I wish we put more energy into preventing Alzheimer’s and sharing what we know. There’s a lot known about populations that barely get it and lifestyles that have reduced occurrences of it.
There’s just no/limited money in prevention
There’s just no/limited money in prevention
I've experimented a lot with my diet and slowly figured out which food combinations work and do not work for me. And it is much less intuitive than anyone would assume. I used to eat a certain kind of junk food that is on the "definitely bad for you" list and I would always lose weight on it. I know it's still bad in other ways, but it made me question why I was trying so hard and still failing, while some junk food made it effortless.
It's something that the "calories in calories out" crowd really loves to dismiss outright.
I changed my diet. Eat a lot of food. Am regularly full. My numbers are all great. I feel better than I have in a long time. And I eat the types of food the people who live the longest (on average) and have the best long term vitality do.
It wasn’t easy but I’m delighted now
Don't really try and stop myself if I want to splurge on the weekends: ice cream, maybe some pizza, etc.
Bloodwork is fantastic currently.
The CDC doesn’t tell people about any link or to lose weight if they are obese.
I know multiple people being treated for type 2 diabetes. Few of their doctors have talked with them about weight or obesity being linked.
The general solution in the US is to be regular on diet so your insulin done can be regular.
I do know one person who was recommended to change their diet and weight. In a matter of months he was no longer a diabetic. I told other diabetics about it and they didn’t believe me.
We, as a society, try to keep people on regular insulin and monitoring instead of trying to cure or minimize type 2 diabetes.
Hard disagree.
If I know I’m in at high-risk for Alzheimer’s, I will spend money to help prevent it.
Unfortunately this is a growing market; anyone who’s watched a parent or grandparent with Alzheimer’s, it’s a no-brainer.
Whole population groups around the world get it in a really limited capacity and only at extremely old age if they do. We know how they live and what they eat. Groups have been studied in the US who are similar and they get really low rates of Alzheimer’s compared to the surrounding population.
The changes people need to make for this just aren’t those you can get a high rate of return on.
Drugs are the most obvious. I'm personally familiar with the drug Gleevec, the multi-billion dollar blockbuster drug for Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia, which only about 4–5,000 people get in the US each year. Compared to heart disease and the more well-known cancers (breast, lung, colon), this is a rounding error. When it launched, the cost was $10,000 for a 30-day supply in the US.
Novartis' annual revenue for Gleevec was $4.7 billion dollars before it became a generic drug after patent expiration [1].
The number of people in the US who get CML per year is 5,000; the number who get Alzheimer’s is 100 times that—500,000.
I'm not suggesting revenue of 100x of $4.7 billion to a comparable drug for Alzheimer’s; but 10x isn't out of the question.
Due to the COVID pandemic, Alzheimer's disease dropped from the sixth to the seventh-leading cause of death across all ages in the United States.
This is big market.
> Lifestyle change isn’t something VCs can make a big return on.
It's much more complicated:
Having at least one APOE e4 gene increases your risk of developing Alzheimer's disease
two- to threefold. If you have two APOE e4 genes, your risk is even higher, approximately
eight- to twelvefold. But not everyone who has one or even two APOE e4 genes develops
Alzheimer's disease.
If these blood tests pan out, the next step will be wearable devices (like glucose monitors) to test for Alzheimer’s markers or including that tech in a future Apple Watch or other future device.
As an example, Apple has already bought several health-tech startups [3]; if a startup develops Alzheimer’s tech Apple can incorporate into it's ecosystem, they'd be ripe for an acquisition.
> Whole population groups around the world get it in a really limited capacity and only at extremely old age if they do.
False—the rate of Alzheimer's is growing globally. It's 50 million people now; at current rates, it will exceed 152 million by 2050 [2].
Like many diseases of old age, people are getting it at increasingly earlier ages.
For example, we used to call Type 2 Diabetes "adult onset Diabetes"; that term is quickly fading in relevance since children get Type 2 Diabetes pretty often these days.
The theory from David Sinclair that diseases of old age, including Alzheimer’s, are the result of a lifestyle the promotes premature aging, people who are genetically at increased risk for Alzheimer’s (by having at least one APOE e4 gene) will continue to get it at earlier ages.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imatinib#Economics
[2]: https://www.brightfocus.org/alzheimers/article/alzheimers-di...
[3]: https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/healthcare-information...
It reminds me of cycling "weight weenies" -- people who obsess every gram on their bike frame, eg spending 3x for their caliper brakes because it uses an alloy that saves 20g. Yet most of them are 30 lbs/15kg overweight. They should lose the weight and only then worry about a few hundred grams from their bike frame. Additionally, losing that weight would pay all sorts of dividends unrelated to biking.