Slashdot Mirror


Brain Implants Relieve Alzheimer's Damage

Genetically engineered cells implanted in mice have cleared away toxic plaques associated with Alzheimer's disease. The animals were sickened with a human gene that caused them to develop, at an accelerated rate, the disease that robs millions of elderly people of their memories. After receiving the doctored cells, the brain-muddling plaques melted away. If this works in humans, old age could be a much happier time of life.

143 comments

  1. It's a great time to be a mouse... by edashofy · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's a fantastic time to be a mouse. Mouse with cancer? No problem. Mouse with alzheimers? No problem. Mouse with diabetes? Go ahead and have that Snicker bar, we have the cure for what ails ya.

    1. Re:It's a great time to be a mouse... by D-Cypell · · Score: 1

      Yeah! Say what you like about Disney, their health cover is second to none!

    2. Re:It's a great time to be a mouse... by CheeseTroll · · Score: 5, Funny

      Mouse with head still attached? Yep, they'll take care of that, too!

      --
      A post a day keeps productivity at bay.
    3. Re:It's a great time to be a mouse... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      whats the leading cause of death of white mice?

      scientists.

    4. Re:It's a great time to be a mouse... by revxul · · Score: 1

      Having bad memories? We can get rid of those for you, no problem! [link - world-science.net]

      --
      Truth, Just Us, And Hatred For All Mankind!
    5. Re:It's a great time to be a mouse... by eam · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not that it changes the situation that much, but they're actually talking about taking skin cells from the patient, genetically modifying them, then putting them back in the patient's skin. No brain surgery required, and if it works out badly the removal is probably easier than removing a wart.

    6. Re:It's a great time to be a mouse... by eam · · Score: 2, Informative

      Of course, the web site got it wrong, too. The title says "Brain implants", but the article specifies skin implants.

      See, it isn't only slashdot editors that screw up.

      Of course, I'm assuming the editor of the Harvard University Gazette decided on the title for the article. It would be more disturbing if the author of the article didn't know enough about what he wrote to get the title right.

    7. Re:It's a great time to be a mouse... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pharmaceutical research laboratories.

  2. The best news by Sunburnt · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm normally quite sarcastic when posting.

    Not now. Alzheimer's Disease is one of the most horrifying maladies faced in societies where people live long enough to suffer from it.

    I hope that this research pans out into practical treatment. Being betrayed by the body is terrible enough later in life.

    --
    Tags != Comments, and -1 (Troll) != -1 (I Would Respond Angrily To This Poster So They Must Be Trolling)
    1. Re:The best news by Trillan · · Score: 0, Redundant

      I've had a couple relatives go this way. Definitely something I wouldn't wish on anyone. This needs to become a practical treatment.

    2. Re:The best news by Rei · · Score: 1

      Something about this seems off, though. I've seen MRIs and PET scans of alzheimers patients (I'm no doctor, but I work writing medical imaging software according to spec), and the thing that stands out most about them to me, as a layman, is the *lack* of tissue, not *extra* tissue that you would want to dissolve. Example from a quick google images search here (healthy 92-year old male left, 92-year old male AD patient right). I don't see how a drug that destroys plaques is going to reverse that.

      --
      Dear Lord: One of your creatures may be hurt tonight. Please let it be the other creature.
    3. Re:The best news by Cecil · · Score: 1

      You might be right, but experts in the field have been convinced for over a decade that the formation of the plaques is what causes the problems. I'm not saying experts can't be wrong, but generally they're a pretty safe bet. Isn't it possible that the plaque growth is what causes the brain cells to die off? In which case dissolving the plaques seems like it would be a good treatment plan.

    4. Re:The best news by FewClues · · Score: 1

      Sunburnt you speak for most of us. I have had a couple of aunts with Alzheimer's and it is a terrible thing to watch them die in such pain. People who don't see this as hope and support it, simply have never personally witnessed an Alzheimer's patient's death.

  3. Flowers... by Penguinshit · · Score: 1, Funny

    ... for poor old Algernon. Good to see he'll remember his "smart" days.

    1. Re:Flowers... by KudyardRipling · · Score: 1

      fsck the flowers, the following is what should be heard: MEANS TEST SOCIAL SECURITY!

      --
      Submission as evidence constitutes plaintiff and/or prosecutorial misconduct.
  4. It really works... by D-Cypell · · Score: 1, Funny

    My grandmother was involved in some secret trials of this technology. I have to say it is marvelous. For years she could hardly remeber a thing, but once we found a doner she can now remember everything up until the motorcylce accident.

    1. Re:It really works... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny
  5. Hooray. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For medical science. For when "positive thinking" doesn't quite do the trick.

  6. obligatory... by owlnation · · Score: 1

    I, for one, welcome our new elderly cyborg overlords...

    Well, someone had to...

  7. Great! now more people will die of cancer by nietsch · · Score: 1

    while being fully aware that they are dying. The frailness of age is still not solved with it, but it will make healthcare even more costly as all people getting older will demand this or other costly cures. One should wonder if people will demand longer careers (past their 70s) to pay for this extension of life too.

    --
    This space is intentionally staring blankly at you
    1. Re:Great! now more people will die of cancer by d12v10 · · Score: 1

      ...

      1) Alzheimers != cancer
      2) The article does not say this is a cure, in fact it implies that is more a treatment than a cure
      3) Whether or not people would demand longer careers is not important. This isn't about the economy or healthcare, this is about treating PEOPLE with a FATAL ailment.

    2. Re:Great! now more people will die of cancer by OceanBarb · · Score: 1

      Well, we are all dying...some just take longer than others. Every day past 21 years is gravy. But it sure is hard to live in the moment wearing that red vest when I'm 83. Hope my bones hold up. Don't anyone shove a shopping cart at me.

    3. Re:Great! now more people will die of cancer by knewter · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Your mind seems awfully warped. Recognize this for what it is: an intriguing discovery with the possibility of solving a problem. If on the whole people are worse off for the treatment, we should rationally expect that it won't become widespread. So stop being a dick and just say 'hey this is really cool.'

      I used to be constantly pessimistic like this. I'm trying to get over it. Solving problems / learning more truths == good.

      --
      -knewter
    4. Re:Great! now more people will die of cancer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anything that holds off or eliminates the need for dementia care is something that deserves some attention.

      The cost of the treatment must be weighed against the costs of caring for patients with dementive illnesses. That includes billions in unpaid care that many people are providing to their relatives. (Not to mention the costs associated with the health problems and mortality that family caregivers themselves experience as a result of their caregiving.) Dementia care is a drag on society, and demographically it's going to get a lot worse as the boomers age.*

      From a personal perspective, I took care of a parent with Lewy Body dementia practically singlehanded from onset to death (over the course of a couple of years). It was nothing short of horrifying, and the experience has seriously kicked my butt even a year later. I can't easily imagine either Medicaid or the informal support net of family caregivers holding the line if/when the incidence of dementia increases by a factor of, say, 2 or 3.

      * After typing the above I found an interesting set of statistics provided in the 2007 National Policy Statment of an organization called the Family Caregiver Alliance:

      "With the annual cost per person of nursing home care averaging $75,190, any delay means real savings to families, to government programs and to businesses. Consider:

      - If services provided by informal caregivers had to be replaced with paid services, it would cost an estimated $306 billion (in 2004 dollars)
      - Lost productivity due to informal caregiving costs businesses $17.1 billion annually
      - Informal caregivers personally lose about $659,139 over a lifetime: $25,494 in Social Security benefits; $67,202 in pension benefits; and $566,443 in forgone wages."

      Also, from Newsweek's "The Boomer Files" at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19131991/site/newsweek / :
      "Alzheimer's currently afflicts more than 5 million Americans and 70 percent of them live at home, where they are cared for by many millions of daughters, sons and spouses.....By 2050, the number of Americans with Alzheimer's and other dementias could soar to 16 million."

    5. Re:Great! now more people will die of cancer by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1
      In addition to being inexcusably nasty, your post makes asumptions without basis in TFA. Once in mass production, the cure would consist of:
      • Harvesting some skin cells.
      • Genetically altering them so that they'll generate the plaque-disolving chemical.
      • Injecting the altered cells into the spinal or cerebral fluid.
      So, 2 doctor visits plus occasional checkups to make sure nothing goes haywire. Some tricky lab work. Maybe $10,000.00, about what it costs to stay in a big-city nursing home for 1 month. In exchange, the patient probably gains 10 years of mentally healthy life, happiness for himself and those who would otherwise have to care for him.
      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    6. Re:Great! now more people will die of cancer by mikael · · Score: 1

      One should wonder if people will demand longer careers (past their 70s) to pay for this extension of life too.

      Well, here in the UK, the government has decided that anyone working in the private sector will have to work until they drop by abolishing the retirement age.

      Meanwhile, MP's and state workers still get their superannuated pension schemes and early retirement.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    7. Re:Great! now more people will die of cancer by nietsch · · Score: 1

      Your mind must be warped even more in that you think you can judge somebody else's mind on the basis of three sentences.

