Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Researchers Find Genetic Cause For Alzheimer's, Possible Method To Reverse It (upi.com)

Posted by EditorDavid on from the reversing-researchers dept.

schwit1 quotes UPI: Scientists at an independent biomedical research institution have reported a monumental breakthrough: The cause of the primary genetic risk factor for Alzheimer's disease, and a possible cure for the disease. Researchers at Gladstone Institutes in San Francisco identified the primary genetic risk factor for the disease, a gene called apoE4... Their findings were published this week in the journal Nature Medicine... By treating human apoE4 neurons with a structure corrector, it eliminated the signs of Alzheimer's disease, restored normal function to the cells and improved cell survival.
The study's senior investigator says he's already working with a San Francisco pharmaceutical startup to develop the approach and move towards clinical trials, adding that "we are working to accelerate the timeline as much as possible."

113 comments

  1. old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    This is old news I heard as a child. Here I recently discovered the cure for Alzheimer's but just seem to have forgot it.

    1. Re:old news by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Any such article sounds encouraging, but from the article linked there is no way to gain any sense of how likely this 'new' information will lead to a cure, if it is indeed even correct.

      Alzheimer's is a big deal, so if this is correct we'll see a lot more attention on it.

    2. Re:old news by olsmeister · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Do we even want a cure? Alzheimers generates a lot of revenue....

    3. Re: old news by alvinrod · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It hardly matters. Old people will eventually spend all of that money on some other medical condition. Unless you have a cure for old age in general, people will still have to face that after decades, their bodies are getting worn down. That means spending more and more money to keep it afloat or just accepting death.

    4. Re: old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Alzheimers can impact people at any age, it just so happens to happen more often later in life - like cancer.

      More interestingly, there is some recent debate that alzheimers might be a 3rd form of diabetes.

    5. Re:old news by Scutter · · Score: 4, Informative

      I've lost two close family members to Alzheimers. It's one of the cruelest diseases I've ever seen. Yes, we want a damn cure.

      --

      "Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
    6. Re: old news by alvinrod · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It still matters not one bit. Unless the main cause of death becomes accidents with near complete and instant fatality, eventually a person gets sick and needs expensive medical care. Instead of big pharma selling you meds for Alzheimers, they sell you meds for something else.

    7. Re:old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep. If the headline was accurate this would be on the front page of every news outlet on earth.

    8. Re:old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It also means those people are no longer earning. Cure them of alzheimers so they can build up savings for another 5-10 years before they get cancer and then you drain them of everything.

    9. Re: old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a ridiculous statement. Do you even understand how statistics works a little bit? Let's use my grandparents as examples. We'll throw out my paternal grandfather, because he was shot at a young age. My paternal grandmother had alzheimers and required a lengthy (around 5 years) nursing home stay. So throw out that too. My maternal grandfather died of a massive heart attack shoveling snow, zero cost. My maternal grandmother died at 91 during what was supposed to be a routine operation. Very little cost.

      If my paternal grandmother had any of the other death types other than her alzheimers, it would have saved society 5 years of nursing home stay an meds, treatment, etc. Probably pushing $1m dollars. And this cost was borne 100% by Medicaid - you and me. She didn't have a penny to her name.

    10. Re: old news by thomst · · Score: 5, Insightful

      alvinrod shrugged dismissively:

      It hardly matters. Old people will eventually spend all of that money on some other medical condition. Unless you have a cure for old age in general, people will still have to face that after decades, their bodies are getting worn down. That means spending more and more money to keep it afloat or just accepting death.

      "It hardly matters" to you - for the moment.

      Wait until someone you care about develops Alzheimer's (this, of course, assumes you care about anyone other than yourself), and you have to deal with their progressive mental deterioration on a personal level. I can tell you from my personal experience that watching my mother steadily turn into a frightened, confused, paranoid sketch of herself, conversing with whom eventually became little more than an exercise in listening to a skipping record - constantly getting lost before she reached the end of a sentence, repeating the same "news" several dozen times in a half-hour phone call - was profoundly heart-rending.

      To focus exclusively on the financial cost of the disease (and you are completely off-base even there, since Alzheimer's can require up to a decade or so of residential, supervised care before it becomes fatal in and of itself) and completely ignore the human one is profoundly callous, at best.

      I'm not going to say, "I hope it happens to someone you love," because I wouldn't wish Alzheimer's on anyone. But I surely am tempted ...

      --
      Check out my novel.
    11. Re: old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Progressives spend food-money on thumb-fucking monkeys. Unless you have a methods to force progressive to eat liver and onions might as well just shoot them dead. On wait ... I mean run a 3-week hunting season in January with 2-scalp bag-limits.

    12. Re: old news by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 2

      Wait until someone you care about develops Alzheimer's (this, of course, assumes you care about anyone other than yourself), and you have to deal with their progressive mental deterioration on a personal level.

      You're dealing with the politicized misanthropy movement here. They hate it when a disease is cured because it means either more young people having "too many" children, or more useless old people who should all be gassed for the benefit of Mother Gaia.

