Hello everyone! So for this week, my article was the
Alzheimer’s lay article. We talked a bit about it in class, but Alzheimer’s is
mainly due to amyloid plaque buildup in the brain as well as neurofibrillary
tangles, which then causes dementia. The onset of symptoms does not necessarily
coincide with the time in which the patient begins to have the plaque buildup.
Rather, the patient usually accumulates all this damage and toxic changes
before they actually experience the symptoms. Because of this, the once healthy
neurons begin to function less efficiently and die. Despite knowing that the plaque and tangles does contribute to Alzheimer's, the root cause of it is still unknown. It is thought that one's lifestyle, genetics, and environment affects the brain over time and will contribute to Alzheimer's. With Alzheimer’s, the tell-tale
symptom is usually memory loss and recent memory loss as well. Other symptoms
are loss of cognitive ability, spatial skills, and reading and writing skills. Those
with Alzheimer’s lose the ability to take care of themselves and complete
simple tasks such as dressing and feeding oneself. Most patients begin developing Alzheimer's around the age of 60 and above. Furthermore, it is more common in women than in men, and genetics/family history is a huge factor as well. It has also been noted that previous head traumas have a greater risk in getting Alzheimer's. As of now, there are no cures for Alzheimer's.
Although there haven’t been many studies that support this,
it has been noted that reducing risk factors such as hypertension, diabetes,
and inactivity may prevent up to half of the Alzheimer’s cases. Likewise, in
some studies, it is shown that oxidative stress might contribute to Alzheimer’s;
in some of the patients’ brains, there is an increase amount of endogenous
antioxidants and lesions cause by free radical exposure. Studies have shown
that antioxidant vitamins, such as vitamin E, will help slow the progression of
the disease. There are a lot of other vitamins and nutritional changes that can
affect Alzheimer’s as well. Omega-3 fatty acids are supposed to help as well.
When you hear of these and how taking a few more vitamin pills and fish oil
pills might help slow the progression of Alzheimer’s, what do you think? I got
a lot of this info from this website(http://www.uptodate.com.ezproxy1.library.arizona.edu/contents/prevention-of-dementia?source=search_result&search=alzheimers&selectedTitle=7~150)
and its information is pretty credible. For me, I somehow think that simple
things like that won’t do much for the patient. I feel like a newly developed
drug would be more powerful. All the lay articles that we’ve read this semester
have made me more of a skeptic and start to think that these aren’t viable ways
to prevent something as hideous as Alzheimer’s.
On a bit of a side note, I found that the FDA is trying to “loosen the rules” when it comes to approving new Alzheimer’s treatments. I found this in this website if you guys want to take a look at it (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/14/health/fda-to-ease-alzheimers-drug-approval-rules.html?pagewanted=all). When I first read the title of the article (and finally, a lay article in which the writer is actually somewhat credible!), I was a bit appalled because I thought that some treatments that go through regular trials and pass through the FDA are still kind of risky and some get recalled. Why on earth will you go and make the rules more lax, and why just for Alzheimer’s? But anyways, the FDA has a proposal to approve treatments even if the treatment only helps Alzheimer’s patients that haven’t progressed so far in the disease—that is, the treatment doesn’t need to improve the patient’s life or symptoms by much. By easing the regulations, it is thought that it will speed up the development and approving newer and better drugs. All in all, I feel like this benefits the pharmaceutical companies more than the Alzheimer’s patients (look at most of the support for it in the article! It comes from people from the pharmaceutical companies!). In one part of the article, it says how the drug from Lilly failed a test, but if you look closely, the drug might work well with a certain number of patients. It feels like they are just fishing for something to make money out of. What do you think of this? Is it really just for money, or is it really for the sake of Alzheimer’s patients?
On a bit of a side note, I found that the FDA is trying to “loosen the rules” when it comes to approving new Alzheimer’s treatments. I found this in this website if you guys want to take a look at it (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/14/health/fda-to-ease-alzheimers-drug-approval-rules.html?pagewanted=all). When I first read the title of the article (and finally, a lay article in which the writer is actually somewhat credible!), I was a bit appalled because I thought that some treatments that go through regular trials and pass through the FDA are still kind of risky and some get recalled. Why on earth will you go and make the rules more lax, and why just for Alzheimer’s? But anyways, the FDA has a proposal to approve treatments even if the treatment only helps Alzheimer’s patients that haven’t progressed so far in the disease—that is, the treatment doesn’t need to improve the patient’s life or symptoms by much. By easing the regulations, it is thought that it will speed up the development and approving newer and better drugs. All in all, I feel like this benefits the pharmaceutical companies more than the Alzheimer’s patients (look at most of the support for it in the article! It comes from people from the pharmaceutical companies!). In one part of the article, it says how the drug from Lilly failed a test, but if you look closely, the drug might work well with a certain number of patients. It feels like they are just fishing for something to make money out of. What do you think of this? Is it really just for money, or is it really for the sake of Alzheimer’s patients?
Great entry and an interesting insight regarding the pharmaceutical companies. It is capitalism at its best when companies exploit their customers through health products for the sake of profit.
ReplyDeleteNevertheless, I mentioned briefly in class my interest in the beta-amyloid buildups as being the primary player in Alzheimer's. My initial thoughts on how Alzheimer's occurred paralleled what is known as the 'amyloid cascade hypothesis' which simply states that dysfunction in amyloid precursor proteins leads to overexpression, overproduction, buildup and eventually inflammation. I thought that this was the initial step in the onset of Alzheimer's. After saying this, I found a recent study (published in 2010) conducted by the NIH itself that disproved amyloid buildups as the starting cause of Alzheimer's. The research article addressed that in the earliest stages of the disease, it is the synaptic loss and metabolic decline that cause the dementia. They explain that the amyloid dysfunction cascade and resulting plaques do cause clinical decline in Alzheimer patients, but is a secondary phenomenon and occurs later.
The etiology and exact mechanisms are still unknown; however, studies like this provide good insight to current researchers studying the topic.
Outside source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3079347/
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThat's actually really interesting, with how the amyloid buildups not being the first cause of Alzheimer's. I feel like with a lot of these neurological diseases (as well as other inflammatory diseases), it's so difficult to actually find the primary cause. It's like grasping at random straws and getting the secondary or even tertiary problems/causes.
ReplyDeleteAlso, in this case, I wonder what will be the best way to look for treatment, especially since we know that the buildup isn't the first step in Alzheimer's. Because the plaque buildup does cause the clinical decline, I feel like perhaps this should be the target during treatment. With the synaptic loss and metabolic decline, even though it isn't all that great, if it doesn't cause the amyloid buildup and thus directly cause symptom of memory loss, would it be helpful to target this first? I know that both the metabolic decline and such are the first causes of dementia in Alzheimer's, but since it alone doesn't really affect the patient (as in it doesn't present clinically), I wouldn't think that it would matter as much. Likewise, because these two causes don't create a symptom that would be shown clinically, I think it might be hard to test and treat. Then again, with the plaque buildup, by the time it is shown clinically, it might be too difficult to treat by then.
Neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer are nasty diseases and I agree that it will take more than just a higher consumption of vitamins to have any affects. Once diagnosed with the disease, I feel that even if a high dose of vitamins were taken in daily for a long period of time, it will not have any significant impact on improving the symptoms caused by the disease. However, perhaps consuming essential multivitamins regularly early on, it will decrease the likely hood of such diseases. Many of these vitamins are crucial for development and proper functioning and a lot of us do not intake all the vitamins we need. I feel that it is similar to exercising daily in order reduce to the risk of cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis, or muscle degeneration. In some cases, neurodegenerative diseases are hereditary and have to do with genetic make-up, but for those that are not, I believe there can be preventative measures to reduce the chance of developing such a disease. As far as the FDA being more lenient on regulations for Alzheimer treatments, I also feel that it is more of a money reason. Pharmaceutical companies invest billions of dollars into developing drugs and if they do not sell the drugs they lose out on a lot of money. If they cared more about the patients, they would spend more time making sure the drugs actually check out and are more beneficial than harmful to the patients.
ReplyDelete