      --
      This space is intentionally staring blankly at you
  8. How to tell when a mouse has Alzheimer's... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    He stops trying to run away from the guy in the lab coat.

  9. Neprilysin by wizardforce · · Score: 4, Informative

    The Harvard team used skin cells from the animal's own body to introduce a gene for an amyloid-busting enzyme known as neprilysin. The skin cells, also known as fibroblasts, "do not form tumors or move from the implantation site," Hemming notes. "They cause no detectable adverse side effects and can easily be taken from a patient's skin." In addition, other genes can be added to the fibroblast-neprilysin combo, which will eliminate the implants if something starts to go wrong.
    I suppose the simple genetic change isn't as likely to cause some immune reaction than the gene implanted via a virus- it should be a lot safer to just introduce cells with the gene instead of altering large sections of tissue in the human body. here's the enzyme they are talking about that is doing the good work:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neprilysin
    --
    Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
  10. Re:what so horrifying about it? by mce · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Oh yes you do. Maybe not any more by the time you're almost completely gone. And also not when it all first starts (slowly). But in between there is a period when you're aware of what's happening and still lucid enough to understand. That phase is the true torture period for the person affected.

  11. Old age is not a happier time of life? by ArtuRocks · · Score: 2, Informative

    If this works in humans, old age could be a much happier time of life. Ummm.... huh? Two problems I have with that sentence:
    1.) Granted, I'm 34, so I'm not talking from experience, but from what I gather old age is already a happier time of life.
    2.) If I'm interpreting the sentence correctly, the sentence is implying that most of the time when people reach old age they get Alzheimer's. If that is true, then I need a reality check because I didn't know that.
    1. Re:Old age is not a happier time of life? by 644bd346996 · · Score: 1

      2.) If I'm interpreting the sentence correctly, the sentence is implying that most of the time when people reach old age they get Alzheimer's. If that is true, then I need a reality check because I didn't know that. Certainly nobody dies of "old age" anymore. It is always something like Alzheimer's or cancer or heart failure or complications from the treatment of something like that. We've already cured the simpler afflictions, and are now basically dismantling the whole "planned obsolescence" aspect of human biology.
    2. Re:Old age is not a happier time of life? by polyex · · Score: 1

      It is common. I have had some first hand experience with my Father on this one. It seems like many of his old friends either have this or vascular dementia as well (which looks similar but is different). Its not a scientific observation, but I kind of get the feeling if you manage to not kill yourself or get killed, and avoid the the heart attack and cancer route in your old age, you may find this at the end of the road. Your right about younger people getting it, I know that a politician recently contracted it at a very young age. I would venture the vast majority of people who have it though are say over 60, which is a rather nasty retirement gift.

    3. Re:Old age is not a happier time of life? by vidarh · · Score: 1
      If you survive to old age today, most people die of either cancer or heart disease or get dementia of one form or another that either eventually kills them or leaves them with so little brain function it's an academic point anyway (i.e. Alzheimers, where patients might spend years in almost vegetative states before dying, often as a result of decay because they might have spent years unable to even walk).

      I believe it's a reasonably even split between the three, though I might be mistaken, and Alzheimers make up by far the largest number of the dementia cases.

    4. Re:Old age is not a happier time of life? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You invariably will get Alzheimer's if you live long enough. The buildup of amyloid plaques appears to be a natural part of living and, until we find a treatment, everyone will get it if they were to live long enough. Most people die of something else before the symptoms start, however.

    5. Re:Old age is not a happier time of life? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but from what I gather old age is already a happier time of life.
      The study only captures the mood of a population at one point in time; it does not actually observe changes in mood over time. One possible explanation that that article surprisingly does not consider is that sad people die early. A positive mood and outlook can positively affect the immune system, so it stands to reason that happy people are more likely to have long lives.

      This reminds me of the claim that non-smokers are less likely to get Alzheimer's, so therefore nicotine must be an effective treatment.
  12. Re:what so horrifying about it? by Jugalator · · Score: 1

    Yes, you do as it's a gradual disease. Before you've totally lost it, you'll be aware and often very depressed from it too. Not to mention how sad it is for the relatives to see someone's personality go away like this.

    --
    Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  13. What I want to know is.. by StikyPad · · Score: 0

    Where are they getting the brains to implant?!?

    1. Re:What I want to know is.. by Detritus · · Score: 1
      "Knock, Knock"

      "Who's there?"

      "Candygram"

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    2. Re:What I want to know is.. by megaditto · · Score: 2, Interesting

      From your skin. And not 'brains' but connective tissue cells (fibroblasts) that are easy to grow.

      It sounds pretty good but I am afraid it will not cure the disease. Permanent damage and the tissue/functionality lost are not restored, so I am afraid we would still need stem cells for a proper AD cure.

      --
      Obama likes poor people so much, he wants to make more of them.
  14. Great News by polyex · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I feel strongly that your mind is the most important part of your body. Its truly what makes you unique,. This research progress is great news. I just wish there was some way to get my Father treatment. Someone once told me that one of the toughest time for a child is when he realizes his parents are mortal. Over the last couple of years I have had to watch a brilliant man slowly disintegrate into a shell of his former self (all the while knowing what was happening to him and that he really had no where to escape to). If you have a heart attack, you sometimes can do something about it, with better lifestyle eating etc. or even cancer, you can fight it with therapy and perhaps have the hope to be free of it. Not the case with this disease, and the worst part is that you know its happening to you as its slowly robs you and your loved ones of your last sanctuary, yourself. Dealing with this first hand has certainly had an effects on me and my outlook on life in ways that were not apparent to me at first. Any kind of progress against this disease simply makes my day.

    1. Re:Great News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I too am dealing with the loss of a loved one (grandmother) to Alzheimer's. More so than pretty much any other disease, it robs you of your ability to grieve for the loss of a loved one. Whereas someone lost to cancer or a heart attack goes from a very clear state of being alive to being dead, Alzheimer's victims aren't that way.

      I'm not sure when my grandmother died since her body is still very much alive, but I know that it happened. I know that the woman I knew as a child is no longer alive. I know that every time I visit her, I come anew to the same realization that she's gone. It's a cruel trick of nature to leave a visual image that triggers memories of when she was alive. And that's something that those who's loved ones have been buried/cremated/etc don't have to deal with.

      Here's hoping that these and future developments will lead to a cure for this disease because no one, neither victim nor family members, should be put through what Alzheimer's does.

    2. Re:Great News by polyex · · Score: 1

      "No Crap?". Nice response. I did not say possessing a mind makes you unique, I said its the mind that makes you unique. "Without a mind, you would only be piece of meat". You are already a piece of meat, whether you have a mind or not. Climb into the lion cage at the zoo during feeding time. Without a mind, you would not amount to much more than a piece of meat. That, is interesting.

  15. Horrifying for whom? by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 1, Interesting
    Sure early Alzheimers must be a bit frustrating for the sufferer, but this is tempered by a loss of cognitive function (ie. you don't necessarily realise that you have the condition). It is probaly far more horrifying for the people who remember Jim being all bright and sharp but now see him dulled.M

    I'd think that a stroke or other direct physical impediment must be far more frustrating for the actual sufferer.

    Increasing Alzheimers is mostly a result of keeping people alive longer. No matter how age care progresses, there will always be a weakest link. The designed lifetime of the human body is being exceeded. Perhaps we should allow people to die earlier with dignity.

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
    1. Re:Horrifying for whom? by Sunburnt · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Sure early Alzheimers must be a bit frustrating for the sufferer, but this is tempered by a loss of cognitive function (ie. you don't necessarily realise that you have the condition).
      In my secondhand experience, that is only a consolation once the disease is terminal. Before that point lies a great deal of suffering spread out over years, without any hope for even a partial rehabilitation.

      Perhaps we should allow people to die earlier with dignity.

      Death with dignity is an important right. To me, it's almost as compelling as the possibility of living longer with dignity. That's why this research is so important.

      --
      Tags != Comments, and -1 (Troll) != -1 (I Would Respond Angrily To This Poster So They Must Be Trolling)
    2. Re:Horrifying for whom? by Trogre · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How about spending every day convinced that you're eight years old, and that your (long dead) parents have abandoned you in a strange place?

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    3. Re:Horrifying for whom? by wytcld · · Score: 5, Insightful

      you don't necessarily realise that you have the condition
      Have you known anyone with it? You might not realize at first why something is wrong, but you see that others are treating you as if it is. It doesn't just strike the elderly; there's an early-onset variety. You lose your job because you're losing track of details too often. Shopkeepers start to realize they can get away with shortchanging you. Your car keys become more lost at home, more often, and when you drive you get more lost, more often. When you do become convinced something serious is going wrong, the doctors tell you that it could, perhaps be Alzheimers. But they have no sure way of diagnosing it prior to an autopsy. Your health insurance company - if you didn't lose that with your job - contests your claim because your doctors can't produce a definite diagnosis. Maybe you're just depressed? Maybe you're just a malingerer? Keeping track of the details needed to contest their denials becomes almost impossibly complex for you. Some days, you start to forget to eat. Other days, you're almost your normal self. The amazing plasticity of the brain allows you to mimic normal function socially well enough that some friends don't really see anything wrong. But you've got an awful feeling there is.

