Genetic test could predict people at higher risk of memory problems

This recent piece of research may be of interest:

https://www.alzheimers.org.uk/site/scripts/news_article.php?newsID=2625

Brexit Could Threaten Neurodegenerative Disease Research in Europe

The respected US-based Alzforum (Working for a cure) has some thoughts on the potential effects on research of 'Brexit' (the decision by the UK to leave the European Union):

http://www.alzforum.org/news/community-news/brexit-could-threaten-neurodegenerative-disease-research-europe

Alzheimer’s Is Not Normal Aging — And We Can Cure It

I thought this was worth posting. He says some interesting things but it's a bit of an anti-climax when you realise that, as with so many new ideas that are discussed, there's still a long, long way to go. The images shown from 3.05 are very powerful:

A problem with research

There are daily reports of dementia-related research. A recent study, reported by Reuters Health (and others no doubt) suggests that 'repeated use of a certain class of drugs for gastric reflux or peptic ulcers was linked with a higher risk for dementia among patients in Germany'.

I'm interested in this as I've been on Lansoprazole or Prevacid (one of the drugs mentioned) for several years, though rarely on a large dose. After a period of only taking it when I really felt discomfort I recently decided to try and manage without it. Purely coincidentally I also cut right back on milk after I came across Oatly products and liked them. After a couple of months I have had very few problems with acid reflux. (I have also drunk fresh lemon juice first thing in the morning for several years and found that that helps, by the way.)

But Google reveals that lansoprazole allegedly lowers blood pressure.......and raises it! Maybe there'll be research along soon suggesting that it protects against dementia.

It seems that, as some people in the UK used to say (perhaps they still do)  'you pays your money and you takes your choice'.

No wonder people are confused

I'm sceptical about this article and not just because it's in the Daily Mail:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3413873/Alzheimer-s-cause-discovered-Poisonous-algae-freshwater-lakes-reservoirs-UK-fuelling-dementia-epidemic-afflicting-1m-people.html#ixzz3y9MDkzK4

I also read in latest issue of 'The Week' an article which quotes Professor John Hardy telling the Royal Society about 'drugs to halt AD within a decade'. The Week article and also contains this 'fact' (though it's not clear where it comes from):

Since 1980, there has been a 20% drop in dementia incidence (in Britain), possibly as a result of people taking actions to reduce their cholesterol levels.

I've never seen this before and most statistics suggest a growing problem. The Mail article talks of 'increasing rates of Alzheimer's'.

And even if it is true I think his possible reason is pretty implausible.

So much of the stuff you read about AD, even when you discount the massive amount of obvious twaddle, contradicts other stuff. And the media never delve into these matters in any detail at all but just wait for the next press release to come along.

Finally, so many of the articles and news items talk about dementia and Alzheimer's as if they are one condition with one cause (whatever that happens to be this week).

Pure ignorance across the board.

Interesting research and a silly generalisation

http://www.expressandstar.com/news/uk-news/2015/09/30/brain-implant-aims-to-reverse-alzheimers-memory-loss/

This is a fascinating idea even if its transalation into something usable is probably decades away.

I spluttered, as I always do with such statements, at this:

That is why someone with Alzheimer's disease can recall events from long ago - before the disease took hold - but have difficulty forming new long-term memories.

I know someone with AD who finds it as difficult to recall any event from long ago as she does to form new long-term memories. I'm sure she's not the only one.

The same old tendency to generalise that we've noted before.

New Hope for Alzheimer's Research?

'Between 2002 and 2012, 99.6% of drug studies aimed at preventing, curing or improving Alzheimer's symptoms were either halted or discontinued.'

A staggering quote from this Guardian article:

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/apr/15/alzheimers-disease-cause-study-caveats-aside-findings-encouraging.

The author explains how researchers are finally realising that they have made an appalling mistake in concentrating, to the exclusion of almost everything else, on trying to find drugs that would remove beta-amyloid plaques from the brains of people with the disease. This turns out to have been possibly the biggest, most expensive and most pointless wild goose-chase in the history of medical research.

There is also a summary of the recently-reported research which suggests a different approach to treatment or cure which looks promising and even opens up the possibility that lost memories may one day be regained.

A breath of fresh air!

Another study reports cognitive decline with tamoxifen

I've posted about the breast cancer drug Tamoxifen before.  More than one study has suggested that this drug may cause or contribute to cognitive decline.

