Wellness Exchange: Health Discussions
Covid-19 Link to Diabetes Risk in Children Revealed
(upbeat music) - Welcome to Listen 2. This is Ted. The news was published on Monday, October 14th. Joining us today are Eric and Kate to discuss a fascinating new study. Let's dive right in, shall we? Today we're discussing a recent study suggesting a link between COVID-19 infection in children and an increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes. Let's start with the basics. Eric, can you explain what this study found? - Sure thing, Ted. So these researchers in Ohio took a deep dive into data from over 600,000 American kids and teens. They were looking at two groups, those who caught COVID and those who had other respiratory bugs. Now here's the kicker, they found that the COVID kids were up to 60% more likely to develop type 2 diabetes compared to the other group. It's pretty eye-opening stuff, if you ask me. - While that sounds alarming, we need to pump the breaks a bit here. This study only shows correlation, not causation. We can't jump to conclusions. - I hear what you're saying, Kate, but let's not dismiss these findings too quickly. These studies methodology seems pretty solid. They looked at data over a two-year period with an average participant age of 15. They weren't just guessing here. They checked diabetes risk at one, three, and six months after infection by looking at A1C levels. But let's not overlook a crucial factor here. Only about one in 200 participants were overweight or obese. That's a huge deal when we're talking about diabetes risk. - I get your point, Kate, but here's the thing. Even among those who were overweight or obese, COVID infection still increased diabetes risk significantly. In fact, for that group, the risk was even higher. We're talking about a 227% increased risk after six months. That's not something we can just brush off. I'm still not convinced. There could be a whole host of other factors at play here that weren't accounted for. What about diet, stress levels, family history? We can't just pin this all on COVID without considering the bigger picture. - You both raise interesting points. Let's dig deeper into the numbers. Eric, what specific risks did the study find? - All right, let's break it down. The study found that kids who had COVID were 55% more likely to develop type two diabetes one month after infection. That risk dipped slightly to 48% after three months, but then shot up to 58% after six months and get this for kids who were hospitalized with COVID. The risk was three times higher after one month compared to those hospitalized with other illnesses. That's a pretty significant jump, no matter how you slice it. - But hold on a second. Those percentages don't tell us how many actual cases we're talking about. What's the baseline risk here? We need context to understand it. - Fair point, Kate. According to the CDC, about 5,000 Americans under 19 have type two diabetes. Now, even a small percentage increase could mean hundreds more cases. That's not insignificant when we're talking about a serious lifelong condition that can lead to all sorts of complications. - I get that, Eric. But let's put this in perspective. That's still a tiny fraction of the millions of children who've had COVID. We shouldn't be causing unnecessary panic over what might turn out to be a statistical blip. We need to be responsible with how we present this information. - Let's put this in historical context. Can you think of any similar health scares linked to viral infections in the past? - Absolutely, Ted. This reminds me a lot of the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic. Later studies found that people born during the height of that pandemic had a two to three times higher risk of Parkinson's disease later in life. It's a prime example of how viral infections can have long-term health consequences that we don't immediately see. The Spanish flu's linked to Parkinson's wasn't discovered until decades later, which really underscores the importance of long-term studies like this one. - That's an interesting comparison, but it's not exactly apples to apples here. The Spanish flu primarily affected the brain while COVID is mainly a respiratory illness. You're right that they're not identical, Kate, but the principle is the same. Both show how viral infections can have far-reaching effects on the body that we might not immediately recognize. Just because COVID primarily attacks the respiratory system doesn't mean it can have other systemic effects, the body's all connectable. - I understand the comparison you're trying to make, Eric, but I think we shouldn't jump to conclusions. History is full of health scares that turned out to be overblown. Remember the swine flu panic or the fears about cell phones causing brain cancer? We need to be cautious about drawing parallels too quickly. - How do you think this COVID diabetes link compares to other post-viral conditions we've seen? - Well, Ted, it's quite similar to post-polio syndrome where survivors develop new symptoms decades after their initial infection. This just goes to show how viruses can have long-lasting effects on the body that we might not immediately recognize. With polio, people thought they were in the clear only to face new challenges years down the