      If you want Alzheimers patients "to die earlier with dignity" then you'll have to start killing them, like witches, at the first sign. Because for most of them it's the first thing to seriously go wrong. And for most of them it develops very, very slowly, sliding down a slope where by the time you might wish they'd say "Kill me now, please," any such rational choice is finally behind them.
      --
      "with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
    4. Re:Horrifying for whom? by HeroreV · · Score: 2

      Perhaps we should allow people to die earlier with dignity. If people didn't have such strong irrational hang-ups about suicide, that would be the best answer. Live as long as you possibly can until something like Alzheimers comes along, and then wack yourself. You avoid the long terrible death associated with living too long, while still having a longer life.
    5. Re:Horrifying for whom? by Joe+Tie. · · Score: 1

      In my secondhand experience, that is only a consolation once the disease is terminal. Before that point lies a great deal of suffering spread out over years, without any hope for even a partial rehabilitation.

      Same here. You'll almost never see the reality of it from the media though. It's always just bemused, confused, funny old folks. My Grandmother has it, and it's convinced me that I'm going to eat a bullet if I'm able if and when I come anywhere near that state. She lives in a state of near permanent terror and paranoia when not drugged up, and when, not that much better.

      --
      Everything will be taken away from you.
    6. Re:Horrifying for whom? by Squarewav · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Sadly Hollywood and TV make it look like Alzheimer's is nothing more then memory loss.

      I live with my parents now to take care of my dad who has early onset late stage Alzheimer's. he most def knows something is wrong with him. He is unable to speak and it frustrates him to no end. He can't find the bathroom and we (me and my mom) have to figure out that he needs it and lead him to it. Even the most basic things like putting on his pants is a nightmarish exp for him.

      Its not the watching some one fade away that makes things hard on the family. Its watching someone exp hell on earth and not being able to do a damn thing about it

    7. Re:Horrifying for whom? by NoPantsJim · · Score: 5, Insightful

      My grandfather passed away from Alzheimer's complications this Summer after living on his own for around 5 years. He sure as hell knew he had it. As recently as last October he was still in amazing physical shape, running daily to the gym, working out like a maniac, and running back to his home. Even at his old age, he could still do more pull ups than I can at 22 (and I'm no slouch, 28 palms forward from dead hang, he beat me with 33).

      We noticed the first signs around Christmas. He began to act in an odd way and mixed up some of our names. We insisted he go to a doctor, who then told us he was so far along in the disease that he must have been suffering from it for at least a year. When we confronted him about it he told us he was embarrassed and did not want us to take his freedom away. It was amazing how quickly he declined in the next few months.

      I was always very close with him, he actually bought me the truck I currently drive and has helped pay for some of my college. The last time I saw him he didn't know who I was, and asked me to tell him about myself. I talked to him for around four hours recounting my life and the times we had spent together. At the end he started crying because he said he wanted to remember my parents and me, but couldn't. When we left that day he told us he didn't want to live anymore, and died three days later.

      The reason Alzheimer's is such a horrific disease is because it is such a tarnish on the life of the individual. My grandfather was in the Navy during World War II. He was an officer and was actually present in the room during the signing of the official surrender terms on the USS Missouri on V-J day. He spent the next 15 years as a stock car racer, and then owned a chain of mechanics shops for 20 years. He raised three successful children and had several grandchildren he was very close with. But when he died, he had absolutely zero recollection of any of this.

      I just know that I don't want to go out and achieve all of my goals in life only to reach an age at which I cannot recall any of them.

    8. Re:Horrifying for whom? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who is the idiot who moderated this seriously?
      He has a totally valid point, it's likely the sufferer ISN'T the one who is 'suffering' but more family (hell practically everyone says that)

      As for allowing people to die earlier with dignity he's discussing euthenasia another taboo subject our governments have it backwards on.

    9. Re:Horrifying for whom? by rilister · · Score: 4, Insightful

      wow, that's a shockingly ignorant statement. Commenting on Slashdot on graphic cards when you no nothing about it is one thing, but on fatal diseases is a different kind of thing, dude.

      A 'bit frustrating'? Most people are diagnosed a year or so into onset, but there's no real way of knowing when the disease starts. For many patients, there's literally (like, 5) years of knowing a) you have a disease that is 100% fatal and that you will gradually forget the names and faces of the people you love. b) you will eventually become a terrible burden on those same people, you will treat them badly and they will get to watch as you regress to less than a child. c) gradually losing all the mental faculties that you take for granted every day, knowing exactly why for several years.

      It's terrible, frightening death sentence where the patient's personality is dismantled piece-by-piece, moving slowly to death, with their families watching helplessly on.

      I've worked with patients with a number of chronic and fatal diseases (cancer, AIDS, etc...) and nothing would scare me more than a diagnosis of Alzheimer's.

      --
      'This writing business. Pencils and what-not. Over-rated if you ask me. Silly stuff. Nothing in it' - Eeyore
    10. Re:Horrifying for whom? by vidarh · · Score: 3, Insightful
      A "bit frustrating"? Try years of living in fear of whats happening and shame of not being able to function properly and desperately trying to hide it. It's not how it plays out for all Alzheimers sufferers, but it's a fairly normal way for it to start.

      Both my grandmothers went down that route. One of them managed to hide it from her husband until he was meant to go to hospital for a minor operation. Then her world collapsed, because she knew she wouldn't be able to handle things alone while he was away, and she refused to get out of bed, and she never did again - she lived another ten years with rapidly declining mental faculties and rapidly accelerating memory loss, but was certainly aware of it for another year or two.

      The other, we realized after she was diagnosed, had been hiding her declining memory for years by excusing any memory problem by claiming she had "just taken pain medication" for some of her other health problems. Others hide it by writing notes to assist them, or learning to talk and ask questions in ways designed to avoid admitting they've forgotten something.

      Remember those horrible moments in school, when you'd forgotten something very obvious and got asked about it, and knew or thought everyone else would think you were an idiot if you answered wrongly? Now imagine every conversation you have for several years being like that.

    11. Re:Horrifying for whom? by mattpalmer1086 · · Score: 1

      No, it's deeply distressing for the sufferer as well, although you are right to say the family and friends do suffer horribly too. It takes years, even decades to fully play out, and for much of that, the sufferer is aware of what is happening to them. When they stop remembering what's happening to them, it gets even worse. They have to be looked after all the time, but resent being treated like a child. They can't remember that they aren't capable anymore. People often get violent, or deeply depressed, as they no longer understand why the world no longer makes sense.

      The idea that once people forget they have a problem, it's all sunlight for them is so wrong it's hard to know what to say. It's really, really, horrible. If you haven't experienced it, you shouldn't comment on it so flippantly. I found your comments abuot euthanasia particularly insensitive.

    12. Re:Horrifying for whom? by Ms.Otaku · · Score: 1

      Sure early Alzheimer's must be a bit frustrating for the sufferer, but this is tempered by a loss of cognitive function (ie. you don't necessarily realise that you have the condition).

      That is not true! They do know what is happening to them and it's horrific to feel your mind slip away. It's even worse for people who's pride and self image is based on their sharp intelligence. My grandfather yearned for death long before his body weakened too.

      It's also not entirely a result of keeping people alive longer. Every single male in my direct paternal line has suffered from Alzheimer's for at least three generations back. (granted they all lived well into their 70's)
      I sincerely hope that this breakthrough works out and makes it into human medication within the next ten years. I don't want my father to ever look at me with trapped eyes and ask for death.

    13. Re:Horrifying for whom? by grammar+fascist · · Score: 1

      Perhaps we should allow people to die earlier with dignity.

      Most people I've talked to don't know about this.

      Disease-free old people often just up and die for no reason. I'm serious - there actually is such thing as death from old age. It's a systematic thing. For whatever reason and by some mechanism we don't understand, the body decides that it's no longer time to be alive, and systems start slowly shutting down.

      As far as I can tell, it's rather a nice way to go compared to the others. It's over in a few days and the pain is quite manageable. The more age-related diseases we clobber, the longer people live, and the more likely they are to die this way.

      If we come up with a way to "treat" this one, though, you'll have a point.
      --
      I got my Linux laptop at System76.
    14. Re:Horrifying for whom? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      This is a touching story ... which reminds me of the following song I think about:

      "Old" by Assemblage 23:

      When I grow old
      And my memory
      Leads me deep into the fog where it abandons me
      Will you remind me
      Of who I used to be
      When I was younger?

      When I am old
      And the hands of time
      Have ravaged all the remnants of my fragile mind
      Will you still tell me
      Of how it used to be
      When I was stronger?

