Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Breast size may indicate diabetes risk

ANDRÉ PICARD

From Tuesday's Globe and Mail

Latest comment posted at 9:22 AM EDT 29/01/08

Women with a bra cup size of D or larger almost five times more likely to develop diabetes than women with an A cup, study finds ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Simply Red from Canada writes: So I should thank my mother that she passed along her small breast size?
  2. Jim OKeefe from Toronto, Canada writes: My wife didn't even need a bra when she contracted diabetes. But then she was only 11 years old. Type 2 diabetes is a lifestyle choice. True, you can be predisposed to contract it, but the only way you'll get type 2 is if you're fat AND lazy. No one really knows how type 1 (juvenile or insulin dependant) is contracted, but since only a very small percentage of diabetics have this no one (apart from them and their families) cares so little study has been done on this since Banting.
  3. Peter S from Toronto, Canada writes: Since we know weight is a factor in contracting diabetes, doesn't it stand to reason that larger women have a higher risk? And larger women tend to have larger breasts. What boggles the mind is that a study was done to prove something so obvious.
  4. My eyes are open, Are yours? from Canada writes: Hi Jim,

    Sorry you're so bitter. Have you heard about the Juvenile Diabetes Foundation of Canada? They seem to be doing research, on prevention, symptom relief and possible cures.

    It IS possible to get type 2 diabetes if you're not fat and lazy. My dad contracted it at age 65, even though he was at a normal weight (140 pounds at 5' 7') and walked 1 hour every day plus did 5 BX. He didn't eat any junk either.
  5. Jah Wobble from Canada writes: I would like to know how they controlled for obesity in this experiment since breast tissue is primarily made up of fat itself
  6. Eric the Red from Canada writes: Stupidest. Research. Ever.
  7. B H from Toronto, Canada writes: Why do I know so many skinny people with type 2 diabetes? The only good idea I have is that what constitutes 'too little exercise' or 'a poor diet' is very dependent on family background... the people I'm thinking of were noticeably fitter and more active than most non-diabetic people their age, although not quite athletes, and had a noticeably better than average diet, quite healthy by most people's standards... maybe they needed to be athletes and have a not just better than average diet but a perfect one. When I see how little it takes to make one person diabetic and what kind of lifestyle other people get away with, I get a bit tired of comments that it's caused by being fat and lazy.
  8. Melissa Pauline from Canada writes: Jim O'Keefe: Actually you can develop Type 2 diabetes in other ways. My grandmother has Type 2 diabetes after complications from gall-bladder problems damaged her pancreas when she was in her 70s (long story, but that's the gist of it). Sometimes people just get sick.
  9. Jim OKeefe from Toronto, Canada writes: Open Eyes - Thanks for the info, and sorry for your dad. A friend's dad died of complications from diabeties, and although he wasn't grossly overweight he wasn't very active. My friend later contracted it himself, during a period when he was grossly overweight. That was his siren call, so he whipped himself into shape and monitored his blood sugar till he got to the point where he didn't need the drugs. Then his Beta cells in his pancreas died (type 1), so now he's on an insulin pump. Still in good shape though, he just ran an Ironman competition last fall. --- My bitterness stems from the very poor coverage, and thus education, about type 1. My wife is often given advice from acquatances about how better eating and exercise will help cure her 'problem'. And I've volunteered for the JDRF, but their budget is rather small so they can't do much. The biggest kicker however is how OHIP approaches health care. Before my wife got on a health plan, she used to go to a needle exchange to get free syringes. She was advised by one staffer to say she needed them for illegal drugs, otherwise she would be turned away! Although the CDA would cover a portion of the cost of insulin, no one covered the major expense of blood strips (a few dollars a day). When you don't make much money and have to pay for food and rent.... All the eye and kidney treatments costing millions of dollars were covered by OHIP, but not the rather paltry amounts that would enable prevention. And tons of research go into treatment (sponsored by medasist, E. Lily, Biovail et al), but not into a cure. So yeah, I guess I am bitter.
  10. Go Oilers Go! from Canada writes: Perhaps it's because women with a cup size larger than D more often than not are carrying extra weight or are considered obese; which has already been proven to be a key factor.
  11. S JKoop from Saskatchewan, Canada writes: Peter: The study's findings aren't that obvious. They 'controlled' for obesity, remember.

