Alzheimer's Progresses Faster in Educated People

Nrbelex writes "Bloomberg news is reporting that 'High levels of education speeds up the progression of Alzheimer's disease, according to a study published in next month's issue of the Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry. Mental agility dropped every year among Alzheimer's disease patients with each additional year of education, leading to an additional 0.3 percent deterioration, the researchers from the Columbia University Medical Center in New York found. The speed of thought processes and memory were particularly affected.'"

Comments

Have the statistics been properly done here?

[Anonymous Coward]

The first thought that came into my mind when I read this: if you have more (mental ability) and the end result of Alzheimer is the same for all people, then you will lose it (mental ability) faster...

Re:Have the statistics been properly done here?

[AKAImBatman]

After I read this story, I couldn't get a line from Blade Runner out of my head: "A candle that burns twice as bright, burns half as long."

I guess there was more truth there than the authors realized. /somber

Re:Have the statistics been properly done here?

[kaiidth]

Actually it seems to be a little weirder than that.

The researchers said one possible explanation is what has been dubbed the "cognitive reserve" theory.

This holds that highly educated people either have a greater number of nerve connections in their brains, or the nerve connections that they have are more efficient.

Therefore, when the damaging changes associated with Alzheimer's - such as the deposition of toxic protein clumps - start to take place, educated people are better placed to resist their effect at first.

However, the subsequent impact is likely to be greater than it would be in less educated brains, because of the higher levels of accumulated damage.

In other words (I think), educated people simply don't show the effects of Alzheimers as fast. By the time anybody notices that anything is wrong, a great deal of damage already exists. So since it is already at a later stage when you first notice it, it looks from the outside as though the person has very quickly reached an advanced stage of Alzheimers. Instead, they have been resisting Alzheimers for ages.

There was a New Scientist article about this...

Additional 0.3% deterioration?

[hal2814]

So how exactly is this being measured? From what I can find, all the story mentions is:

"All the patients underwent around four neurological assessments, each of which comprised a dozen separate tests of brain function."

Given that Alzheimers affects everyone in different ways, I guess I'm just a little leery of a study that's claiming that it can quantitatively compare the mental facilities of one victim to another.

Reflection of Rote Memorization?

[Bob9113]

This is interesting. I would love to see a comparison between those with traditional American educations (which I assume is what this study focused on) and those who are similarly capable (perhaps who hold similar titles in similarly challenging fields), but who have followed less traditional paths in learning.

For example, I can point to five people at my current job - each a very skilled software engineer, and each very skilled in debating other topics in current events; among those five people are 1 PhD, 2 Masters, 1 college drop-out, and 1 high school drop out. The one thing we all agree on? Much of traditional American education has become primarily a matter of rote memorization - there is very little teaching of theory and problem solving involved.

Further, I saw a different study some years ago that showed a strong correlation between studying the arts late in life and delaying the onset of Alzheimers. Proficiency in the arts tends to require lots of understanding of abstract concepts, akin to studying theory in more technical fields, and requires little rote memorization.

That is to say, is it possible that the study hit on people whose minds have become less plastic as a result of education? People whose brains have been conditioned to be crystalizable by massive repetition instead of adaptable to new situations? Or, to take the nature instead of nurture angle, was the study skewed heavy on people with more crystaline brains, because such people are more proficient in an educational environment heavy on rote memorization?