      If time is cruel
      And it takes away
      All the recollections of my younger days
      Please help me reminisce
      Of all these past events
      When days were brighter

      And years from now
      When I can't recall
      The faces and the names I used to know so well
      Promise you'll help me
      Regain those memories
      When my load was lighter

      When we were young
      And the world seemed
      Full of nothing else but possibility
      I still remember
      Blankets of whispers
      That said 'Forever'

      But if autumn comes
      And your love for me
      Has withered like the leaves that fall from every tree
      Will you lie to me
      So I can still believe
      That you still love me?
      That you still love me?
    15. Re:Horrifying for whom? by LiquidAvatar · · Score: 1

      Yeah, my grandfather had Alzheimer's and eventually died in that state. For the final year or two of his life, he could almost never recognize anyone; he thought that my grandmother (his wife of 50+ years) had kidnapped him and would regularly plead with her to let him see... her (remembering the young her, we think). Or at least let him call his wife to let her know that he is ok. I agree 100% with the plan of offing myself before going through that torment.

      --
      It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.
      -Voltaire
    16. Re:Horrifying for whom? by cthulhu11 · · Score: 1

      Here's a wacky idea: STOP ENGAGING IN THE BEHAVIOR THAT CAUSES THE CONDITION IN THE FIRST PLACE. The medical system in this country is distressingly geared toward treating after the fact for profit rather than prevention.

    17. Re:Horrifying for whom? by JesseMcDonald · · Score: 1

      If you want Alzheimers patients "to die earlier with dignity" then you'll have to start killing them, like witches, at the first sign. Because for most of them it's the first thing to seriously go wrong. And for most of them it develops very, very slowly, sliding down a slope where by the time you might wish they'd say "Kill me now, please," any such rational choice is finally behind them.

      If anyone really did want to take that approach, they could record such a decision in advance, while they still have the capacity to make rational choices. This would be similar to the concept of a living will -- a way of expressing one's will in the face of foreseeable future events that may render one incapable of doing so directly.

      To make that practicible, of course, one would need to challenge the current legal status of assisted suicide; otherwise the individual's will would remain irrelevant regardless of their ability to reason about and express such a choice.

      --
      "The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
    18. Re:Horrifying for whom? by ahkbarr · · Score: 1

      Perhaps we should allow people to die earlier with dignity.
      Death with dignity is an important right. To me, it's almost as compelling as the possibility of living longer with dignity. That's why this research is so important.
      There is no dignity in death. Death is greedy, messy and selfish. I agree with what you're saying, though.

      I would go a step farther, and point out that there's nothing immutable about any facet of aging, and that we should be thinking about senescence as an accumulation of preventable deteriorating processes. Many already do, and as a result, the concept of immortality is only an engineering problem, and not only the realm of crackpots and quacks.
      --
      Compared to war, all other forms of human endeavor shrink to insignificance. God, how I love it. - Gen. George Patton
    19. Re:Horrifying for whom? by Sunburnt · · Score: 1

      Here's a wacky idea: STOP ENGAGING IN THE BEHAVIOR THAT CAUSES THE CONDITION IN THE FIRST PLACE.

      While I agree with your sentiment in general, I can't see how it is relevant to Alzheimer's. If you know of a causal factor for the disease, you might want to share it with the folks who've been studying that problem for decades - you'll be able to cash in handsomely. Right now, the data seems to suggest a genetic cause more than an environmental one.

      --
      Tags != Comments, and -1 (Troll) != -1 (I Would Respond Angrily To This Poster So They Must Be Trolling)
    20. Re:Horrifying for whom? by cthulhu11 · · Score: 1

      There is good evidence that at least a substantial fraction of diagnosed Alzheimer's cases are in fact CJD. Don't mistake cattle for food, and you won't get CJD.

    21. Re:Horrifying for whom? by Sunburnt · · Score: 1

      There is good evidence that at least a substantial fraction of diagnosed Alzheimer's cases are in fact CJD.
      Got any? I mean, no offense, but this contradicts everything I've ever researched regarding Alzheimer's (which is one of the most heavily-studied diseases affecting humans.) The only place I've ever seen a similar assertion was an unsourced pamphlet I was handed while walking by a PETA event.
      --
      Tags != Comments, and -1 (Troll) != -1 (I Would Respond Angrily To This Poster So They Must Be Trolling)
    22. Re:Horrifying for whom? by cthulhu11 · · Score: 1

      Read T. Colin Campbell's "The China Study".

  16. Longer 'til retirement. by Original+Replica · · Score: 2, Insightful

    One should wonder if people will demand longer careers (past their 70s) to pay for this extension of life too.

    As socialized medicine seems just around the corner and the social security system is already in danger, I would go so far as to say longer careers should be strongly encouraged, and the social security age should be slowly raised. To pay for all of this we are going to need more cash going into the common government funds, and I don't fancy paying a 50% tax/S.S. rate to cover a bunch of Baby Boomers who retired at 60. As the infirmities of age are pushed back so should the accepted retirement age be pushed back. We already spend the first 20 years of our lives not contributing materially to society, I don't think we should also spend the last 20 years on an open ended vacation unless it can be paid for 100% out of pocket. While I think this is a wonderful medical advancement (there is a history of Alzheimer's in my family), it does in a way add to the impending problems the western world faces in it's growing elderly population.

    --
    We are all just people.
    1. Re:Longer 'til retirement. by Bonobo_Unknown · · Score: 3, Insightful

      In the USA you could have had all this (zero cost at point of service medicine for everyone). They decided to have a war in Iraq instead.

      --
      We don't believe in radical loony monotheistic religions from the middle east -- we're Christians.
    2. Re:Longer 'til retirement. by ElDuque · · Score: 1


      Universal health care is a different order of magnitude from this war: Medicare spending over the next 5 years is estimated at $2.56 trillion by the CBO (nonpartisan), while 5 years of Iraq war has only cost us $500 billion. (source: a very partisan-looking website)

      If you want to expand government (taxpayer) funded health care from the approximately 50 million people Medicare currently covers to everyone, that $2.56 trillion goes up by a factor of about six.

    3. Re:Longer 'til retirement. by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

      To pay for all of this we are going to need more cash going into the common government funds, and I don't fancy paying a 50% tax/S.S. rate to cover a bunch of Baby Boomers who retired at 60. You should know, the main problem (for a really long time) hasn't been a lack of money going into the SS trust fund, it's money going out. The Federal Government owes Social Security > 1 trillion dollars... with interest.

      Social Security has been running a surplus since around 1984 (which is when they jacked up taxes) BUT Republican and Democratic Administrations alike have been raiding the SS Trust Fund ever since then to cover their deficeit spending.

      In 1999 a Republican Congressman got a resolution passed (416-12) prohibiting SS funds from being spent on any Government program. 100% of Democratic Senators voted against it & the bill died.

      Long story short: There isn't enough Government spending to cut and someone is going to have to raise *taxes eventually.

      *Bush hasn't signed any diret tax hikes into existince, but they've been jacking up fees and a variety of other non-taxes in order to help cover the difference.
      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
  17. A couple big questions though... by tfoss · · Score: 5, Interesting

    First off, here's the actual article, which was published in PLoS Medicine (meaning free access for everyone, yay).

    Whether this accomplishment (and it is a pretty cool accomplishment) will be meaningful for people is very uncertain. First of all, Alzheimer's is not a positive diagnosis, that is you diagnose it by the absence of other explanations for observed behavior. So you don't actually have a way of confirming that the mental defects of a patient are *really* due to a-beta deposits. Unlike many diseases, we can't (yet) test blood or tissue or do imaging studies to confirm a-beta deposits (though there is tons of effort being spent on developing such tests). So you'd have to decide to do a pretty serious procedure on (generally) elderly people in less than ideal health on the basis of a flimsy diagnosis. It might well be worth it, but it is a big question.

    Moreover, though, we don't really know what causes the neurodegeneration associated with amyloid diseases. We know that deposits or a-beta or tau tangles (or light-chain or huntingtin, or SOD or transthyretin (which was the topic of my thesis work) or whatever amyloidogenic protein you like) correlate well with neurodegeneration. But whether those are the cause or not is still a very open question. In fact there is plenty of research around that suggests that amyloid deposits themselves are not damaging, but the precursors in the aggregation pathway are the real culprits. Some have even suggested that amyloid is a more or less inert structure that can be used to segregate potentially dangerously unstable proteins away from the rest of the cell.

    So, supposing this treatment does everything perfectly, chops up a-beta and disintegrates plaques, *and* we can deliver it to correctly diagnosed patients, we still might not even be hitting the right target.

    Not to be too down on this topic, but we are still quite a long way from a treatment, much less a cure.

    -Ted

    --
    -=-=- Quantum physics - the dreams stuff are made of.
    1. Re:A couple big questions though... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      ^^ Exactly. I work in a lab at Harvard studying mechanisms thought to be responsible for eliminating aggregates (such as those in AD) from the cell, and there's no evidence that this is where toxicity comes from. Shutting down these processes doesn't have any effect on the progression or lifespan of mice with ALS, Huntington's disease, or Prion infection. I'm still looking into AD and Parkinson's, but all signs point to no effect at the moment.

    2. Re:A couple big questions though... by skoaldipper · · Score: 2, Insightful

      [..]or whatever amyloidogenic protein you like) correlate well with neurodegeneration. But whether those are the cause or not is still a very open question.
      Didn't they link mad cow disease to a protein as well? I believe they ruled out microbial agents there as the principiant. So, if the common post symptomatic link is protein deposits, then what are some of those possible precursors leading to them?