    Which effectively means this: take five individuals who all have the exact same high BMI. Among these equally obese individuals, the researchers find that the ones with the larger breasts disproportionately develop Type II... even though they have the same BMIs as their less-at-risk counterparts who carry their weight on their hips, ankles, and midsections instead.

    Obviously people with obesity are more likely to also have larger breasts. BUT, what the researchers found was that larger breasts also have an independant influence on the risk of diabetes, that is, independant of obesity! The researchers likely came to this conclusion because if breast size was simply and only a proxy for obesity, well then, in controlling for obesity (examining women of identical BMIs), they would have found no difference in risk for differently endowed breast women with identical BMIs. In reality, they did find a difference.

    Why is this important? It means where you carry your weight, where fat deposits accumulate on your body - something that is not merely a CHOICE as Jim Okeefe contends - matters to your risk of type II diabetes. I would wager that this is an important finding, wouldn't you?

    Jah Wobble - hope this clarifies how one can independantly examine the effect of breast size on risk of type II diabetes.
  12. Jen Dobson from Canada writes: What some of the posters seem to discount are women who are skinny and also have big breasts. Of course it depends on your definition of skinny I guess, but I consider myself, and some of my friends and family to be quite skinny, yet have C or D cup size breasts.

    So I interpret this research to say that even if you are skinny, but have large breasts, you at higher risk. Thus it isn't neccessarily just pointing out the obvious.
  13. a sailor on the prairie ocean from Canada writes: now you know where some of those dollars go for research.
    doctors are human and some of them go for the gusto. what are you gonna do when there's a bunch of mice runnin' around in a maze of cages, a bunch of monkeys running around in their steel cages, or you got something guaranteed to take your mind off all those bothersome 'little' things.
  14. Jim OKeefe from Toronto, Canada writes: My apologies to those that have or know people who have type 2 despite the fact that they have good Body Mass Indicators and are fit. Guess the doctors/dieticians were not quite accurate on their explainations, or else (more likely) I leapt to conculsions. A high fat diet, or a lot of fat in the body, can impede the body's ability to recognize insulin. I know/knew several people with type 2, all overweight and not active, although not nearly as so as some other otherwise healthy people I know. There's no known reason as to why some people contract type 1, dispite evidence towards triggers, ie cow milk in 1st year of life.
  15. Jah Wobble from Canada writes: yes extremely helpful, however the relationship is purely correlational is it not? can we say there is a causal link between the two eg breast size and diabetes? since there are a myriad of possible correlations -some of which are deemed possibly connected eg breast size and some that might be spurious eg color of eyes how much further ahead are we? eg is it not also possible that women with brown eyes ( latino, black etc) also are more susceptible? Likely, but knowing that relationship would not be all that menaingful or helpful would it? so what's the significance of knowing something about this particular relationship?
  16. Life is a Paradox from Canada writes: If our bodily parts is an indication of our cellular activities, then, the measurement of our individual body structure is an indication of the specific activity.

    If the above makes sense, then it is not surprising to learn that bigger breast is an indication of certain propensity towards diabetes, due to the similar nature of activities that relates to tissue size with fat storage(anabolism).

    Thus sports people have big muscles and bookworms have thick glasses. Of course this is not so obvious now because they went for contact lenses and laser surgery...which can also be applied to those who went for breast augmentation or reduction. A different story.

    The point is, we always judge people by their outward appearance, whether it is the first impression or not. The only difference is whether our judgment/perception/ scientific data interpretation IS VALID. All of them have one underlying, common thread and it is call, VALUES. The ability to apply the observation in an accurate manner is a reflection of one's value. It ranges from the cellular activities to the organism's outward behavior. It is common sense only when it is accurate. It is a mystery when it is based on wrong values.

    Steven Lee
  17. Mrs. T from Canada writes: Saw this on the news last night. First thought was the doc has a breast fetish and got the gov't to fund his 'research'. My husband called him brilliant.
  18. NR Connor from TO, Canada writes: Peter S from Toronto, Canada writes: Since we know weight is a factor in contracting diabetes, doesn't it stand to reason that larger women have a higher risk? And larger women tend to have larger breasts. What boggles the mind is that a study was done to prove something so obvious.