    13. Re: old news by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

      It still matters not one bit. Unless the main cause of death becomes accidents with near complete and instant fatality, eventually a person gets sick and needs expensive medical care. Instead of big pharma selling you meds for Alzheimers, they sell you meds for something else.

      And? What's wrong with spending money to improve your condition or make life more comfortable/fun?

    14. Re: old news by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Philistine.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    15. Re: old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not going to say, "I hope it happens to someone you love," because I wouldn't wish Alzheimer's on anyone. But I surely am tempted

      Well I'll say it then. I hope he gets Alzheimer's. And because he's alienated everyone that ever cared about him, I hope that he'll be at the mercy of Nurse Ratched every single day while his brain shrivels.

    16. Re:old news by umghhh · · Score: 1

      The fact that goldmansachs thinks these lousy few billions earned (after all the costs) is not worth it if it does not come yearly, shows where the problem is. The solution to it could be a license for crooking (lawyers and finance magicians) as above attached to a yearly decimation lottery so you can abuse general public as usual but once a year you have to go through the thrill of being selected to feed the lion etc. You televise or stream it and have revenue to cover costs of lions.

    17. Re: old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't understand what you mean. Progressives are always pushing to spend more on exactly this kind of research

    18. Re: old news by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      >Old people will eventually spend all of that money on some other medical condition

      Some of them. Some of them will just let it go and pass that money to the next generation.

      I wonder how do I prevent robbers in scrubs from robbing my offspring dry using my senile condition.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    19. Re: old news by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      https://www.sciencedaily.com/r...

      Insulin may be as important for the mind as it is for the body. Recent research has raised the possibility that Alzheimer's memory loss could be due to a novel third form of diabetes. Scientists have discovered why brain insulin signaling would stop working in Alzheimer's disease. They have shown that a toxic protein found in the brains of individuals with Alzheimer's removes insulin receptors from nerve cells, rendering those neurons insulin-resistant.

      Very strange abstact. In the beginning it implies that diabetes cause Alzheimer, while the last sentence indicates to the opposite.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    20. Re: old news by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      Also, Google Scholar search on this reveals only old articles, latest I have seen was 2014.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    21. Re: old news by alvinrod · · Score: 2

      I've already known people who have developed dementia or other degenerative mental conditions. Some have had their health fail for other reasons like cancer and I've known plenty who've been done in mostly by their own vices. Talk to anyone who's been around long enough and they've seen plenty of medical tragedy, either in their own life or in that of their friends and family.

      I say that it doesn't particularly matter because in the end there's going to be something that comes for you whether it's Alzheimer's, heart disease, cancer, strokes, etc. Whatever it is, it's scarcely pretty. I hope that when I go it's something quick like a sudden heart attack that did my grandfather in instead of something that's long and hell on everyone else around me. However, if he had the choice to live until whatever might kill him next, I'm pretty sure he'd pay whatever cost necessary. He simply didn't have any choice in the matter.

      Again, it doesn't really matter because even if we can cure Alzheimer's there's just something else that will kill us instead. Perhaps it will be something that won't rob us of our sense of self or destroy the person that is us, but it's just as costly in the end from a financial point. Even my grandmother who lived a long life and enjoyed relatively good health up until her death needed care providers to help her once she became incapable of completely caring for her self. That adds up over the years.

      No matter how good your health is eventually you reach a point where no amount of money can keep you alive for a second longer. Yet people desire to cling to life as much as possible. It's just not in our genes to lay down and die and if it ever was or is, those would tend not to be passed on. It's not that the medical field is particularly greedy or more so than any other business, but that people by and large are willing to spend everything they have to live just a little bit longer. I'd like to say that the ones who won't do that are the most sane among us us, but I suspect that many of them feel no reason to go on which is perhaps more tragic.

    22. Re:old news by tomhath · · Score: 1

      The study's senior investigator says he's already working with a San Francisco pharmaceutical startup to develop the approach

      from the article linked there is no way to gain any sense of how likely this 'new' information will lead to a cure

      You need to pay more attention to how /. strings you along.

      Yesterday the Goldman article was posted to stir up discussion about the evils of Big Pharma and how they don't want to cure diseases.

      Today we get this nebulous article about how some altruistic researchers from San Francisco found a cure for Alzheimer's and are working with a Silicon Valley start-up to develop it.

      If that start-up turns out to be Theranos it would be a clickbait trifecta.

    23. Re:old news by mysticgoat · · Score: 1

      I read an article about this on one of the mainstream aggregators early this morning (Either Yahoo or Google).

      If the subject was not so serious, say about athletes foot rather than Alzheimers, I would have dismissed it after the initial skim, rather than actually spending a few minutes to read it. And on reading it, I felt like, yeah, this is a huge amount of hype being built upon a very tiny foundation.

      If there is anything to it, then I am sure that there will be a more substantive article soon. This one has the aroma of a Fleischmann–Pons announcement about it.