      Personally, I never understood the need for aluminum in any bio absorbable product. In part, that's why I use specific deodorant brands not containing any derivative of it.
      --
      I hope, when they die, cartoon characters have to answer for their sins.
    3. Re:A couple big questions though... by tfoss · · Score: 1

      Didn't they link mad cow disease to a protein as well? Yes, it is PrP. Prions are a rather strange phenomenon (a nobel worthy one) where you have an infectious agent that nothing more than a protein. Generally infectious agents are living things (parasites, bacteria, viruses (if you can call those live)), but prions are simply a normal protein we all have in our bodies that has acquired a different structure. This structure is extremely stable, and when ingested or inserted into other animals is able to initiate the transformation of normal PrP to misfolded, infectious PrP. Fortunately, it seems there is a pretty strong species barrier between most animals, so not just any animals' prions are able to infect humans.

      So, if the common post symptomatic link is protein deposits, then what are some of those possible precursors leading to them? The protein deposits are a specific structure called amyloid that appears to be accessible to any proteins if you treat it with conditions severe enough. That only a handful (20 or so) proteins actually cause amyloid-related disease is both fortunate and interesting. What is common to all of them, though, is that a normal protein is somehow forced to adopt a non-normal structure through either chopping up the protein, producing an incorrect version of it, or being subjected to conditions the protein is not intended to be in. When this happens, individual protein molecules adopt aberrant structures that can then interact with each other to form macroscopic deposits, these being the amyloid fibers people talk about. There is evidence to suggest that those initial few misfolded molecules, before large-scale aggregation takes place are the actual dangerous species. What exactly causes abeta (the peptide that forms amyloid in alzheimers) to aggregate in people is still very poorly understood. Lots and lots of things are correlated (brain trauma, inflammation), and many different genes and gene products (proteases, chaperones) seem to play a part, various environmental factors are also thought to be involved, but it is certainly a multi-factorial process.
      As for aluminum, I don't think there have been any conclusive studies that link it to alzheimers (the hypothesis was started in the 60s based on direct injection of aluminum into rabbit brains, but there are lots of reasons to question those original studies).

      -Ted
      --
      -=-=- Quantum physics - the dreams stuff are made of.
  18. Is there any way I can help? by Skychrono · · Score: 2, Interesting

    My greatest fear in life is forgetting important things - forgetting what makes me wake up every morning, forgetting the good in people, forgetting those close to me. I know some old people for whom I'd gladly shed off years of my life if it meant they could touch more people the way they touched me. Alzheimer's has always been the one thing that I've prayed they could avoid. So, I ask you Slashdotters - do you know of any way I can help here? Can I donate money to this cause somehow? What can _I_ do?

    1. Re:Is there any way I can help? by Macrosoft0 · · Score: 0

      i agree completely. the past is what has shaped my personality and made me who i am. if i can't remember the past, its almost like it never happened. if i don't have that past experience to influence my behavior, then i am not acting like myself, but more like a completely different person. if so, i am not myself, only a stranger.

      --
      stuff
    2. Re:Is there any way I can help? by Puff+of+Logic · · Score: 1

      So, I ask you Slashdotters - do you know of any way I can help here? Can I donate money to this cause somehow? What can _I_ do? Well, it's probably not feasible for you to single-handedly contribute significant funding to such a cause, and I believe organisations already exist to solicit charitable donations to help those afflicted with Alzheimer's. If you feel as strongly about eradicating such biological horrors as Alzheimer's as you seem to, might I suggest you take a somewhat longer view and volunteer your time trying to get the next generation of students excited about science? Work is already in full swing on many of our current diseases but doubtless further problems will arise. An investment of your time towards getting some younger folks interested in science as a career could pay future dividends well in excess of a monetary donation now.

      For the record, I very much empathise with your sentiments. I also had something of an epiphany concerning the misery inflicted upon humanity as a result of disease and injury. I chose to switch careers, started volunteering for events like Cool Science and other such pro-science activities, and I'm halfway through the application process for medical school. I realised that discussing the world's problems on Slashdot was all well and good, but it was far better to stand up and actually try to help fix some of them. Good luck.
      --
      P.P.S. I'm doing Science and I'm still alive.
  19. mod parent up! by deftcoder · · Score: 1

    Nice... hope the mods see you.

    --
    Peace sells, but who's buying?
  20. Mod Parent Up by selain03 · · Score: 1

    roflroflrofl

  21. Re:what so horrifying about it? by Sunburnt · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You don't feel any "suffering", and even if you did,you wouldn't remember it.

    First off, that's not exactly true, as a couple other commenters have indicated.

    Secondly: it's not all about you. I said it's a terrible disease for society. That means not only the people who descend into grey terrors and death, but the loved ones who must bear with them through their suffering. People who will never suffer from Alzheimer's benefit from this research as well.

    --
    Tags != Comments, and -1 (Troll) != -1 (I Would Respond Angrily To This Poster So They Must Be Trolling)
  22. Breast Implants Relieve Alzheimer's Damage? by jmitchel!jmitchel.co · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    What a Country!

  23. Bug compatibility by pablodiazgutierrez · · Score: 1

    Am I the only one who read "receive" instead of "relieve"?

  24. Horrifying thought by symbolset · · Score: 1

    3 Billion men alert vital and virile well into their 100's. That should be good for the planet.

    Not that I would turn it down myself...

    --
    Help stamp out iliturcy.
    1. Re:Horrifying thought by Sunburnt · · Score: 2, Insightful

      3 Billion men alert vital and virile well into their 100's. That should be good for the planet.
      We're already at 3 billion men (and over 3 billion women, for that matter.) "Vital" and "virile" might be a longshot, and unrelated to the research in question, but "alert" (or "not senile") probably wouldn't be a negative.
      --
      Tags != Comments, and -1 (Troll) != -1 (I Would Respond Angrily To This Poster So They Must Be Trolling)
  25. The bright side of alzheimers by Cyko_01 · · Score: 0, Troll
    Do they really want to remember?!

    Sometimes Alzheimer works as a coping mechanism. When they are in a nursing home, is it beneficial to there sanity to remember how yesterday was exactly the same as today? It helps them forget how miserable there life is and it makes every day as interesting as the last. They are always making new friends. They always have a "new" story to tell when someone comes to visit (even if they have heard it a million times). The visitors have someone that they can talk to because they won't remember it the next day anyways. It's like having a crazy old therapist!

    Maybe we should consider all aspects before we go and play god. Do we really know what's best for the elderly?
    1. Re:The bright side of alzheimers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Idiot. You don't just lose your short term memory, what happened the day before. You lose long term memory, which is everything. Every thing you've seen, everyone you know, every skill you have, everything you've ever done. They don't make "new friends" because they've forgotten how interact socially. They don't "tell stories" because they've forgotten them all, or forgotten how to speak at all. I lost a grandmother to Alzheimers (and I give thanks that her biggest risk factor was head trauma so my mom, my brother, and I are unlikely to go through the same thing) and it was an nightmare for me, and I wasn't even responsible for her care! Read the goddamn wiki before spouting off garbage like that.

    2. Re:The bright side of alzheimers by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1
      You think Alzheimers is so wonderful? You could achieve similar results right now with a lobotomy. No? Not for you?

      Also, consider the burden removed from family and caretakers if Alzheimer's is cured. One of the main reasons people are in nursing homes is brain degradation, Alzheimers or Parkinsons mostly. Fix the brain, and the body is better able to take care of itself: fewer people in nursing homes.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    3. Re:The bright side of alzheimers by RembrandtX · · Score: 1

      Yeah .. a coping mechanism. I mean .. remembering who you, your children, your wife, your family are .. how bothersome.
      Remembering how to walk, dress yourself, and ultimately .. how to breathe or keep your heart beating .. how tedious.

      My grandfather had alzheimers for about 15 years, ultimately he died in a VA hospital, with family all around him. Weeks prior, he had shouted at people [including his wife and daughters] that they were keeping him from his family against his will. At the end he could not even do that, as he had forgotten how to talk. His liver and kidneys shut down, and eventually, his brain forgot how to keep his heart beating.

      We should stop and consider how cruel it is to remember things before we go about treating alzheimers.

      Thats kind of like saying everyone should get cancer, you know .. to teach them all to stop driving so fast.

      --

      --Ne auderis delere orbem rigidum meum, non erravi pernicose!
    4. Re:The bright side of alzheimers by vidarh · · Score: 3, Informative
      Seriously, if that's an attempt at a joke it's extremely tasteless.

      Both my grandmothers have/had Alzheimers. The first couple of years they still recognized us, though their short term memory went within months and got to the point where at any visit you'd have to remind them who you were several times (then they'd still recognize us) and they'd ask the same questions over and over again and promptly forget the conversation.

      But then, pretty soon they were unable to recognize anyone. Including their spouses who they'd lived with for decades; including their children.

