learn it first. Autopsied Alzheimer's brain shows no sign of the prion-nucleated chain reaction that is characteristic of Mad Cow or other prion diseases. It is amyloid-beta that accumulates in Alzheimer's. And it isn't even known whether the amyloid "plaques" are causative or simply an anomalous by-product.
for a specific purpose?
I'm not suggesting that these companies are evil. But why invest money when the government could do the work? You have to produce quarterly reports.
Pharmaceutical companies invest the money necessary to run clinical trials. This still needs to be done with "old" medications to use them in new applications. Granted, it isn't as expensive as developing a drug de novo, but it takes people and resources away from developing far more profitable solutions.
On the other hand, there will always be the incentive to build a better mouse trap. Companies will continue to search for "New and Improved!" drugs that have fewer or more palatable side effects, need fewer doses, etc.
This is the same problem with lithium. Can't be patented, so it isn't profitable enough.
Lithium has been shown to prevent beta-amyloid accumulation. While beta-amyloid plaques are only associated with (not known to be causative of) Alzheimer's, the fact is that lithium may inhibit the pathological process that produces such plaques far enough upstream to be just what the doctor ordered.
One problem with lithium, however, is that it's tough on the kidneys. People of Alzheimer's age might not tolerate that well -- nor other side effects like tremors. Regardless, it's been in wide use since the early 70's for other things.
I believe there's some NIH-sponsored thrust to conduct clinical trials with AD patients, but don't quote me on it. If you have access, search through this summer's issues of Nature for the review article on lithium.
Slashdot Mirror
learn it first. Autopsied Alzheimer's brain shows no sign of the prion-nucleated chain reaction that is characteristic of Mad Cow or other prion diseases. It is amyloid-beta that accumulates in Alzheimer's. And it isn't even known whether the amyloid "plaques" are causative or simply an anomalous by-product.
for a specific purpose? I'm not suggesting that these companies are evil. But why invest money when the government could do the work? You have to produce quarterly reports. Pharmaceutical companies invest the money necessary to run clinical trials. This still needs to be done with "old" medications to use them in new applications. Granted, it isn't as expensive as developing a drug de novo, but it takes people and resources away from developing far more profitable solutions. On the other hand, there will always be the incentive to build a better mouse trap. Companies will continue to search for "New and Improved!" drugs that have fewer or more palatable side effects, need fewer doses, etc.
This is the same problem with lithium. Can't be patented, so it isn't profitable enough. Lithium has been shown to prevent beta-amyloid accumulation. While beta-amyloid plaques are only associated with (not known to be causative of) Alzheimer's, the fact is that lithium may inhibit the pathological process that produces such plaques far enough upstream to be just what the doctor ordered. One problem with lithium, however, is that it's tough on the kidneys. People of Alzheimer's age might not tolerate that well -- nor other side effects like tremors. Regardless, it's been in wide use since the early 70's for other things. I believe there's some NIH-sponsored thrust to conduct clinical trials with AD patients, but don't quote me on it. If you have access, search through this summer's issues of Nature for the review article on lithium.