    24. Re:old news by SNRatio · · Score: 1
      Yes, even if "we" refers to "cynical Pharmas only thinking about profit/share price":

      1. Not much of the spending on Alzheimers is for drugs, it's home and institutional care. Pharmas would much rather eat the whole pie, not just a slice.

      2. A cure would be quicker to bring to market, because trials would show efficacy much more quickly. For conditions where treatments are on the market, a cure would be given higher priority by the FDA than treatments, so that part of the process would be faster too.

      .3. Price. A cure would sell at a good multiple of the cost of a year of treatment. This would probably be true for most chronic diseases. Would you rather chare $250K per customer upfront or $50k per year for five years?

      4. Market share and marketing costs. For pretty much any chronic disease, a cure would quickly displace treatments from the market. You wouldn't have to hire a fleet of salespeople and fly doctors to resorts to get the word out either: everyone would already know about it. So profit margins would be much higher.

    25. Re: old news by SNRatio · · Score: 2

      So you don't see any value in staying non-senile for as long as possible or extending lifespan?

    26. Re: old news by i58 · · Score: 2

      Itâ(TM)s not about extending life. Alzheimerâ(TM)s doesnâ(TM)t directly kill you. You die from âoecomplicationsâ. Itâ(TM)s about preventing the years of suffering, and it IS suffering, for individuals and their families before they finally pass on. Alzheimerâ(TM)s is the waterboarding of diseases, and all the family can do is watch. Just my opinion as an ex EMT with 2 RN sisters that had to go through it with our father, so we unfortunately knew more about the disease medically speaking than most, and it didnâ(TM)t let us down in terms of how bad it could get. It sucks bigtime and needs to be researched every bit as aggressively as cancer, etc.

    27. Re: old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're forgetting the economic damage caused by pulling family members out of the workforce to look after people with chronic conditions as opposed to acute ones, even if the medica cost is the same.

    28. Re: old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your "objection" to the quote in your post is misguided.

      The author in no way meant preventing Alzheimer's didn't matter, EXCEPT in the context of medical spending by the Elderly. In fact, the author was replying to a cynical post that indicated a lack of desire to cure Alzheimer's because there is money to made managing the victims.

      Now, THAT is offensive. Pointing out that as we get older many different health concerns start taking money out of our pocket is simply being realistic.
       

    29. Re: old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you don't see any value in staying non-senile for as long as possible or extending lifespan?

      He's already there so, no he can't

    30. Re: old news by coastwalker · · Score: 1

      "Pharma" has no interest in selling old people anything. Old people die and cease to be a revenue stream so screw them. Pharma wants young and middle aged people to sell wanky placebos to for the rest of their lives. Expensive medications which reduce death over 20 years by 0.5% and form the majority of the revenue stream of "Pharma".

      --
      Facts are history now plebs have politics for religion on social media.
    31. Re: old news by mcswell · · Score: 1

      "people will still have to face that after decades, their bodies are getting worn down" Speak for yourself, you young whipper-snapper. I'm approaching the start of my 8th decade (I'm nearly 68), and I intend to keep going for awhile.

      Of course my body may disagree...

    32. Re: old news by mcswell · · Score: 1

      I'm not disagreeing with you, what you describe is certainly the most common outcome. But some people are different. My mother's ability to transfer short-term memories to long-term memory went away; the result was that she could tell you about things that happened a few minutes ago, or things that happened fifty years ago, but lost the ability to tell you what happened an hour or a day or a year ago. Believe it or not, there was actually an upside to that. My sister would take mom out to a coffee shop, and suggested that my mom order the caramel latte. When mom tasted it, she'd say, "Wow, that's good! I've never had one of those before!" Her enjoyment was new every time, and I'm sure my sister got a kick out of it.

      But as I say, that's not a common experience, and I know that mom knew her memory was not good, and it frustrated her; but she found ways to work around it, rather than rolling in despair. I hope if/when my time comes, I can cope as well as she did. (Or better, this cure is real.)

    33. Re: old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Alzheimers can impact people at any age, it just so happens to happen more often later in life - like cancer.

      More interestingly, there is some recent debate that alzheimers might be a 3rd form of diabetes.

      This has more to do with what Alzheimers is than what causes it and it is weak speculation more than anything. It is not to say that if you turn around and stop eating sugar that you suddenly cure your Alzheimers. It is not to say that if you take some huge dose of insulin your Alzheimers goes away for an hour or two.

      I have a young doctor and she is convinced I am going to end up with Alzheimers because I eat a ketogenic diet, despite the fact that in every documented case it has helped Alzheimers, Parkinson's, Epilepsy... and other nerve and brain disorders. What sort of confusion of ideas might this doctor have that would lead her to believe that in a type 1 diabetic, the laws of physics are somehow different that would make the conditions that cause brain health in every other disease, would cause Alzheimers only in the type 1 diabetic??

      This is where doctors are not out to help their patients and more on the side of lying to them to try to keep making a profit. Needless to say, I am in the market for a new doctor!