      Beyond that it took a couple of years before they eventually lost the ability to speak, and were sitting around just looking. We've been "lucky" - neither of them got aggressive. Aggression is a common effect of Alzheimers.

      My paternal grandmother was in hospital for a couple of years with some level of memory, and then sat like a vegetable in a nursing home for about eight years before she died. She was unable to speak, and recognized noone during all of those eight years.

      But the worst part is that when we found out they had Alzheimers, you could see the symptoms going back several years - suddenly lots of strange incidents made sense -, and they must have known something was badly wrong, but tried to hide it. Alzheimers scare the shit out of people and a lot of people getting it try to hide their memory loss as best they can because they're ashamed or scared until it gets so bad they can't function.

      Frankly, if I get Alzheimers and there's still not a cure, I hope I realize early enough to kill myself.

    5. Re:The bright side of alzheimers by bcwright · · Score: 1

      Exactly what makes you think that most of the "sameness" of every day at a nursing home isn't caused by diseases such as Alzheimer's?! True, many of the residents have serious physical problems that may preclude their living alone, but physical disabilities don't prevent you from doing a lot of interesting and varied activities that just don't require a lot of physical activity - reading, talking, playing Scrabble, even surfing the Net (yes there are some older adults who do exactly that).

      Sorry if this sounds too rude, but your post sounds as if you haven't spent much time around older people who have found themselves in that situation.

    6. Re:The bright side of alzheimers by jafac · · Score: 1

      Well, there's Alzheimer's, and then there's Senile Dementia, and the two can actually be independent syndromes, affecting the same person at different times. Senile Dementia is usually much less severe, progresses over a much longer period of time. It's also more of a description of a set of symptoms, than a diagnosis of a condition. All of my grandparents had Senile Dementia but not Alzheimer's- and my mother's starting to show signs in her 70's. She knows it. One of the problems with SD is stubborn, fiesty, denial.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
  26. Removing amyloid. by Climate+Shill · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There's been a method for removing amyloid plaques from the brain since 2002. Elan Pharmaceuticals produced a vaccine which stimulated the immune system to produce antibodies against amyloid. Unfortunately, it's a cure, and cures are bad for business, so Elan abandoned it.

    1. Re:Removing amyloid. by flyingfsck · · Score: 1

      Well, if the vaccine kill the patients, then I suppose that can be called a 'cure' in some perverted way.

      I'm not afraid of death. I have been dead for billions of years before I was born.

      --
      Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    2. Re:Removing amyloid. by Climate+Shill · · Score: 1

      Well, if the vaccine kill the patients [...]

      Which it doesn't. Or was that some kind of joke I didn't get ?

    3. Re:Removing amyloid. by pclminion · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm not afraid of death. I have been dead for billions of years before I was born.

      A bit off topic, but I wanted to respond to this. Think about it. Before you existed, there were billions of years of nothing. And presumably, after you die, another eternity of nothing. So basically the world looks like this:

      Nothing... Nothing... Nothing... flyingfsck exists... Nothing... Nothing... Nothing.

      Notice that "flyingfsck" is special in this scenario -- he (she?) is the one who comes into being, and then dies. I ask you, what the heck is so special about YOU? Why is it YOU who flashes into existence for a brief few years and then disappears?

      The answer is, there's nothing special at all about you. Which means the whole idea that your existence was preceded by "nothingness" and followed by "nothingless" must be inherently flawed. Just something to think about.

    4. Re:Removing amyloid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It did, in a few cases - from massive brain inflammation due to an immune system over-response. Safer versions of the vaccine are being developed, as well as dozens of other approaches to removing amyloid beta plaques from the brain.

      As previous posters have indicated though, amyloid beta buildup may be a symptom rather than a cause of Alzheimer's disease.

    5. Re:Removing amyloid. by MLease · · Score: 1

      How do you get from here to there? As far as I can tell, his philosophy is more or less, "The universe got along fine without me for billions of years, and will do the same after I'm gone." (which is basically my own position). He didn't say anything about being special or nothingness preceding or following his existence; he merely observed that he's not afraid of death because he was, in effect, in that same state before.

      -Mike

      --
      I'm sorry; I don't know what I was thinking!
    6. Re:Removing amyloid. by Climate+Shill · · Score: 1

      Cite ? I remember it as 18 out of 300 test subjects suffering inflammation, with none dying. The worst I've been able to find is a 72 year only whose inflammation "probably hastened" her death. For a disease with 100% mortality untreated, that's not an unacceptable risk.

    7. Re:Removing amyloid. by pclminion · · Score: 1

      How do you get from here to there? As far as I can tell, his philosophy is more or less, "The universe got along fine without me for billions of years, and will do the same after I'm gone." (which is basically my own position). He didn't say anything about being special or nothingness preceding or following his existence; he merely observed that he's not afraid of death because he was, in effect, in that same state before.

      I'm not making a comment on the fellow's ego. It just stimulates me to think. If there's nothing special about me, then there is nothing special about the "nothingness" which both precedes and follows me. And yet, I exist, as a conscious being. This leads me to believe that what "follows me" in this life is not an eternity of nothingness, but more consciousness. Not my own, since "I" no longer exist, but consciousness, first person existence, none the less. My point is, by believing that our lives are followed by nothingness, we defy the basic statistics of the universe.

    8. Re:Removing amyloid. by bcwright · · Score: 1

      First of all, as far as I've seen the vaccine is NOT a cure in the sense of reversing the effects and restoring lost mental function, but at most of halting the progression - though even that is still under evaluation, since it's by no means clear that simply removing the plaque is enough to stop the disease process. Not that a treatment that halted the progression of the disease wouldn't be a very good thing, but it's not the same thing as a cure.

      Secondly, the vaccine has NOT been abandoned, as far as I can find; instead there is work ongoing to try to reduce potentially dangerous side effects such as inflammation.

      Thirdly, in what sense would a cure be "bad for business"?! Pharmaceutical firms are not even in the nursing home business which is the primary cost of care for end-stage Alzheimer's. In fact they could stand to make a good deal of money if a cure could be found!

    9. Re:Removing amyloid. by juhaz · · Score: 1

      Thirdly, in what sense would a cure be "bad for business"?! A cure is one-shot deal. Once you're cured, you're cured and no longer cash cow. Bad for business.

      In fact they could stand to make a good deal of money if a cure could be found! Only if it's cure or nothing, but when you're comparing a cure and treatment it's pretty obvious which makes good deal more money. One injection, or one daily for twenty years?
    10. Re:Removing amyloid. by milwcoder · · Score: 1

      There's also tremendous value to business to be the first one to find a cure for AD. Maybe their existing drugs will become obsolete, but exclusive patents will feed the company for years to come, not to mention all the accolades and awards that come with the accomplishment. In a competitive market, which I believe the "innovate-or-go-under" drug industry is pretty damn near, this type of collusion to stop inventing treatments can hardly be pulled off.

    11. Re:Removing amyloid. by bcwright · · Score: 1

      A cure is one-shot deal. Once you're cured, you're cured and no longer cash cow. Bad for business. [...] when you're comparing a cure and treatment it's pretty obvious which makes good deal more money. One injection, or one daily for twenty years?

      There isn't even a particularly useful treatment, pharmaceutical or otherwise, for Alzheimer's, let alone a cure - so your argument is specious on its face.

      Besides, the pharmaceutical industry as a whole is by no means averse to producing curative drugs; that's what antibiotics and vaccines are, for example. The pharmaceutical industry isn't a single monolithic company or some kind of corporate cooperative; if one of them can produce a drug that's useful, they stand to make a good deal of money from it even if it just requires a one-time dose (the price of the drug will probably just be set higher in that case).

      You can argue that they often prefer to fund development for drugs that are treatment-oriented rather than cure-oriented, and there may be a wee bit of truth in that, but if they have a treatment-oriented product and their competitor in the next city or halfway around the world comes up with a cure (or even just a significantly better treatment) the value of their product has just gone almost to zero overnight. Where's the profit in that!?

      Besides, they don't always have the luxury of making a conscious decision about whether a new product will be curative or merely long-term treatment; they have to follow where the science is leading. If current research is suggesting a likely approach for cure, it would be stupid for a company to abandon work on curative drugs in favor of drugs that were long-term treatment only, because as noted above as soon as the curative treatment (pharmaceutical or otherwise) became available, most of the value of their investment would be wiped out overnight.

      I think if you take off your tinfoil hat you'll find that the world doesn't work the way you think it does. Very rarely can you find these vast conspiracies that you imply.

    12. Re:Removing amyloid. by geekoid · · Score: 1

      "Unfortunately, it's a cure, and cures are bad for business, ..."
      Not true at all. a simple cursory look at the pharmaceutical industry and it become very obvious that a cure ahs more profitability in the long run, and in the short run.
      Facts:
      1) People running large corporations are concerned about making money NOW.
      If a cure is found, that could rake in billions in profit a few short years. Meaning that the executives get big FAT bonuses, the CEO gets even a BIGGER fat bonus, and share holders get more money. So everyones short term interest is fulfilled with getting a cure.

