Because billionaires haven't gotten it yet, or their loved ones. If Elon or Bezos get it, it'll get funded to kingdom come.
Why has there been so little progress on Alzheimer's disease?
91–100 of 355 posts
Re: Why has there been so little progress on Alzheimer's disease?
#92They had a biological model. They had multiple drugs that were showed activity against that model, and effectiveness in humans. Problem was, the model was wrong. Pharma’s burned billions chasing this as it’s possibly the biggest market imaginable. Whether it was fraudulent or just incorrect is a different question. We don’t know all of the details of human biology. We don’t even know what all we don’t know. Most gues…
> Problem was, the model was wrong. I thought despite the fraud, it's still the best model we have[1]? The fact there was fraud doesn't mean the model is immediately incorrect. At best, it means its foundations are shakier than we thought, but it's not a slam dunk repudiation. [1] https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/in-defense-of-the-amyloid-h...
Many in the research community realised the model was wrong a long time ago. This is a great read about the reasons why: 'How not to study a disease: the story of Alzheimer’s.' by Karl Herrup.
Re: Why has there been so little progress on Alzheimer's disease?
#93'Science progresses one funeral at a time...' It is often the case that an entire field is led by a few influential people and until they leave others can't get the air they need to make real progress.
I think you're right. Anyone brave enough to suggest areas of investigation where there is evidence this has happened?
Re: Why has there been so little progress on Alzheimer's disease?
#94I have a kind of outlandish hypothesis that needs more research before it can be taken seriously, but it basically says that the cause and effect are backwards. Mental atrophy due to less learning/thinking, isolation, loss of meaning and purpose happens first. The sleep down regulation and decay of mental circuitry comes after. Would explain why treating the physical symptoms doesn't work. Protective against the prob…
> Mental atrophy due to less learning/thinking, isolation, loss of meaning and purpose happens first. Except early onset Alzheimers happens and it also happens to plenty of people for which none of those are true.
Exactly. My mom lost her job because of early onset. She was very social, read tons of books, etc…. Now, I’m happy she at least still knows who am, but she can’t put a sentence together.
Re: Why has there been so little progress on Alzheimer's disease?
#95They had a biological model. They had multiple drugs that were showed activity against that model, and effectiveness in humans. Problem was, the model was wrong. Pharma’s burned billions chasing this as it’s possibly the biggest market imaginable. Whether it was fraudulent or just incorrect is a different question. We don’t know all of the details of human biology. We don’t even know what all we don’t know. Most gues…
> Pharma’s burned billions chasing this as it’s possibly the biggest market imaginable. To be clearer, Pharma is chasing a nice long treatment plan, that will require expensive drugs till the end. Pharma does not heal - this is not good for business. So there are criteria around what they are searching for.
I think you are wrong, for several reasons.
From the human perspective, researchers are people, and they do have their incentives. Making a breakthrough, of any kind, is important for them - even if for their career (but many do genuinely care and want to help humanity as a whole).
From marketing and sales perspective, look at what happen to pharma companies capitalization when Ozempic appeared: a relatively small Elly Lily suddenly got bigger then Merck, Novartis, Roche or Johnson & Johnson. You can hardly call it a long treatment plan with expensive drugs "till the end".
Really, there is a lot of bad things going on in healthcare and pharma industry, but the conspiracy theory "they don't want to invent efficient drugs" really makes no sense when you dig deeper.
Re: Why has there been so little progress on Alzheimer's disease?
#96I'm surprised there was no mention (at least none that I found when searching) of the relatively recent research coming out of Harvard regarding the hypothesis that low levels of lithium in the brain are responsible for a lot of Alzheimer's cases. The research is still in the very early stages (largely mouse models, though they did develop the hypothesis by looking at differences in human brain tissue post mortem), b…
Every time I read about it and get jazzed I take it and feel awful. I’m guessing my brain chemistry is better without it.
Re: Why has there been so little progress on Alzheimer's disease?
#97I'm surprised there was no mention (at least none that I found when searching) of the relatively recent research coming out of Harvard regarding the hypothesis that low levels of lithium in the brain are responsible for a lot of Alzheimer's cases. The research is still in the very early stages (largely mouse models, though they did develop the hypothesis by looking at differences in human brain tissue post mortem), b…
Every time I read about it and get jazzed I take it and feel awful. I’m guessing my brain chemistry is better without it.
Awful how?
Re: Why has there been so little progress on Alzheimer's disease?
#98The company I work at has been building a dementia prevention program covered by most insurance plans in the US. Our clinicians work directly on helping understand risk of neurodegenerative disease and help tailor personalized plans to improve outcomes. A recent lancet study concluded that around 45% of dementia cases are preventable [0] Happy to answer any questions people have. https://www.betterbrain.com Disclaime…
What things do you focus on to lower that 45%?
Re: Why has there been so little progress on Alzheimer's disease?
#99https://www.statnews.com/2019/06/25/alzheimers-cabal-thwarte... "Despite being described as a “cabal,” the amyloid camp was neither organized nor nefarious. Those who championed the amyloid hypothesis truly believed it, and thought that focusing money and attention on it rather than competing ideas was the surest way to an effective drug. It has not worked out that way. Research focused on amyloid, and the developmen…
There's a lot of this going on in science. Once the common accepted truth is "X" papers that are counter to X or show that X is not true, end up not getting published and then funding dries up.
Re: Why has there been so little progress on Alzheimer's disease?
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
> gatekeepers directly or indirectly control research funding. Perhaps funding like public grants could be controlled by few? Should not the case for private money? Relatively common health issues older people tend to get fair amount of private funding after all. Rich people tend to be older and they are lot more likely to see amongst their friends and family Alzheimer's and Parkison's or even cancer and so forth and…
If you're a wealthy person lacking a neurobiology background, how do you decide which research efforts are the most promising? Which labs do you back? Generally, you rely on experts. Who typically became experts by adhering to the conventional wisdom set by gatekeepers. "Science advances one funeral at a time" feels apt. Sadly, the problem isn't confined to Alzheimer's. Whenever only a few people decide what is "righ…
I don't think the problem is nearly as big as people claim. Experts are often right!
While there are counter examples and inefficiencies in the system (and there are idea of addressing this, by distributing some part of the money in other ways), we have far bigger societal issues because people do not believe in science, especially where there is an industry lobby sowing doubts.
So I really want to push back against the the idea that the scientific system is broken. While there are real issues, this is still very misleading.