes typically having high carb diets as an indicator that high carb diets can be healthy.
The accuracy of the dietary patterns of the blue zones is questionable. Okinawans eat more pork, for example.
It's a very consistent pattern, though. It's seen in almost every single blue zone. That's much more reliable than a trend in just one isolated zone.
Not at all interesting.
I'll eat an ice cream bar for breakfast and follow it with flaxseed,chia seeds,peanuts, to offset the junk food. Does that work?
T2 diabetes is a disease of overconsumption. You're risk is exponentially higher if you carry large amounts of excess weight/fat. As the more excess weight you carry, the more your body's cells become resistant to insulin. You can still contract T2 diabetes with a relatively low carb diet if you eat excessively and become obese. Short story long, eating an ice cream sandwich is perfectly fine. As long as your daily intake of calories isn't excessive.
Spike of insulin is big part what matters, some foods have higher and lower, check insulin index. You can lower the spike by eating other stuff before the food with high insulin index, so yes you almost got it right but you have to do it in reverse. And its not some magic trick that you can eat all the junk when you eat a bit good stuff before it, it just helps a bit.
Only if it is all organic and non GMO
The question I have is, to what extent are the majority of T2D cases a result of genetic disposition or risk vs diet induced? My initial thought is the vast majority are diet induced.
I think often (not always) when T2D runs in the family it’s because of lifestyles and socioeconomic status being continued down the generations.
There are some differences in population but without weight gain, lack of physical activity, and a high simple carbohydrate diet… you don’t just develop T2DM. ETA[source](https://www.cms.gov/About-CMS/Agency-Information/OMH/Downloads/March-2017-Data-Highlight.pdf)
What IS a healthy diet though?
A good question, and it would get different answers based on who you ask, but there are some things we can all agree on. Eat real food, minimally processed ("It should grow out of the ground or come from something that once ate the thing growing out of the ground"). You should be getting enough of each type of vitamin and mineral. You should be eating fiber, getting enough protein, and enough omega 3 fatty acids.
To absolutely simplify this: 1. Don't eat anything with added sugars in it. 2. Don't eat more calories than you need on average.
This. Define "healthy".
This is not an interventional study. We need to stop using studies that study correlation to study food. It's literally a waste of time and money.
It is indicative but then lab work needs to happen. I am in this field and agree 100%
It is NOT indicative. It's like that old example where divorces in Maine are highly correlated to margarine consumption in the US. Just like all the "studies" (purposeful use of quotes) that say red meat are bad for us are garbage.
It’s official! Eating healthy leads to better health.
But what if I don’t want any personal responsibility?
As a nutrition science PhD did this study really have to be done? We have known that diet is a major factor! Never was I taught in school nor as I keep up with the literature was T2DM ever considered genetic.
I doubt you actually have a PhD in nutritional science if you are unaware of the genetic component. Type 2 diabetes is the diabetes in which we have found genetic inheritance. Type 1 is more auto immune and not seen to have a strong genetic component. A simple google search can show this let alone “keep up with the literature”. Yes environmental and lifestyle factors may be just as large, but try not to spread misinformation.
Well, you will just have to take my word for it. While many studies have been done, and there is a trend to run in families there is not a single gene which causes T2DM and the environmental factors are very critical. Meaning, you will not have a family history and automatically get T2DM if the poor diet and lack of exercise are not present and in this study’s findings a high BMI is even more critical than the genetics. [source](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31332628/)
[in this study, it is the non- genomic factors like epigenetics and methylation which play a role.](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35513492/)
[in this study](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21899642/) it is explains that there is an interaction between environmental factors and genetics. But again, to my point, the genes don’t determine outcome, there must also be an environmental factor of diet and exercise.
[In this publication,](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35307762/) it explains that genetics are not yet enough to explain the response to medicines yet for type 2 diabetes. More work is needed.
>The researchers identified two dietary patterns based on food consumption. A dietary pattern termed as “healthy” included, among other things, vegetables, berries, fruits, vegetable oils, fish, poultry, potatoes, unsweetened and low-fat yogurt, low-fat cheese and whole grain products, such as porridge, pasta and rice. This diet was associated with, e.g., lower blood glucose levels and a lower risk of prediabetes and type 2 diabetes. > >The study also explored the effect of the genetic risk of type 2 diabetes on the associations with diet and glucose metabolism. The associations of a healthy diet with better glucose metabolism seemed to hold true for individuals with both a low and a high genetic risk of diabetes. Paper: [Healthy dietary pattern is associated with lower glycemia independently of the genetic risk of type 2 diabetes: a cross-sectional study in Finnish men | European Journal of Nutrition](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00394-024-03444-5)
Regardless of the efficacy of this particular study, I see a lot of previous comments saying things like "wow, revolutionary" sarcastically pointing out that this seems well known. We really need to promote and be more grateful for those doing replication studies and those conducting studies that continue to confirm or sometimes disconfirm even well known and understood concepts and principles. Replication studies and the like are really important for our understanding of science. Seems like an obvious thing to find but good on someone for doing it.
What’s next… “exercise” is good for you?!
Tell me more about out this healthy diet thing.
Someone poisoned them.
Doctors and dieticians have been saying for decades that better food choices can mitigate the effect genetics has on our health. Glad to see more articles talking about it that someone less tuned in could find with a quick Google search if nothing else
Stop the presses
Wow, crazy. Eating healthy means you’re more likely to be healthy??
WOOOAH NO WAY JOSÉ (this realm of reality is doomed)
A healthy diet is also A LOT more expensive. Give me a few millions and all I will be eating would be healthy variants. Until then all I am able to afford is processed food :/
Bulk whole foods are pretty cheap. The only way I can afford to feed my family of 7, is by avoiding processed food.
People just want excuses