    34. Re: old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Old people will eventually spend all of that money on some other medical condition

      Some of them. Some of them will just let it go and pass that money to the next generation.

      I wonder how do I prevent robbers in scrubs from robbing my offspring dry using my senile condition.

      The point of the whole article and thread, for those of us with an IQ above 150 is that we live in a society with a fucked up medical system that has a financial incentive to keep us sick and desperate for as long as possible as it's business model. This will not do.

      The scientific workers amongst us have our work cut out for us, to understand and cure these diseases, whilst working around the science deniers among us who would have society fall so that they can make a quick buck. (LOOKING AT YOU REPUBLICANS) This is not a political post, It is quite possible for a society to exist where the hyper religious science deniers can have their own little space where they can do their little rituals and dis allow abortions and such but where the larger portion of the more intelligent of us can live in a world where the truth is respected and where people born into hyper religious families who come to the realization that the good book, is all a fairy tale, and want to grow up and live in the real world with the rest of us can turn their back on their past pathology and be forgiven for being wrong.. and can live a healthy life.

      That is not unreasonable, but of course the religious and those that have a problem with this will scream and cry like it is the devil saying it and is wrong.. and the path to damnation.. that is how you need to frame the people that will argue with my comments. This is all I have to say!

    35. Re:old news by dev-in-seattle · · Score: 1

      Do we even want a cure? Alzheimers generates a lot of revenue....

      This is something that's a real tragedy and it feels very wrong to joke about it, based even on the fact that some companies want to not cure things but reduce them to get continuing money. My grandmother had it, it was the worse thing to see her go slowly.

    36. Re: old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      your binary views on complex issues are fascinating.

    37. Re: old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your response would read better without the weirdly confrontational tone. But anyway.

      Heart attacks are often sudden death, but if you're anything like my mom, it leads to a double bypass, several stents, a tracheostomy, and years of expensive failed attempts to correct that tracheostomy.

      90% of heart attacks don't result in death. Only 10 - 20% of strokes are fatal. Cancer can take years to kill you, and the life expectancies improve all the time (and the cost increases).

      So while sudden death happens, it's not as common as one might think.

    38. Re: old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Pharma" should not be anthropomorphized. "Pharma" is a collection of tens of thousands of smart people, many of whom got into the business because they watched someone suffer and wanted to make it better.

    39. Re: old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think it does. That last part is just confusingly worded. The protein kills insulin receptors, so the cells become insulin insensitive. Insulin insensitivity is diabetes-like.

    40. Re:old news by Wycliffe · · Score: 1

      Do we even want a cure? Alzheimers generates a lot of revenue....

      In this case, the "cure" is likely monthly doses of this particular medicine for the rest of your life. This is exactly the type of "cure" that a company wants to have.
      Even in a case where you could completely cure someone, a company who sells expensive medicine for it might not have an incentive to cure it but a different company without a conflict of interest still has an incentive to develop an expensive one time cure for it.

    41. Re: old news by micahraleigh · · Score: 1

      Eventually everyone gets hungry too and then people try to sell them food.

      Are you going after these monsters who grow and sell food or what exactly?

      Or are you just openly a misanthrope?

    42. Re: old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Needless to say, I am in the market for a new doctor!

      Why, if you think you know better?

    43. Re: old news by bitterblackale · · Score: 1

      This outlook of the purpose of medicine is why America is so backwards. The point is to improve life, not lengthen it. A moment of clarity in an Alzheimer sufferer weighs as much as a year of living.

    44. Re: old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Write a really good, legally reviewed advanced directive. Have it notarized, give to your primary doctor, bring whenever you go into hospital. Make sure you nominate someone to make your medical decisions for you who understands your wishes and will enforce them for you should there come a time that you no longer can do it for yourself.

      People don't like to think about this stuff and put it off. It's actually more important than a will, imo, because you can become incapacitated due to accident, injury, or sudden bad health at any age.

      I enforced my grandfather and grandmother's living wills and then suffered through signing a DNR for my mother when she had no advance directive/living will... and the hospital where she lay dying still resussitated her 11 times in 2 days after removing the balloon pump from her heart.

      Seriously, no matter your age... write your living will /advance directive. Now!

    45. Re:old news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't give us possible methods. Just give us the solution. Stop with the click bait hope of some kind of cure or treatment to reverse diseases. The only thing that's been cured in any meaningful way is vaginal yeast infections and Athlete's foot fungus.

    46. Re: old news by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Why do you think that improving life and extending life are mutually exclusive?

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    47. Re: old news by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Many doctors are ignorant of fields that they weren't taught extensively, and are prejudiced against techniques outside their specialties. Most are almost completely ignorant about nutrition. Many uncritically believe the claims of pharmaceutical salesmen. Overall, I doubt that they're any more dishonestly profit-motivated than other professions.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    48. Re: old news by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      "Many uncritically believe the claims of pharmaceutical salesmen."