line. It's a stark reminder that we need to take these potential long-term effects seriously. - But polio directly attacked the nervous system. We don't have any solid evidence that COVID is directly attacking the pancreas or insulin-producing cells. It's a bit of a stretch to compare the two. We need to be careful about making these kinds of- - I see your point, Kate, but the study does suggest some potential mechanisms. They propose that COVID might disrupt metabolism or cause antibodies that attack pancreatic cells. It's not far-fetched, given what we know about how viruses can affect the body in unexpected ways. We shouldn't dismiss these findings just because we don't fully understand- - Look, I'm not dismissing the findings entirely, Eric. I'm just saying it's still speculation at this point. We need a lot more research before we can start making definitive claims about COVID causing diabetes. Let's not put the cart before the horse here. I absolutely agree that more research is needed, Kate, but at the same time, we shouldn't dismiss these findings. Either the Spanish flu Parkinson's link teaches us to take potential long-term effects seriously. If we had known about that link earlier, imagine how many lives could have been improved through early intervention and treatment. We have an opportunity here to be proactive rather than reactive. - Fair point, Eric. I just think we need to be careful not to cause unnecessary fear based on preliminary findings. There's already so much anxiety around COVID, especially when it comes to kids. We don't want to add to that burden without solid evidence. - Let's look to the future. How do you think this might unfold? Eric, what's your prediction? - Based on these findings, Ted, I believe we're going to see a significant increase in type two diabetes cases among young people in the coming years. If the studies findings hold true, we could be looking at thousands of additional cases. It's not just about the numbers, though. Each of those cases represents a child who might face lifelong health challenges. We need to be prepared for this potential wave and start thinking about how to address it proactively. - That's an overly pessimistic view, Eric. I think we'll find that many of these cases are temporary and will resolve on their own as children recover from COVID. Kids are resilient and their bodies are great at bouncing back. We shouldn't assume- - I hear you, Kate. But the study showed the risk persisted even six months after infection. That suggests it's not just a temporary effect. We're not talking about a short-term spike in blood sugar here. This could be a fundamental change in how these kids' bodies process glucose. We need to take this seriously and plan on- - Six months is still relatively short-term in the grand scheme of things, Eric. We need years of data to draw real conclusions. Remember, diabetes is a complex disease with many contributing factors. It's premature to pin this all on COVID without long-term studies to back it up. - What about the healthcare system? How might it need to adapt if Eric's prediction comes true? - Great question, Ted. If I'm right about this, we'd need to dramatically increase diabetes screening in children, especially those who've had COVID. Pediatricians would need additional training in diabetes management. We might even need to set up specialized clinics to handle the increased caseload. It's a big undertaking, but it's better to be prepared than caught off guard. - That seems premature to me. We should focus on prevention, promoting healthy diets and exercise, rather than assuming there will be a diabetes epidemic. Those are good practices regardless of COVID. - Why not do both, Kate? Early screening could catch cases before they become severe, potentially saving lives. We're talking about a condition that, if left untreated, can lead to heart disease, stroke, and kidney failure. Isn't it worth investing in screening if it could prevent those? - But widespread screening of otherwise healthy children could lead to over-diagnosis and unnecessary treatment, Eric. That comes with its own set of risks and costs. Not to mention the anxiety it could cause for families. We need to be careful about medicalizing childhood more than we already have. - I understand your concerns, Kate, but I firmly believe the risks of missing early diabetes far outweigh the risks of over-diagnosis. We're talking about a condition that can have serious, life-altering consequences if left untreated. Early intervention could make a world of difference for these kids. It's not about causing panic. It's about being prepared and proactive. - You're fear-mongering, Eric. The vast majority of children who've had COVID won't develop diabetes. We shouldn't create a panic over a relatively small risk. Let's focus on promoting overall health and well-being instead of scaring parents and kids with worst-case scenarios. - Well, it seems we've covered a lot of ground today. This study certainly raises some intriguing questions about the long-term effects of COVID on children's health. While there's still much to learn, it's clear that ongoing research and vigilance will be crucial. Thank you both for your insights and thanks to our listeners for tuning in. Until next time, this is Ted signing off from Listen2.