    =========================

    Yep, another 'scientific' study confirming the obvious. Not that that is surprising, but why did it get media coverage?
  19. Jen Dobson from Canada writes: Again some here seem to have missed that they accounted for BMI index, meaning that they looked at women with the exact same BMI (essentially, the 'skinniness or fatness') and then compared those with large and small breasts.

    So really this study has nothing whatsoever to do with obese people. Not sure if some didn't read the article or didn't understand what correcting for BMI means.
  20. S JKoop from Saskatchewan, Canada writes: Jah Wobble: You are right; this is entirely correlational. But, that's to be expected. I doubt the researchers are saying 'large breasts cause diabetes' - perhaps that's the media spin to make this seem interesting to a public. More likely, the researchers are saying women with large breasts tend to get diabetes and that this requires more attention and more research, to discover if this is causal and if not, what is really at work here. Even if it is not causal, it is important, because groundbreaking discoveries often occur through the slow accumulation of knowledge. If this is not a causal relationship, we should look at what are the intervening variables. I bet the researchers have already gotten started on that.

    Your 'eye colour' example is excellent for proving this point. You are likely right that there is no causal relationship between eye colour and diabetes. However, finding that a correlation exists, allows us to ask: well, what is the intervening variable here? This takes us to race and ethnicity, which DO play a role, likely a causal role, in the risk of diabetes. An early study which finds a relationship between diabetes and eye colour, allows us to later develop the causal theory about ethnicity and diabetes.

    All in all, it should be pointed out that causation can never be proven. Every association we see in the world is correlation. Causation is always a jump, because there can always be an intervening variable we haven't thought about. What makes a correlation a strong consideration for causation is a good, logical, theory. This study shouldn't be discredited simply because causation has not (yet) been proven. If researchers always did that, we'd be at a loss for understanding a myriad of social and physical phenomona.
  21. Mark H from Columbus, IN, United States writes: 'Peter S from Toronto, Canada writes: Since we know weight is a factor in contracting diabetes, doesn't it stand to reason that larger women have a higher risk? And larger women tend to have larger breasts. What boggles the mind is that a study was done to prove something so obvious.'

    You beat me to it, Peter. Spot-on.
  22. Ruth Bishop from Canada writes: How much effort would it take people to distinguish between Type I and Type II diabetes??? These are vastly different conditions which happen to affect the same organ of the body. I have Type I (alongside 10% of people with diabetes), have always been fit, active, and underweight -- yes, I have a low bra size too(!)-- and I've worked extremely hard to stay this way despite having a nasty condition which actually makes it harder to exercise. So, I find it insulting to be constantly bombarded by supposedly scientific articles talking about the link between diabetes and obesity. Talk about adding insult to injury!!!
  23. Yellow Submariner from Canada writes:

    Why not just wear smaller bras then? Might be a bit uncomfortable, but if it can save your life, why not?
  24. Tyler Christensen from Yokohama, Japan writes: Am I the only one that had to look up 'concomitant'?
  25. Marian Olson from Vancouver, Canada writes: Junk science abounds, and there is going to be even more of it from these 'researchers'. Their careers, unfortunately, are assured. There are endless possibilities for further studies in this area. What next, warning signs in the change rooms? As an aside, there are always exceptions, but in all honesty, speaking as a retired physician, type 2 diabetes is a lifestyle disease in the vast majority of cases - call it the 'fat and lazy' phenomenon if you wish to be rude - and I would like to see some research on an effective way for these individuals to take some responsibilty for their own health. They would feel better, live longer, and save the rest of us a whole lot of money. Now that would be worthwhile research.
  26. Ms Dragonfire from Canada writes: Huh. Guess I'd better watch out - I'm over a D cup in my early twenties.

    Oh, wait a sec, I already have type 1, and have since I was a wee kid. Foiled!

    To those commenting to Jim: it's really unfortunate that your relatives have had to deal with type 2. My father has it as well, just got diagnosed a few months ago. The thing is, he isn't in his 60s or 70s, and /is/ obese and nonactive. Most people didn't even used to be diagnosed with type 2 until they were at least in their mid-fifties - it used to be an almost-purely genetic thing, like what must have been behind the illness of your relatives.

