4 ms·

Here's the original publication. The paper is actually more focused on the 3d engineered brain model and is titled "A 3d human brain-like tissue model of herpes

Here's the original publication. The paper is actually more focused on the 3d engineered brain model and is titled "A 3d human brain-like tissue model of herpes-induced Alzheimer's disease": https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/6/19/eaay8828 https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/6/19/eaay8828 The publication actually seems to highlight the demonstration of the 3d brain Alzheimers model as more of what the accomplishment of the paper is (as compared to a demonstration of a herpes/Alzheimers link). Studying Alzheimer's is really difficult because the mouse models etc that we have today are particularly poor for this disease case, which means we can barely rely on any preclinical work done in these models in determing whether or not a drug is going to work in clinical trials. Better models to study Alzheimer's will be very important in fighting the disease. For more publications on the 3d model, here is what the paper cited in its methods section for how they made the brain-like structures: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213671116301412 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221367111... https://www.nature.com/articles/nprot.2015.091 https://www.nature.com/articles/nprot.2015.091

Natsu 6y ago
Thanks for linking that, the first thing I wondered when they said "herpes" was "which one"? Looks like the answer to that is herpes simplex virus type I (HSV-1)
- vmception 6y ago
  the statnews article says that too
- guiambros 6y ago
  Also relevant: > “Active [herpes] infection may not be a requirement for Alzheimer’s disease,” Kaplan and his colleagues wrote. A history of herpes infection might be “sufficient to initiate Alzheimer’s.” > But not in everyone. An estimated two-thirds of people 50 and younger are infected with HSV-1. Although nothing close to that number will develop Alzheimer’s from a virus or anything else, scientists aren’t sure what combination of genetics, lifestyle, and other factors determines who will.
bsder 6y ago
This is good because it helps continue to break down the whole "amyloid hypothesis" stanglehold on Alzheimer's research and we might finally start seeing some progress. This is not the whole story, but it's a ray of sunshine to get medical scientists moving in a another direction.
- ncmncm 6y ago
  Question is what two generations of amyloid experts will do with their careers once it is seen that amyloids are just a response to a problem, not the problem. Discover new prions, maybe? But the first priority has to be to get the purse strings and publication barriers out of the hands of amyloid partisans. Anybody deep in amyloids will have some time to find another gig, because the whole Amyloid Industrial Complex will take an appalling length of time to dismantle. Peer reviewed publication and grants are profoundly conservative, with only very occasional exceptions.

Natsu 6y ago

Thanks for linking that, the first thing I wondered when they said "herpes" was "which one"? Looks like the answer to that is herpes simplex virus type I (HSV-1)

vmception 6y ago
the statnews article says that too
guiambros 6y ago
Also relevant: > “Active [herpes] infection may not be a requirement for Alzheimer’s disease,” Kaplan and his colleagues wrote. A history of herpes infection might be “sufficient to initiate Alzheimer’s.” > But not in everyone. An estimated two-thirds of people 50 and younger are infected with HSV-1. Although nothing close to that number will develop Alzheimer’s from a virus or anything else, scientists aren’t sure what combination of genetics, lifestyle, and other factors determines who will.

bsder 6y ago

This is good because it helps continue to break down the whole "amyloid hypothesis" stanglehold on Alzheimer's research and we might finally start seeing some progress. This is not the whole story, but it's a ray of sunshine to get medical scientists moving in a another direction.

ncmncm 6y ago
Question is what two generations of amyloid experts will do with their careers once it is seen that amyloids are just a response to a problem, not the problem. Discover new prions, maybe? But the first priority has to be to get the purse strings and publication barriers out of the hands of amyloid partisans. Anybody deep in amyloids will have some time to find another gig, because the whole Amyloid Industrial Complex will take an appalling length of time to dismantle. Peer reviewed publication and grants are profoundly conservative, with only very occasional exceptions.