      That is their only source of information for drugs.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
  2. Quick, send some to Twitler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He seems to have forgotten that he tweeted this a while back:

    https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/373146637184401408?lang=en

    Must be Alzheimers, because we sure as shootin' know he'd never go back on his word.

    <cough>TPP</cough>

    1. Re:Quick, send some to Twitler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hillary lost. Get over it.

    2. Re: Quick, send some to Twitler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One might say, itâ(TM)s time to âoemove onâ?

    3. Re:Quick, send some to Twitler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      because we sure as shootin' know he'd never go back on his word.

      He didn't make any promises in that tweet you linked to, therefore he didn't 'go back on his word'. Now, if you are going to be mad at a politician for doing something he/she criticized others for in the past... well, you are going to have a busy day. I guess you prefer the ones that cover it up though.

    4. Re: Quick, send some to Twitler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      This is why I voted for Trump.

      A national 4 year meltdown tantrum by every left-wing autist in the country, unable to live, work, or breathe without agonizing over what Trump might have said on Twitter.

      The hilarious thing is that Trump is mostly doing the same things Hillary would have done, but with slightly less corruption and graft.

    5. Re:Quick, send some to Twitler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      because we sure as shootin' know he'd never go back on his word.

      He didn't make any promises in that tweet you linked to, therefore he didn't 'go back on his word'. Now, if you are going to be mad at a politician for doing something he/she criticized others for in the past... well, you are going to have a busy day. I guess you prefer the ones that cover it up though.

      Don't be too hard on him. He's just repeating what he heard on social media. Give him credit, he's a very useful tool.

    6. Re: Quick, send some to Twitler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Another fine example of cutting off your nose to spite your face. But cutting at the neck. You think your silly red hat will save you when it's your turn to be sold out by Trump?

      The hilarious thing is that Trump is mostly doing the same things Hillary would have done, but with slightly less corruption and graft.

      That is a load, don't fool yourself. The horrible things Hillary would have done are completely different than the horrible things Trump has done. The similar amounts of corruption and graft are immaterial.

    7. Re:Quick, send some to Twitler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hillary lost. Get over it.

      Trump can't get over it.
      He keeps reminding the faithful what a terrific incredible bigly victory it was whether he's addressing the Coast Guard, the FBI or the Boy Scouts.

    8. Re: Quick, send some to Twitler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Another fine example of cutting off your nose to spite your face. But cutting at the neck. You think your silly red hat will save you when it's your turn to be sold out by Trump?

      The hilarious thing is that Trump is mostly doing the same things Hillary would have done, but with slightly less corruption and graft.

      That is a load, don't fool yourself. The horrible things Hillary would have done are completely different than the horrible things Trump has done. The similar amounts of corruption and graft are immaterial.

      You would prefer Hillary because she would have gotten away with it and the mainstream media would not care.

    9. Re:Quick, send some to Twitler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      because we sure as shootin' know he'd never go back on his word.

      He didn't make any promises in that tweet you linked to, therefore he didn't 'go back on his word'. Now, if you are going to be mad at a politician for doing something he/she criticized others for in the past... well, you are going to have a busy day. I guess you prefer the ones that cover it up though.

      Reading comprehension not your thing? Or just reading to the end of the post? Or were you just too triggered – too much blood in your eyes, too much fever in your brain – you had to fire off a response before reading to the end of the paragraph. To say nothing of your ability to connect the dots when you're all wound up.

      Regardless, he sure as shootin' thought a president ought to get congressional approval before attacking Syria. Was that a promise? No. But it sure was an indication of what he thought was the right thing to do. But we all know that these days "the right thing to do" rarely crosses Twitler's mind.

      But literally the "going back on his word" was about TPP. (And a couple hundred other things.) But you were too triggered to see that I guess.

      That's the thing about you Twitler supporters. You're easy. Too easy. It's like taking fucking candy from a baby. So much fun.

    10. Re: Quick, send some to Twitler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everytime a trumptard opens his mouth. Everytime.

      You seem to be proud of the fact that you were willing to plunge your entire country in chaos, and possibly the world into another world war, just to piss off liberals.

      The more trumptards try to convice us that they are not morons, the more they prove exactly the opposite. Your beloved God himself thinks you're all morons, and he even told you to your face:

      "I could stand in the middle of fifth avenue and shoot someone, and people would still vote for me."

      And guess what ? You proved him right, because you fucking morons DID vote for him.

      So enjoy your last remaining years in power. Because when the next elections come, the backlash is gonna be so hard that we're gonna make sure that red-state shallow-end-of-the-gene-pool filth like you NEVER get the chance to take control of this country ever again, and for generations to come. Cockroaches belong in cracks and inside walls, and that's where we're gonna send you back crawling.

    11. Re: Quick, send some to Twitler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually I preferred neither.

    12. Re:Quick, send some to Twitler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He said Obama needed Congressional approval, then does the same action without Congress.

    13. Re: Quick, send some to Twitler by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Because when the next elections come, the backlash is gonna be so hard that we're gonna make sure that red-state shallow-end-of-the-gene-pool filth like you NEVER get the chance to take control of this country ever again, and for generations to come.

