[DarkmSparks]

last I heard everything amyloid/plaque burden was suspect after

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/19/us/stanford-president-res...

It looks very much like they are a symptom rather than a cause. They have got very good at medicines that remove amyloid/plaques, they only physical outcome was massive brain bleeds and death, plus a little

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/search/research-news/13804/

before being withdrawn for all the reasons they resigned

https://www.pharmaceutical-technology.com/analyst-comment/bi...

absolute disaster :(

[pedalpete]

Tau and it's relationship to Amyloid, are the current top hypothesis.

Another way to look at why the removal of amyloid may not be effective in repairing damage is to think of it like a blocked pipe.

A pipe gets blocked, and the pipe itself gets damaged, causing a leak. The block can be removed, but that doesn't repair the pipe.

In my example, the pharmaceuticals are removing the blockage, but the damage is still done.

Having said that, I believe that as we learn more about what we currently call Alzheimer's, we'll discover that we've been lumping multiple diseases under a single label. I believe the amyloid hypothesis, and Type 3 diabetes hypothesis, both have merit. There may well be others.

[DarkmSparks]

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) can lead to the rapid formation of amyloid plaques....

So entirely possible they are simply part of how or brain deals with brain cell death.

Its possible at this point it's not a "disease" at all, at least no more than the STI we are all dieing from (our parents had sex and now we get to die).

Prior to 1900 or so, average life expectancy was something like 25 or 30, our brains simply never evolved to live as long as they do now, some people age faster than others..

The problem for the scientific basis is all the brain research has gone into plaques and ignored all the other conditions that lead to cell death and aging, it's going to be a while before other directions can be properly explored, and plaques for sure still have the momentum despite failing at every turn.

[freddie_mercury]

Not really true. See for instance this link

"Opponents call the amyloid hypothesis zombie science, propped up only by pharmaceutical companies hoping to sell off a few more anti-amyloid me-too drugs before it collapses. Meanwhile, mainstream scientists . . . continue to believe it without really offering any public defense. Scott was so surprised by the size of the gap between official and unofficial opinion that he asked if someone from the orthodox camp would speak out in its favor."

https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/in-defense-of-the-amyloid-h...

[DarkmSparks]

From that link

"and only slow progression a relatively small amount."

They don't even do that. they _do_ remove plaques, they _do not_ have any statistically significant effect on MMSE degradation.

plus I only see the comments that point out the entire scientific basis for them was based on faked research.

The way I had it "simply" described was "the plaques are basically dead brain cells, the problem is the brain cells rapidly dieing, not cleaning up the corpses afterwards".

either way, the faked research set dementia research back at least 2 decades and wasted billions of dollars on failed medications with no benefits and horrific side effects (that they tried to cover up).