      2) Treatments take longer to make a profit, and the patents run out.
      This mean it takes longer for the executives to make money, and when they start to turn a nice profit, there patents run out and the need to compete in the market. Which means it costs more, and the drug needs to get cheaper.

      Which do you think is more likely?
      Making some money over 17 years, or make more money in 3 years?
      Greed is the reason they WANT cures. They could get 8-10 grand a cure or this disease, and insurance companies would gladly pay it.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    13. Re:Removing amyloid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a retarded statement. Any drug company would fall on their knees to produce a Alzheimer's cure, which would be one of the biggest drug blockbusters of all time, especially for a company like Elan, which has yet to make a profit in its corporate history.

      Elan pulled the vaccine (AN-1792) because of immune flares in the brain, which indicated that the vaccine was causing the immune system to too vigorously attack the amyloid proteins. They now have a successor candidate, AAB-001, which consists of the actual amyloid antibodies, rather than being a vaccine that stimulates the immune system to produce the antibodies. It did so well in Phase II testing that it is being moved early to Phase III (the final step required by the FDA) by the end of this year.

    14. Re:Removing amyloid. by yourlord · · Score: 1

      Our matter and energy have always existed and will exist after you and I both die. In the vast expanse of infinite time, that matter and energy has and will exist in infinite forms and configurations. Our body and conscience is just a product of how our matter and energy are currently configured right now. There is nothing more "special" about how it is right now than it will be 5 trillion years from now when it's dispersed across galaxies.. Your conscience only matters in the context of you and your relationship with other beings who happen to be in a similar state of existence at this particular point in time..

      It's nothing more than ignorant human ego to think we or our conscience matter any more than a speck of dust floating somewhere in interstellar space.

    15. Re:Removing amyloid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually a subset of the patients in the trials had severe brain inflammation and the trial was ended. There's a followup trial in progress now using passive immunization, where antibodies to beta amyloid are injected, instead of the active immunization, where the patients are stimulated to produce their own antibodies to beta amyloid.

      However, you're right, the patients who didn't get inflamed brains and die were helped by the vaccination. That's why people are watching the current round of trials closely, and with hope. This is actually the closest we are to a treatment.

    16. Re:Removing amyloid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You assume that that speck of dust, or interstellar space, or you yourself for that matter, exist without me. Obviously you (and it, and the other it) don't, so I should think that would make me matter a bit ;)

    17. Re:Removing amyloid. by bcwright · · Score: 1

      These are all good points, but they don't tell the whole story.

      In many cases, a curative drug will require more ground-breaking research than one that's merely an improvement on existing treatment; therefore the curative drug is likely to cost more to develop than one that's merely an improved long-term treatment. Of course, in the case of Alzheimer's, where we don't even have good treatment options, this point is moot. Nevertheless curative drugs can and have been very profitable for the pharmaceutical industry.

      For those who still don't understand, look up the Excel spreadsheet function NPV (Net Present Value), which computes the net present value of an annuity. In this case the annuity in question would be the long-term return from selling a treatment-oriented drug. If you can sell a cure for the same or greater price than the "present value" of that treatment annuity, that's a good business decision - especially since you'll never have the risk of losing most of the remaining value of the annuity because someone else developed a better drug.

    18. Re:Removing amyloid. by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Actually, before there exists there wasn't even nothing to you. There can't be nothing unless you are able to recognize something.
      Non-existence is not nothing.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    19. Re:Removing amyloid. by geekoid · · Score: 1

      "In many cases, a curative drug will require more ground-breaking research than one that's merely an improvement on existing treatment; therefore the curative drug is likely to cost more to develop than one that's merely an improved long-term treatment."

      yes, but it's a cure you can charge 500+ times the price.

      It also assume someone running a company will sacrifice getting money for themselves now in order to get money for the company later, when someone else is running the company.

      Even if there is a chance the company will make a lot more money in 17 years, it still requires the people running, and the shareholders, to put off immediate greater personal gain.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    20. Re:Removing amyloid. by Physician · · Score: 1

      You're special because Jesus died in your place and if you believe in Jesus you will never die the second death.

      --
      Does God treat us as servants or friends? Check my homepage.
    21. Re:Removing amyloid. by bcwright · · Score: 1

      yes, but it's a cure you can charge 500+ times the price.

      Possibly. It would depend on a number of factors: How good are the long-term treatment options? How expensive are they? What's the expected life span of those who have the disease, given both options? What are the side effects and risks associated with each treatment? If it's a disease that happens late in life - like Alzheimer's - and there are treatment options that aren't too awful (not the case right now with Alzheimer's, I know, but taking it as an example of a disease that primarily affects the elderly), then people - that is, insurance companies and Medicare - may be less willing to plunk down a huge chunk of change for someone who may only have a few years left. But even if that multiplication factor is excessive, you're certainly correct that in general there would be a willingness to pay more - possibly even a lot more - for a cure than there would for long-term treatment.

      Even if there is a chance the company will make a lot more money in 17 years, it still requires the people running, and the shareholders, to put off immediate greater personal gain.

      Anyone looking at the company's books - which will naturally include any serious investors - will be looking at the combined Net Present Value of their intellectual property, as well as risks to it from potential competitors, lawsuits, etc. Certainly everyone would like to go for the immediate big win, but in fact most drugs aren't in that category and it's quite routine for pharmaceutical companies and investors to be looking at the expected revenue streams from their portfolio of products and for those to be factored into the company's overall valuation.

      I don't think we disagree very much - I just don't think it's quite as cut-and-dried as you make it sound. But clearly the posters who are claiming that drug companies are unwilling to look for cures because it's "bad for business" need to take some courses in basic economics and investing.

  27. Frailness getting solved piecemeal by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

    The frailness of age is still not solved with it, but it will make healthcare even more costly as all people getting older will demand this or other costly cures.

    This is one piece of solving the frailness of age. Solve enough of them and "old age" is no longer frail.

    Solve enough more and it is indistinguishable from healthy youth.

    Which IS the idea after all.

    Meanwhile, the cost of caring for an alzheimer's patient is astronomical. If you can do a one-shot procedure (even a very expensive one) which (at a minimum) arrests the progression of the damage and lets the victim continue independent living rather than being institutionalized under continuous skilled care, the overall cost of treating the disease will plummet.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  28. Not to be rude... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But do people that have Alzheimer's actually want to know that they are dying? My Grandmother had it and I have to say it was terrible to watch it happening. Sure I would have loved for her not to have it but she did seem really happy though, for someone that was dying...

  29. Re:what so horrifying about it? by Palpitations · · Score: 1

    In the past, I've worked in group homes for those with developmental and other disabilities. Our clients had ailments ranging from muscular dystrophy, to Tourette's, to Down's Syndrome, to echolalia, to schizophrenia, to Alzheimer's, to a huge range of other things (typically a combination of some of the above). I worked with them 40 hours a week, day in and day out. My duties included the basic day to day care of these folks. Bathing them. Giving them showers. Dressing them. Cooking for them, or connecting their feeding tubes if they were unable to eat solid foods. Making sure they took their meds. And being there for them when they were confused or upset, and needed someone. To put a personal touch on my comments - my parents were basically too busy to care for me. and my grandmother essentially raised me. In recent years, she has had several small strokes, and is now dealing with Alzhiemer's. My experience is limited, I will admit that. But I have seen more than most. Alzhiemer's is a horrible condition. But I have never seen anyone feel depressed from it for more than a few hours at a time. Paranoid? Upset? Certainly. Confused? Almost always. Even hostile at times. But depression seems to be limited to very brief amounts of time... And once it passes, the people I've had contact with have never had any memories of feeling bad. I don't mean to belittle the feelings of those who suffer from what is, by all accounts, a horrible disease. But in all honesty, depression is something that seems to be much more common in those close to the people who are actually suffering the disease itself. Most people I have known who have had Alzhiemer's could be best described as ambivalent. Of course, your mileage my vary.

  30. Re:what so horrifying about it? by Palpitations · · Score: 1

    Damn it. Sorry for responding to myself. I just wanted to appologize for the wall of text. Too much time on other forums where I don't need to put in the line break tags has me slacking today

    I blame the 11 beers prior to my post, and my lack of the ability to use the preview button :(

    Mod parent -1 sucks at formatting.

  31. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Informative

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  32. Re:what so horrifying about it? by leenks · · Score: 1

    My father in law was diagnosed 4 years ago with it. At the time he was still driving, but he was forgetting things, and shortly afterwards he lost the ability to speak coherently. Now he can't speak *at all*, he cannot feed or dress himself, he cannot walk, use the toilet, etc. However, he has flashes where he's quite obviously there - he'll call you over and point at your chin and then tap your nose etc. So he probably does know what situation he's in - he certainly did when it was diagnosed and in the stages leading up to his current condition. Massively degrading.

  33. You really have never seen this, have you? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have to say that that is one of the most naive comments I have ever read on Slashdot. I can only assume that you've never seen anyone degenerate due to Alzheimers. It is truly horrendous for the sufferer, and their loved ones. Read some of the experiences posted on this thread: it's an atrocious disease that turns once bright, sparkling people into senseless automata but what is so upsetting is the brief periods of absolute lucidity where, nine times out of ten, the sufferer just begs for help.