      Wow, what a winning campaign strategy. It's the cheeriness, inclusiveness and optimism in your post that really makes me want to vote for you.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    14. Re: Quick, send some to Twitler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you prefer Trump because now you feel empowered to rape underage girls.

      Trumptard filth.

    15. Re: Quick, send some to Twitler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, horrible things like not tried to take away people's access to affordable health care.

      Or not passing a monster tax cut for the rich? Ol' Paul "Balanced Budget" Ryan bent over for that one, didn't he? And now he's going to bow out, like the fucking coward he is, before getting his ass handed to him on a platter in the midterms. He went to college on this dad's social security benefit and then tries to take away everyone else's Social Security. What an asswipe.

      Or not appointed Betsy De Vos, Ben Carson, and Scott Pruitt. People who are (further) dismantling our public education, allowing the destruction of our environment, and etc. Heck, Scott "Snowflake" Pruitt thinks he deserves to fly in First Class or on private jets to avoid people in cattle car class being "not nice to him." Imagine that. I say "suck it up Scott, you earned that particular set of wings."

      Or how's that wall shaping up? The one that Mexico was supposed to pay for. I guess by now you know you'll be paying for it; No, you don't know that your tax cut expires and your taxes go back up; but the 1%ers whose tax cut doesn't expire. They won't be paying one extra nickle for it, but you will.

      And I dunno, the FBI hasn't raided Hillary's attorney's office and home. That might count for something. Or you can keep believing the lies told on Fox and Friends.

    16. Re: Quick, send some to Twitler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is it cheeriness, inclusiveness and optimism that made you vote for Trump ? No, it's Trump insulting you and calling you morons to your face that made you vote for him. Can you blame us for trying the same strategy ?

    17. Re: Quick, send some to Twitler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you didn't vote then STFU

    18. Re: Quick, send some to Twitler by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      I didn't vote for Trump.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    19. Re: Quick, send some to Twitler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, that other story is right. Russian trolls really are out in force today.

    20. Re: Quick, send some to Twitler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course I voted, you idiot. I'll complain as much as I want to. You're right that those who fail to vote lose their right to whine about the outcome.

    21. Re:Quick, send some to Twitler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hillary lost. Get over it.

      Trump can't get over it.
      He keeps reminding the faithful what a terrific incredible bigly victory it was whether he's addressing the Coast Guard, the FBI or the Boy Scouts.

      This is an article about Alzheimer's disease, not about the 2016 election.. You clearly have Alzheimer's disease. Take your fucking meds!

  3. Now, where by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    did I place the cure. It was here a minute ago. I remember I was over here..

    1. Re:Now, where by mcswell · · Score: 1

      I have discovered a truly marvelous proof of this, which this brain is too small to contain.

  4. Sadly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This effort will be diminished by the mighty hand of adult diapers industry.

  5. Discovery? by Jarwulf · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Even as a casual reader of medical news I thought apoE has been linked to alzheimer's for years. The specific method of removing and inducing the phenotype might be the actual breakthrough but its not like they discovered apoE4 itself.

    1. Re:Discovery? by ceoyoyo · · Score: 5, Informative

      You're correct. The paper is about a cell culture model for Alzheimer's. The authors point out that lots of potential treatments seem to work on mouse models but fail miserably in humans. So they created a cell culture model using stem-cell derived human neurons. They show that neurons that express ApoE4 have various Alzheimer's-like features, and that these can be reversed by gene editing to flip the ApoE4 to another variant, or through the use of a structure-correcting drug.

      The paper is really about the cell culture model, which is very important, but it's not a new drug, and it's a long way from being an actual human.

    2. Re:Discovery? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      The paper is really about the cell culture model, which is very important, but it's not a new drug, and it's a long way from being an actual human.

      Dunno about that. There are lots of people I know that are as shallow and plastic as a petri dish.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    3. Re:Discovery? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please lay off of phantomfive.

      After all, the poor bastard has to live with being phantomfive. Isn't that ENOUGH?

  6. Re:old news -- NOT! by johnstrass1 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Part of the importance is that they use a "small molecule inhibitor" (SMI). This class of medical tins are usually easy to manufacture and ingest. In contrast, most of the other "breakthrough"molecules ave been genetically engineered proteins which are more complex. In addition, SMI drugs can be easily modified to have better profiles.

  7. cure Alzheimers by e**(i+pi)-1 · · Score: 1, Funny

    Rise of the Planet of the Apes .... (John Lithgow's character got that treatment)

  8. Re:old news -- NOT! by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 1

    Interesting. Thanks

  9. Discovery-looking over the fence. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The analogy would be the finding of the "cure" for polio. Pre-cure people couldn't be cured. While post didn't get the disease.

  10. apoE4 gene not the only cause of Alzheimer's by RNLockwood · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It's first required to detect the apoE gene and whether there are one or two copies to provide a provisional diagnosis, I guess that's not really a problem but the article doesn't say. I would guess that when patients reach some age or perhaps at birth the genetic test would be prescribed by physicians as a matter of course. What's the normal function of the gene?

