PubMed HealthSearch

Biomedical subjects

C J Adcock

Publications and source records attributed to C J Adcock.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

Menstrual irregularities are more common in adolescents with type 1 diabetes: association with poor glycaemic control and weight gain.

Ovarian function in post-menarchal girls with Type 1 diabetes was evaluated. Menstrual histories from 24 adolescents with Type 1 diabetes were compared with those from 24 age and sex matched controls. A fasting blood sample was obtained from subjects with Type 1 diabetes for the measurement of ovarian and adrenal sex hormones, LH and FSH, glucose and insulin, insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I), and insulin-like growth factor binding protein-1 (IGFBP-1); and an ovarian ultrasound scan was performed. Menstrual irregularity was more prevalent in patients with Type 1 diabetes than controls (54% vs 21%, p < 0.01) and their mean body mass index (BMI) was greater (22.3 +/- 0.5 (+/- SEM) vs 20.7 +/- 0.6 kg m-2, p < 0.05). Subjects with Type 1 diabetes with irregular menses (when compared with diabetic subjects with a regular cycle) had a significantly higher HbA1 (12.8 +/- 0.4 vs 10.5 +/- 0.5%, p < 0.01) and BMI (23.2 +/- 0.6 vs 21.4 +/- 0.6 kg m-2, p < 0.05) associated with a lower sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG) (37.2 +/- 4.0 vs 52.6 +/- 4.0 nmol l-1, p < 0.025) and IGF-I (1.4 +/- 0.2 vs 2.2 +/- 0.2 mUI-1, p < 0.025) and a higher LH:FSH ratio (2.6 +/- 0.5 vs 1.4 +/- 0.2, p < 0.05). Polycystic ovarian changes were identified in 10/13 (77%) of these patients with an irregular cycle. Menstrual irregularity is common in post-menarchal girls with Type 1 diabetes and is associated with poor glycaemic control and weight gain. The apparent high incidence of polycystic ovarian change requires further investigation.

Adolescent

Science and psychoanalysis.

A philosophical approach is suggested which regards scientific laws as based upon the structure of the universe but fully open-ended in that the structure does not determine what must occur but only what cannot occur. There are thus infinite future possibilities but nevertheless a firm orderly system which permits reliable expectations within the limits of the system while at the same time there is scope for free will in a real sense. Such a view admits the limitations of a falsification-of-hypotheses approach to research insofar as it depends upon the single-case basis of refutation. However it finds no problems with regard to a multivariate analysis of data assessed in terms of probability theory and considered in relation to its consistency with the total body of scientific theory, which it sees as having its basis in a 'thingness' concept that is both fundamental in our perceptual activity and acceptable as a basis for understanding the systematic orderliness of our mental experiences.

Cognition