61–70 of 122 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not true. Monoclonal antibodies are on the market right now which slow the progression of the disease (by removing amyloid).
~~yes by 4 months. If I had AD i wouldn't bother with those treatments.~~ Sorry I missed the context you are right the fact that they slow AD by 4 months is a proof that amyloid plaques are part of the pathogenesis.
I only had time to skim the paper. Notably, the effect is concentration dependent and required high concentrations of THC. The chart shows it really starting in the 0.1uM range and then taking off in the 1uM range. I don’t know what levels are achieved during normal use but I did find some studies that successfully killed a lot of hippocampal neuronal cells after 6 days at 1uM range. So the levels of THC observed in…
Get stupid now to avoid cognitive decline later? Not sure I like that tradeoff...
Anecdotally, when I'm feeling scattered and foggy, when I take a big hit off of my vape pen, I go through a period of noticing how shaky my appendages are, and go through what feels like a physical process of the sensation of my mind "unwrinkling" or unfurling. I often wondered if something was being cleaned out in my brain because I usually feel a lot more calm and still afterward, thoughts more collected.
Get stupid now to avoid cognitive decline later? Not sure I like that tradeoff...
Not really sure what you mean, I saw people on 10mg THC wring crazy code in a crazy speed. Some of them need it to be able to focus and think clear. Drugs never work "one way" for everybody. And its not only people its many things that affect how they work (setting, culture, education etc.). And if you think man kind does not need any drugs (including alcohol), if you look at it from a historic perspective we might e…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
AIUI, all such results are because the FDA has given up since aduhelm and said "well, if it clears amyloid, that's as good as slowing Alzheimer's, right?" despite the actual results on Alzheimer's progression being largely negative.
For what it's worth, early statins were originally cleared based only on the evidence that they lower cholesterol without longer term studies showing a reduction in mortality. Of course there is now plenty of evidence showing statins improve overall endpoints.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
AIUI, all such results are because the FDA has given up since aduhelm and said "well, if it clears amyloid, that's as good as slowing Alzheimer's, right?" despite the actual results on Alzheimer's progression being largely negative.
For what it's worth, early statins were originally cleared based only on the evidence that they lower cholesterol without longer term studies showing a reduction in mortality. Of course there is now plenty of evidence showing statins improve overall endpoints.
Similarly, there were other drugs that lowered cholesterol that didn’t show a significant reduction in coronary events. As we later learned, it’s not nearly as simple as “cholesterol bad.”
https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2010/03/alzheimers-as...