    Having one copy of the apoE gene doubles and two copies multiplies by 12 the chance of contracting Alzheimer's according to the article, which implies that there are other causes of Alzheimer's and also implies that having the gene doesn't predict with any certainty that carrier will exhibit symptoms if he or she lives long enough. Never-the-less this approach appears to have great promise, probably too late to help me (I'm not yet exhibiting symptoms though despite what my detractors may allege!)

    --
    Nate
    1. Re:apoE4 gene not the only cause of Alzheimer's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you have two copies of E4 you are almost certain to develop Alzheimer's and if you don't then it's probably because E4 also causes other damage to the cardiovascular system that means you're less likely to live long enough... even if you don't reach the diagnostic threshold, as an E4/4 carrier you're almost certain to have some of the disease causing plaques in your brain by your middle age.

      This approach is currently being brought to clinical trial by a company called e-scape bio that is going to be testing these small molecule structure correctors for Alzheimer's and Parkinson diseases.

    2. Re: apoE4 gene not the only cause of Alzheimer's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      E4 affects 14% of the population. Alzheimer's affects around a third I think. So maybe a third of cases.

    3. Re:apoE4 gene not the only cause of Alzheimer's by SNRatio · · Score: 1

      which implies that there are other causes of Alzheimer's and also implies that having the gene doesn't predict with any certainty that carrier will exhibit symptoms if he or she lives long enough.

      Also, a good fraction of Alzheimer's patients don't have APOE4 at all.

    4. Re:apoE4 gene not the only cause of Alzheimer's by RNLockwood · · Score: 1

      Thanks.

      --
      Nate
    5. Re: apoE4 gene not the only cause of Alzheimer's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Think that's fun? I have APOE4x2 and MTHFR 1298(one C) and 677(one T) .

      If my abdominal aorta doesn't blow first, I am pretty much garaunteed to have Alzheimer's .

      This is one reason I am a biochemist and biophysics researcher.

    6. Re:apoE4 gene not the only cause of Alzheimer's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That ApoE4 allele increases the risk of developing Alzheimer's Disease, this correlation has been known for 25 years. It's also been shown the misfolded Tau can trigger misfolding of B Amyloid and progression of Alzheimer's in mice. What they had done is prove causation of the misfolding of B Amyloid and Tau by ApoE4 misfolding. They have done this by adding and removing ApoE4 to trigger and reverse the process. And proved its through misfolding of ApoE4 by showing that a peptide that refolds ApoE4 correctly reverses the process.

      We still don't know the exact mechanism that causes Alzheimer's Disease, and how much misfolded proteins are the cause and how much they are a symptom of the disease. There have been many drugs that successfully block the formation of extracellular plagues of misfolded B Amyloid and Tau, or block the misfolding of B Amyloid or Tau, that have had no clinical benefit to patients.

      ApoE4 affects the risk of developing Alzheimer's, but so does diet and exercise. But it's not a cause of all cases of Alzheimer's, or even a factor in a lot of them. This peptide is a good candidate for trials of Alzheimer's patients with the ApoE4 allele, provided they have a delivery system to human brains. But until you have a Phase I trial to test its toxicity, and Phase III trials to prove it works, we won't have any idea whether or it not it will be cure.

  11. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidenc by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Can we get other qualified experts to confirm this before news sites like slashdot start publishing it as scientific breakthrough? Oh wait.

  12. Confirmed? by BinBoy · · Score: 2

    ...it eliminated the signs of Alzheimer's disease,

    Hopefully they didn't use Theranos to confirm.

  13. Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ok we have known about ApoE4 for decades. Whats new here is proof that we can fix ApoE4 and halt (and potentially reverse) Alzheimers in people who have ApoE4 related Alzheimerâ(TM)s. Keep in mind that not everyone has ApoE4 related Alzheimerâ(TM)s.

    To summarize:
    We knew that ApoE4 causes or increases the risk of Alzheimerâ(TM)s since at least the 1980s maybe before. We may be able to cure Alzheimerâ(TM)s in people whose cause of Alzheimerâ(TM)s is the ApoE4 gene in about 5 to 10 years (FDA approval takes that long umless there is pressure from the public to fast-track it.