    Alheimers is not a coping mechanism. Your little tale about "always having a new story" really is bordering on the offensive.

    Oh, and how appropriate - the Captcha for this post is "declines". Sums the disease up nicely.

  34. Re:what so horrifying about it? by vidarh · · Score: 2, Insightful
    If you have worked in group homes, you have mostly seen people in the late stages of Alzheimers, not the often years of declining faculties that go before that, when memory has still not gone so much that they can't function and work around it, but with the downside that many of them constantly still know exactly what is happening to them.

    Alzheimers is associated with a lot of depression and also with a lot of really aggressive behavior for those reasons.

    Neither of my grandmothers seemed depressed about it for long after they were diagnosed. But by then they'd started declining so rapidly, and lost so much of their memory, that they were essentially "gone" - their lives were reduced to five minute sliding windows of attention combined with some remnants of their long term memory, and they quickly lost that too.

    Those weren't the horrible years for them. They five or so years before that were the bad ones, and we only realized how bad it was once we got the diagnosis and started thinking back to how they'd behaved over those preceding years.

    But for both of them they were terrified for weeks or months around the time when their functional level got so low that they needed to be taken into care. My grandfather on my moms side had to struggle for a couple of months to get my grandmother to agree to even see a doctor when they both knew what was happening, and had to struggle for further weeks to get her admitted, as she kept refusing.

  35. Why? by nickthecook · · Score: 1

    Why would you want to relive Alzheimer's damage?

    Sick bastards.

  36. No bright side by alohatiger · · Score: 1

    Alzheimer's is not the nice, pleasant daily amnesia you think it is. Three times a week a take my mom to visit my step-dad at an Alzheimer's care facility. Many of the residents don't speak, some speak in non-nonsensical sentences and some mutter gibberish. A few of them seem "normal" for a minute or two until you realize they aren't "all there."

    For some the effect isn't memory so much as panic and anxiety. Some get aggressive. These are kept in a medicated stupor. While it seems unfair to use drugs this way, I think it's better than the alternative.

    TFA gives me a little hope because my mom is already on drugs to treat her dementia. She's OK now, but I'm always watching her closely and wondering when I'll be visiting her instead of taking her to visit.

    --
    Bigtime Consulting - "We're the best because we cost the most"
  37. I was going to make a wonderfully elegant comment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .... but I can't remember what I was going to say.

  38. Knowing you know by axlash · · Score: 1

    First up, I appreciate the responses giving by posters who have witnessed first hand the trauma of Alzheimer's sufferers.

    I wonder if it would make any difference if very early on in life, a person became aware of what Alzheimer's was all about and resolved that if it should ever happen to them, they would calmly accept it. Then later on in life, if they began to experience the symptoms of memory loss, they would still have this memory of resolving to accept Alzheimer's if it should ever afflict them - and perhaps this memory would help them deal with the illness.

    --
    Deal with reality - the world as it is - rather than ideality - the world as you would like it to be.
  39. how often is it misdiagnosed mad cow? by cmdr_tofu · · Score: 1

    another unfortunate thing about alzheimers is it could often
    be misdiagnosed. Since we don't test for CJD in this country,
    we will never know :(

    I wonder if the occurence of Alzheimer's is lower in countries that
    do test (like England).

    Both diseases are awful, but it appears there is some relationship:
    http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0107-07.htm

    1. Re:how often is it misdiagnosed mad cow? by bcwright · · Score: 1

      The referenced article is very interesting; there may well be a fair number of misdiagnoses.

      However the estimates in the article seem to indicate that the incidence of CJD that has been misdiagnosed as Alzheimer's cannot be much higher than around 10-15% of dementia-related deaths, and likely much lower, possibly even in the 1-2% range. So I would doubt that misdiagnosis of CJD would have a huge effect on the reported rate of Alzheimer's. Still that's potentially a lot of people dying from CJD, far higher than the rate that's usually been taken for granted, and translates to thousands of deaths per year rather than a couple hundred.

      We don't do routine autopsies any more but we do enough so that if the proportion of CJD deaths were very high - say, 40-50% or more of dementia-related deaths - we'd know about it by now. We'd even be likely to know it if the percentage were only 15-20%. But there are few enough of the CJD deaths that it might be possible to miss some important trends relating to that disease.

      What I found more interesting were some of the indications that Alzheimer's itself might also be a prion-induced disease. Generally the disease course in Alzheimer's is quite a bit slower than with either classic CJD or new variant CJD (aka "mad cow" disease) and the neuropathologies are different (although sometimes overlapping), so it seems probable that it isn't caused by the same agent although they could certainly share similarities.

      Could many currently mysterious chronic diseases in fact be prion-related?

    2. Re:how often is it misdiagnosed mad cow? by kethos · · Score: 1

      We do test for CJD in this country. The Memory and Aging Center at UCSF has a group dedicated to CJD clinical trials and studies. http://memory.ucsf.edu/

  40. So is this "trolling" or "flamebait", I'm new here by Loosifur · · Score: 0

    Dude, seriously!?

      That's like saying that the upshot to AIDS is that you lose weight! Alzheimer's isn't like just being a little forgetful, where every day is some sort of new, fun adventure a la some Disney movie. Just taking the loss of memory aspect, try to imagine what it might be like to wake up in a room and not know where you are or how you got there. Or to be surrounded by total strangers who act like they're family. Or to forget who you are entirely. Knowing all the while that you used to remember these things and the next day you'll remember even less. That's like saying polio is a coping mechanism for a sprained ankle.

    *tosses cookie to troll

    --
    This unbiased moderation brought to you by the Porcine Aviation Group!
  41. Yes, but... by tchdab1 · · Score: 1

    ...are the de-plaqued mice now able to read the paper, recognize their grandchildren, and cook and clean after themselves? If not, what's the point?

    1. Re:Yes, but... by Tsuki_no_Hikari · · Score: 1

      Point is that they would no longer be able to read less of the paper, recognize fewer of their grandchildren, and be able to learn to cook and clean after themselves again, as well as start to regain lost memories with relatives and not fear losing them again. That is the point.

  42. Re:what so horrifying about it? by Jim_Maryland · · Score: 1

    My grandmother is currently in an assisted living environment but not for long. Her Alzheimer's has gotten much worse over the last couple of months. She definitely showed signs of depression more when she was in the early stages. She would frequently say things at holidays like "this will probably be my last ". I think the family chalked most of that up to her living alone and her friends "passing on" initially but in hind sight, I believe it was related to the Alzheimer's. This is such a cruel disease for both the individual and the family dealing with them.

  43. unfortunately by m2943 · · Score: 1

    Unfortunately, when applied to humans, the cure produces side effects like scurrying around the kitchen floor, a craving for cheese, and producing squeaks instead of intelligible speech.

  44. I have coworkers who need brain implants. by joe_n_bloe · · Score: 1

    That's what I thought this article was about at first. Oh well, I'll keep hoping.

    1. Re: I have coworkers who need brain implants. by joe_n_bloe · · Score: 1

      (Actually, my current coworkers are pretty cool. Just in case one of them reads this.)

  45. Questions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How the heck does this work?

    The Harvard team used skin cells from the animal's own body to introduce a gene for an amyloid-busting enzyme known as neprilysin. The skin cells, also known as fibroblasts, "do not form tumors or move from the implantation site

    So they're implanting a gene that causes an enzyme to form that breaks down this plaque-like protein. These genes are implanted into skin cells, which are returned to the body (presumably to the skin), where according to the article, they don't move. So how does this affect the brain? It's not leukocytes or something else mobile. Is the enzyme released naturally into the blood stream? If so, is it possible to have some side-effects, too? The Wikipedia article says it attacks several different small proteins

    They cause no detectable adverse side effects and can easily be taken from a patient's skin.

    I assume what they're saying here is that removing the patch of modified skin stops the treatment? So you can remove this kind of like you can remove a drug patch?

    In addition, other genes can be added to the fibroblast-neprilysin combo, which will eliminate the implants if something starts to go wrong.

    I don't have a clue what this is. Anybody know? An additional gene which eliminates the neprilysin gene in response to a chemical trigger? If the neprilysin-enhanced gene can "start to go wrong," how do they know this gene can't?

    These toxic clumps, along with accessory tangled fibers, kill brain cells and interfere with memory and thinking...Delivery of genes that led to production of an enzyme that breaks up amyloid showed robust clearance of plaques in the brains of the mice

    Ok, I'll finish with two more straightforward questions:

    It sounds like this does not cure Alzheimers (reverse the damage, return brain function, etc), but would theoretically stop further damage, correct?

    Would it be possible to simply synthesize neprilysin outside the body and inject it as a treatment?

  46. If I ever needed brain donor... by Dareth · · Score: 1

    If I ever needed a brain donor, I would want it to be you. I after all prefer my brains relatively new and unused!

    --

    I only look human.
    My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
    1. Re:If I ever needed brain donor... by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      It would almost be worth it just to see them put a brain in a dick.