    Now, though, you get younger people diagnosed with it, even children. You can't call type 1 'juvenile onset' any more, because so many are getting type 2. And guess what most of them are? Heavily overweight or obese, don't eat right, don't exercise, and have the familial disposition towards it. Yet they don't take care of themselves, and end up with it in their teens, or twenties, or thirties.

    Call me bitter. I know I am - but I hate having to see people have to deal with this godawful disease when they don't have to.
  27. Sleepy Head from Canada writes: The commenters commenting that this is 'obvious' because bigger women have bigger breasts, did you even read the article?

    'Even after adjusting for a number of other factors that influence the risk of diabetes, such as obesity, diet, smoking and family history, the D cup women were still 68 per cent more likely to develop diabetes than women with an A cup...However, the research shows that cup size is not directly correlated to body mass index, or BMI (an approximation of body fat). '
  28. Carole Stoyka from Manitoba, Canada writes: The comment that strikes me as odd is that the larger-breasted women were also more likely to have smoked. Did they correlate smoking and large breasted-ness? No where in the article does it elaborate further on this assertion.
  29. Watch Tower from Canada writes: S JKoop from Saskatchewan, Canada writes: Jah Wobble: You are right; this is entirely correlational - yaddah yaddah

    Thank you Mr Science or should I say Dr Koop ;)
  30. Carrie Forbes from Halifax, Canada writes: The problem with equating 'bigger breasts = bigger women' is that breast size, in terms of cup size, is a ratio. Not all D cups are the same size. (Read the article for more information on how to measure) Speaking as an example, I am a small woman weighing 125 lbs, I exercise, and eat healthy. I also wear a 32F bra. Now, this also equates roughly to a 34D, 36C, or 38B - as the band size increases, the cup decreases - in proportion to the body.

    What this says to me is that although small, I am at greater risk than if I were a 32B. Considering I am apple shaped, and like the article, was chubby as a child, I think there is something about the way I store fat that could make me more susceptible to Type II diabetes.
    This does encourage me to continue following a healthy lifestyle, although I would have done so anyway.
  31. gloria garvey from Canada writes: No, Jim, you don't have to be overweight or inactive to get Type 2. My grandfather had it, he was a very slim farmer, and my mother, his daughter, has it. She has never been overweight and has exercised as long as I can remember, even before it was fashionable for women to exercise.
  32. Steve Not an Alberta Redneck from Canada writes: Simply Red from Canada writes: 'So I should thank my mother that she passed along her small breast size?' That depends..........Are you male or female?
  33. W. Mercer from Canada writes: For the millionth time folks, correlation does not equate to causation.

    One would hope that the study had a better reason for being initiated than was indicated by this article.
  34. Accounting Student from New West, Canada writes: It's interesting, I've a friend who has a family history of adult onset diabetes on her Mum's side. (She's got to be really careful with the blood sugar levels as she turns hypoglycemic quite fast). None of her family were overweight for either their small frames, or for society when they were in their twenties (size 6 or smaller), all the women were naturally D or E cups. It's a fact of her family history, she will get diabetes when she is older, her mum has it, her mum's mum has it (and so on, and so on.) None of her family is overweight, they all have healthy liftestyle's, but all the women suffer from adult onset diabetes, and have large breasts. Needless to say, this article makes sense to me, as it is relevant to a friend's history. Unfortunately, her genes are stacked against her. If her brother gets diabetes, it will be surprising, but, there is still the possibility.
  35. keith c from London, United Kingdom writes: Carole: I agree. That was easily the most weird and interesting thing in this story. Could it be that the early developers of big bosoms get attention from the `bad boys' in high school aged 13 and end up in the popular smokers' crowd? lol
  36. Mei-Xing Xu from Canada writes: i do not understand why so many of my fellow Canadians want to be so heavy, i fail to see the advantage. i prefer to be small and thin, i feel healthy. i don't do anything special to be thin, i skip all fast food, eat plenty of raw veggies, rarely touch cheese , avoid fatty meats like the pig and the duck, and exercise everyday.

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top