  14. APOE4 link has been know for over 25 years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    For example, from freaking 1993,

    Abstract

    Several studies have reported an association of the apolipoprotein E allele 4 (APOE*4) to familial and sporadic late-onset Alzheimer's disease (LOAD). Here we report on the relationship between APOE*4 and early-onset Alzheimer's disease (EOAD) in a Dutch population-based study. The frequency of the APOE*4 allele was 2.3 times higher among EOAD cases compared to controls. Among patients, the allele frequency was 1.6 times higher in those with a positive family history than in those without. A significant increase in risk of EOAD was found for subjects homozygous for APOE*4 regardless of family history of dementia, but an increase in EOAD risk for APOE*4 heterozygotes could only be shown in subjects with a positive family history. Our study demonstrates a significant association between APOE*4 and EOAD which is modified by family history of dementia.

    https://www.nature.com/articles/ng0594-74

    1. Re:APOE4 link has been know for over 25 years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes.

      There are 3 alleles, and have the "wrong" allele is also associated with an increased risk of certain types of heart disease. As noted in one of the links below, this gene is one of the 10 specific genes that 23AndMe has received FDA approval to report, leading to one of those difficult do-you-want-to-know decisions.

      https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/gene/APOE

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apolipoprotein_E

      https://www.alzdiscovery.org/cognitive-vitality/blog/new-test-makes-it-easy-to-learn-your-apoe-status-but-should-you

      https://www.alzdiscovery.org/cognitive-vitality/blog/what-apoe-means-for-your-health

      https://www.snpedia.com/index.php/APOE

  15. The primary cause of a genetic risk factor is by goombah99 · · Score: 1

    Grandma.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  16. Don't panic! by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

    I'm sure they will soon discover a much more profitable long--term treatment option instead. /cynical

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  17. Re:Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evid by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

    Can we get other qualified experts to confirm this before news sites like slashdot start publishing it as scientific breakthrough? Oh wait.

    At least they didn't proclaim, "Mission Accomplished!" -- 'cause that always goes over well ... :-)

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  18. Another step to immortality by esonik · · Score: 1

    Aging is something we could solve.
    Check out the strategy here:

    The Science of Curing Aging" | Talks at Google
    https://youtu.be/S6ARUQ5LoUo

    1. Re:Another step to immortality by micahraleigh · · Score: 1

      They debated this and the students at Cambridge University elected to maintain aging even if it could be prevented!

      Do it anyway.

      Raise the voting age past where these over educated scoundrels can't wage murder against the elderly.

    2. Re:Another step to immortality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >They debated this and the students at Cambridge University elected to maintain aging even if it could be prevented!

      I'm sure any treatment for aging won't be compulsory. If they don't want it, they can refuse it. Personally, where do I sign up?

  19. Planet of the Apes Here We Come by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

    Stock up on gas masks and guns while you still can.

  20. parkinsons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My mom has parkinson's, this makes me hopeful they're close to a solution there as well.

  21. Re: United Nations Confirmed US war crimes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well done, you've bought the narrative hook Line and sinker.

    All you need to do is form opinions based on facts. No facts, no opinions. To get started, why not ask yourself why the US (and friends) attacked Syria before the UN inspectors could confirm the use of chemical weapons? I read on the BBC that the inspectors are arriving today.

  22. Aren't these the people that cured diabetes 2014? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seems to me it's the same public relations people.

  23. Sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is impossible people want to live forever because of a sick kind of individualism and egotism. Can't be. It also cant be related to many people not having children.

    It can't be that the monetized world has serious defects. Because if it would be so, we would start to question the money lords and that would make their lifes inconvenient.

    So we conclude that the desire to live forever is something biological. It follows from cardinal rule #1: never dare to question the moneylords.

  24. Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did it ever occur to you that Alzheimers is so likely because the Medicuses now manage to keep many vital organs in good shape, but not the brain ? We are supposed to be sooo much scared about a heart attack that we take all sorts of medications, but all we achieve is that other important organs (the brain in this case) are no longer fit.

    Wouldn't it be better to let the heart attacks run their course ?

    Is meddling with life expectancy really a good thing if you consider the consequences ?

    My father had Alzheimer's too and it would have been much nicer if he died 10 years earlier of a quick heart attack instead of 10 years of misery. Misery as in "don't know my children any more"....

  25. Yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think you confuse Bill Clinton and Donald Trump.

  26. Indeed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hillary can violate all the rules about classified information and the FBI will not bring forward charges. Compare that with lowlings like Bradley Manning, who was be tortured by sleep deprivation for a similar crime.

    We all know the Deep State hates Trump, so they keep digging. Digging up ANYTHING which they hope can be remotely used to bring down a "deviant" like Trump. Someone who questions their wickedness.

  27. Re: United Nations Confirmed US war crimes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Must be because everybody loves a war. Definitely not because your shirtless horse-riding hero could ever support a naughty person.

  28. Good, But by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We also need to know:

    1). Is this gene (in the various expressions) the sole cause of Alzheimer's?
    2). If not, is this gene the majority cause of Alzheimer's?
    3). If not, can we extrapolate in some manner from this genetic cause, to the other causes of Alzheimer's?
    4). Is Early Onset Alzheimer's different in any way from Late Onset Alzheimer's, other than the timing difference?

    There's a big difference between, "hey, we can achieve an effective treatment for 1% of Alzheimer's patients", and "hey, we can achieve an effective treatment for 99% of Alzheimer's patients".

  29. Re:United Nations Confirmed US war crimes by datavirtue · · Score: 1

    Neo-cons have penetrated all parties and Trump has put them in charge of defense (Bolton). Remember 2002-2003 Iraq war drum? Get ready.

    --
    I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock