Some studies show an association between the herpes virus and Alzheimer’s
theconversation.com
theconversation.com
See http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.3181/00379727-161-405... and http://taurx.com/phase-3.html
Some/Many HN commentators love what one could call the collective helplessness associated with authoritarian scientism and materialism - the idea that we are thrown into a ruthless and cold universe where life has emerged out of random and no easy solutions exist but instead only costly manipulation of small particles like genes and other molecules may safe us, but only in a distant future that we will probably never reach. Only persons of authority associated with the institutions in power may guide us to the holy land.
Due to that philosophy there are many comments discrediting possible solutions.
10.3181/00379727-161-40521
A Phase 3 clinical trial of LMTM (TauRx0237 or LMT-X), a derivative of methylene blue, failed to show any benefit against cognitive or functional decline in people with mild to moderate Alzheimer’s disease. Disease progression for both the drug and the placebo were practically identical.
[1] https://content.iospress.com/download/journal-of-alzheimers-... (pdf)
Why not? Why couldn't "proneness to infection" be hereditary, and the actual infection completing the disease mechanism?
So why isn't that a standard treatment now? The abstracts of both studies indicate they were looking at existing antiherpetic treatments.
also I wonder if the fact that I'm actually experience outbreaks every now and then might imply I'm more at risk.
Your PCP should be able to do this for you. You’ll just have a bottle on hand and you’ll use it for only two or three days whenever the outbreak happens.
However! Targeted gene-editing to remove or disrupt latent viral genomes infecting human cell cultures has shown some promise, although it hasn't progressed to testing in animal models, much less an in-vivo clinical trial, just yet:
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=7885240874375341470
Also:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S095279151...
Valacyclovir is cheap and safe enough that it could be given "on spec", to a very large number of people at risk. If it works, it works.
One might interpret the delay in acting on the infectious hypothesis here as a result of the overwhelming majority of Alzheimer's researchers having no experience with virology. What should you do when you discover you have spent your career on something that turns out to have nothing to do with the cause of the disease you have studied? Probably not try to become a virologist. The most nimble must be casting about for other topics in brain microanatomy and gene expression.
In ten years we might see a flowering of other results as they turn their attention away from Alzheimer's to topics that had been neglected.
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2018/09/09/6456291...
"Correction: Sept. 13, 2018
The initial version of this article overstated the rate at which neurosurgeons and spouses of Alzheimer's patients develop the dementia. The risk is nearly 2 1/2 times greater for neurosurgeons, not sevenfold, and 1.6 times higher for spouses, not six times greater. On Sept. 18, the article was changed to say that the risk for neurosurgeons was a comparison with the general population, not other causes of death for the doctors."
- Alzheimer's caused by dirty air. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18230932
- Alzheimer's caused by lack of sleep.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18228627
There's mounting evidence that "health news" is neither healthy nor news.
- Who paid for this research / article.
- Is this cause, or simply correlation of a fair common virus?
And that is a full field of hard working individuals. I'm almost scared to think what my own biases are. I wish there was a solid framework to approach them, since I think most are basically invisible to the holder.
I guess Charlie Munger wrote about the kind of thing you're looking for in 'Psychology of Human Misjudgement'.
But then I heard him interviewed on Chinese TV recently, and he seemed to be displaying some huge misunderstandings on human genetics and intelligence, and making what I consider basic reasoning errors. Perhaps he didn't feel like applying his knowledge of cognitive biases to this area.
That is, I would much prefer if science was immune to bias. Evidence is quite clear that nothing is free of bias, though.
Since I can't read the paper, I'm not sure. I hesitant to generalize, but if dementia can be broadly defined as global, regional, or nuclei-specific cell death. Then a good rule of thumb is anything that impacts the homeostatic equilibria of the CNS in a negative manner, will eventually lead to dementia. Which would account for why there seems to be a plethora of causes.
- Alhiemers is a form of diabetes: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4578267