3 ms·
>"Assuming what you say is true" Don't take my word for it. Follow the links to what the primary literature says. >"being next to useless for meaningful physi
by nonbel 8y ago
>"Assuming what you say is true"
Don't take my word for it. Follow the links to what the primary literature says.
>"being next to useless for meaningful physics or medical news"
Well, to be fair the "amyloid hypothesis" is still the mainstream hypothesis. It's just that this is for reasons that are baffling to me. Afaict, it has nothing going for it at all vs the prior "cholinergic" hypothesis (which has resulted in treatments that actually appear to do something for the patient).
- vibrio 8y ago> the "amyloid hypothesis" is still the mainstream hypothesis. I agree with you. Amyloid may be the most popular but it isn't what it used to be 10-15 years ago (dogma). it has much weaker support. What is particular true and sad about what you've said is that it probably is the most popular but only due to lack of consensus on anything else. After running into the amyloid wall running at full-speed about a dozen times, significant chunks of pharma have nearly abandoned working on the disease, and put some funds into external research.