3 ms·
Useless to whom? It would be somewhat arrogant to suppose that some people would not prefer to make arrangements for their family and themselves in the light of
by vixen99 9y ago
Useless to whom? It would be somewhat arrogant to suppose that some people would not prefer to make arrangements for their family and themselves in the light of a diagnosis. Might they not have one of the 'X things to do before you die' books and feel like following it up while they have the opportunity? Moreover it may be that new treatment arrives that optimally only works in the very first stages as detected by this test.
- sxg 9y agoI agree with your last point. An early detection tool can help find a treatment/cure that works before the disease progresses too far. Again, I see the use for research purposes. While writing my original comment, I specifically had WHO's Wilson criteria in mind (http://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/86/4/07-050112/en/ http://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/86/4/07-050112/en/). The 2nd point requires that there needs to be a treatment in order to screen for a disease. The current time from diagnosis of Alzheimer's to death is about 8 years (with some variability) with a relatively slow progression of symptoms. It's possible that some people may want extra time to make arrangements like you say, but this comes at the cost of living without knowing whether you have Alzheimer's. I've never been in this situation, but I can't imagine that this tradeoff is clear-cut for anyone. I think my gripe with the article is that it claimed this test will "promptly be used clinically". I seriously doubt this. The article doesn't report the sensitivity or specificity of the test, and we don't have a great sense of how early this test can detect Alzheimer's.