These are links to earlier posts on this topic:

http://adventureswithdementia.blogspot.co.uk/2011/10/possible-causescontributory-factors-2_16.html

http://adventureswithdementia.blogspot.co.uk/2011/11/more-on-tamoxifen.html

http://adventureswithdementia.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/tamoxifen-again.html

This link is to a recent report on research which again suggests that Tamoxifen may be responsible for cognitive decline in some women:

www.examiner.com/article/another-study-reports-cognitive-decline-with-tamoxifen

An interesting article about ageism....

..which might offer one explanation as to why research into dementia, which primarily affects and kills older people, is so shockingly underfunded as compared with research into cancer, for example:

Article in The Lancet

Some interesting ideas from Oxford

My daughter-in-law in law spotted this article and very kindly sent it to me:

http://www.oxfordtoday.ox.ac.uk/features/defending-brain

Most of the interesting article is about how Oxford University is trying to co-ordinate its research into dementia and bring together different disciplines with an interest in dementia:

Approaches to dementia, Mackay explains, have hitherto been fragmented between the different disciplines of gerontology, neurology and psychiatry — the latter two branches of cognitive science having diverged more markedly in the UK than in other countries. OxDARE aims to enable a more holistic approach, with the emphasis on translational neuroscience. This process of ‘translation’ involves bridging the gap between research laboratories and clinical settings, bringing science ‘from bench to bedside’ as Mackay puts it. 

This looks like a promising approach.

Another thought-provoking extract:

While dementia is chiefly associated with memory loss, it can involve cognitive impairment of all sorts, and ultimately describes a set of symptoms rather than a single disease. Psychologists are still debating whether there is a difference in kind rather than degree between dementia and regular old-age memory loss, which comes to us all. Since the physical differences in the brain that define Alzheimer’s or Parkinson’s disease are currently visible only upon autopsy, much research is being devoted to finding ‘markers’, from brain scans or blood tests, which will bring forward the point of diagnosis.

For now, there remains an uncomfortable, but ultimately humanising, sense that we are all subject to those small but significant memory lapses – magnified in the endearing stereotype of the scatty Professor – that place us somewhere on the same continuum as those who suffer from conditions such as Alzheimer’s. We owe it to those who are further down that line to name and face the reality of dementia, and give the research endeavour our fullest support. 

One cannot help agreeing with the conclusion.

What's in a name?

The Alzheimer's Society seems to be renaming itself 'Alzheimer's Society' (i.e. dropping the definite article). Of course they may do what they like with their own name but it may not catch on.

An employee of AS was recently interviewed on the BBC and was introduced using the new name.  He then used the new name, but it's obviously unnatural, even to an employee, and later he used the old name.  When the interview finished, the presenter who'd introduced him reverted to the old name herself.

In any case, I am puzzled as to why Alois Alzheimer's name is still attached to the disease.  He was the first person to diagnose a case of what we would now call early/young onset Alzheimer's Disase.  Interestingly, he distinguished the disease from 'pre-senile dementia', indicating that dementia was recognised as a common problem as people got older but previously not recognised properly in younger people.

Alzheimer examined the brain of his patient post-mortem and sketched pictures of the plaques and tangles.  Decades later these were recognised as more or less identical to the plaques and tangles seen when the brains of elderly senile patients were examined.  It was decided they had the same disease.

Yet as time has passed it's become clearer that there are many, many, diseases that cause dementia.  Some of them are similar to each other and some of them are not. In general public discussion 'dementia' and 'Alzheimer's disease' are used interchangeably which is not helpful.

Equally, it is assumed that the plaques and tangles are always a marker of the disease and a great deal of research has been devoted to trying to remove the plaques and tangles.

Yet as the not-famous-enough nuns study shows some people have the plaques and tangles but don't have dementia and some people have dementia but do not have significant plaques and tangles.

It's possible that the emphasis of much research has been misplaced and that other possible research areas are being overlooked.

So how helpful is it that Alzheimer's name is still so well-known?

And to end where we began, it's probably time for the Alzheimer's Society to adopt a more sensible name.  Or, better still, lead a move towards the amalgamation of the various dementia charities.  One national dementia charity could become very influential.

Nuns study yet again

I keep discovering that people who should know better are apparently unaware of the Nuns Study:

http://adventureswithdementia.blogspot.co.uk/search?q=study

You would think that such dramatic and unexpected findings would have had a massive impact on the direction of research.

Alzheimer Research Forum

http://www.alzforum.org

Another heads up about this excellent, though very complex and technical, site.  Just scanning through the comments you can discover some interesting thoughts:

These are puzzling cases indeed. Do these patients have ALS or a different clinical presentation of SCA2? How should we classify such patients? Intermediate repeat expansions have been identified as a genetic risk factor for ALS, while true (longer) expansions are encountered in rare sporadic and familial ALS cases and probably should be considered as a rare true cause of ALS. Thus, disease presentations of SCA and ALS within the same family are possible. That tallies with the concept that ALS is a clinical syndrome with heterogeneous etiologies, rather than a distinct disease entity.

Looks like a great resource for HSV1 and Alzheimer's

I recently came across this:

http://www.alzforum.org/res/for/journal/detail.asp?liveID=188

It interests me greatly and not just because there is a lot of detail (I've barely scratched the surface) about the link between herpes simplex and Alzheimer's (a link that was first looked at in the 1970's).  I'm also intrigued that what is clearly a reputable Alzheimer's Research site is taking the growing body of research in this area seriously.

I simply cannot understand why the comparable bodies in the UK are neglecting this research.  I think it's scandalous.

Possibly the most exciting research into dementia so far

It's not new. I've posted previously about the nuns' study:
http://adventureswithdementia.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/nuns-study.html

I have found an article that explains, more clearly than ever, why this research should receive so much more attention:

Perhaps the single most important conclusion from the study is that Alzheimer disease is not straight forward. In several cases, pathology studies of brain tissue from the deceased nuns did not correlate with their performance on cognitive function tests. Sometimes the pathologist would score a brain as having signs of extremely advanced AD, only to learn later that the nun herself scored extremely well on all cognitive tests. Other times a brain would show only slight damage associated with AD, and the nun was characterized as exhibiting the signs of advanced cognitive decline and dementia.

I often wonder whether there is anything new from this study. Apparently the original researcher has retired but the University of Minnesota is hoping to continue the work:

Additionally, the University of Minnesota has announced that it will begin a second study, with a new group of volunteer nuns, to delve further into the mysteries of Alzheimer disease: Why do some people develop symptoms and not others? Why do some people with advanced brain damage: plaques, tangles and tissue loss, not show any symptoms, while others with minimal brain damage show symptoms of advanced AD?

How odd that these questions are so rarely referred to in discussions of the disease!

Here's a link to the article:
http://promega.wordpress.com/2009/05/04/alzheimer-disease-and-the-nun-study/

Thought for today

Or any day:

We take note of all the details of a disease and yet make no account of the marvels of health.
                                                                        
                                                                                             Maria Montessori

Quoted by John Zeisel in 'I'm Still Here'

The more we discover about the workings of the human brain, the more miraculous it appears. Even a brain damaged by disease is capable of amazing things.

Beacons of hope

There will be people who come across this blog hoping to find some answers, and maybe some hope.

As anyone who cares for someone with dementia, or who has dementia will know, answers and hope are in short supply.

However, in my search, I have found some glimmers of hope  -  if not for S, then maybe for others who are just starting out on this journey. For new or irregular readers here are links to some stories and summaries which I have found interesting and, in some cases, inspiring.

Morris Friedell

Herpes       more     the research     a possible herpes vaccine
(It's worth noting that 'the research' is the most viewed post in the whole blog.)
Steve and Mary Newport

Centenarians

The nuns' study

Centenarians who avoid dementia

This is another example of research that, like the nuns study, suggests that some people avoid or delay the symptoms of dementia 'despite the substantial presence of neuropathological markers of Alzheimer's disease'. This dates from 2004.

One can only agree with the conclusion. I have not discovered yet whether anyone has followed this up or whether, like other promising lines of enquiry, it has been ignored.

Dementia-free centenarians.

Perls T.

Source

Geriatrics Section, Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine and Boston Medical Center, Boston, MA 02118, USA. thperls@bu.edu

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

A small percentage of centenarians, about 15-25%, are functionally cognitively intact. Among those who are not cognitively intact at 100, approximately 90% delayed the onset of clinically evident impairment at least until the average age of 92 yr.

OBJECTIVE:

To review current and past findings related to the prevalence and incidence of dementia amongst the exceptionally long-lived.

METHODS:

Findings from the various centenarian studies, world-wide, are reviewed.

RESULTS:

Neuropsychological and neuropathological correlations thus far suggest that there are centenarians who demonstrate no evidence of neurodegenerative disease. There also appear to be centenarians who despite the substantial presence of neuropathological markers of Alzheimer's disease did not meet clinical criteria for having dementia, thus suggesting the existence of cognitive reserve. Epigenic studies suggest a significant familial component to these survival advantages.

CONCLUSION:

Centenarians are of scientific interest as a human model of relative resistance to dementia.