14 ms·
Hyperbaric oxygen therapy reverses hallmarks of Alzheimer’s disease and dementia
- andraz 5y agoMaybe even healthy individuals could improve memory via this therapy?
- andy_ppp 5y agoOkay this sounds great, what is the specific protocol they talk about in the article, is it some breathing techniques in the chamber or four one hour sessions per day for 5 years?
- robbedpeter 5y ago60 sessions, 90 minutes, 100% oxygen via mask with breaks every 20 minutes, over 3 months, 5 per week. Seems like this is a great thing, hopefully it pans out over larger populations of patients.
- easytiger 5y ago100% oxygen under high pressure is dangerous
- rbanffy 5y agoMy guess is that the mask is the only source of pure oxygen and that the rest of the atmosphere in the chamber has less oxygen than atmospheric air, making it still breathable because of the higher pressure.
- nradov 5y agoThere is a fire risk, but competent chamber operators will make sure that patients don't bring in any ignition sources or highly flammable objects. There will also be some pulmonary oxygen toxicity effects. Based on the protocol described those will be limited and resolve quickly in most patients. The oxygen exposure is too limited to cause any significant risk of neurological effects, like a seizure. So I don't know whether this treatment is actually effective but it's not particularly dangerous.
- gnicholas 5y ago> make sure that patients don't bring in any ignition sources or highly flammable objects. Out of curiosity, what would this include? Smartphones? Bluetooth headphones (to be used with smartphones that are outside)? Smartwatches?
- nradov 5y agoConsumer electronic devices are usually not allowed. Every chamber has their own list of prohibited items. This one is pretty typical. https://www.advocatehealth.com/assets/documents/subsites/luth/hyperbaric/2053_hyperbaricbrochure_d2.pdf https://www.advocatehealth.com/assets/documents/subsites/lut...
- ed 5y agoHere’s the paper https://www.aging-us.com/article/203485 https://www.aging-us.com/article/203485 > The study population comprised adults (5 males, 1 female) with significant memory decline aged 64 years and older > The protocol consisted of 60 daily sessions at 5 sessions per week within a three-month period. Each session included breathing 100% oxygen by mask at 2ATA for 90 min with 5 min air breaks every 20 min. > At baseline, patients attained a mean global cognitive score (102.4±7.3) similar to the average score in the general population normalized for age and education level (100), while memory scores were significantly lower (86.6 ± 9.2). Cognitive assessment following HBOT revealed a significant increase in the global cognitive score (102.4 ± 7.3 to 109.5 ± 5.8, p=0.004), where memory, attention and information processing speed domain scores were the most ameliorated (Figure 8C). Moreover, post-HBOT mean memory scores improved to the mean score (100.9 ± 7.8), normalized per age and education level (100).
- nxpnsv 5y agoThe popular paper completely fails to to state sample size or selection. It seems 10+10 mice also were studied. Maybe a little early to call it a breakthrough...
- tinco 5y agoWhat do you mean? The sample size was 6, and they were selected on having the same symptoms. There is more information on the statistical analysis in the paper, but the conclusion is that it was significant. If this is a significant treatment of Alzheimer's then that's a breakthrough to me, what bar would you set?
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- brokensegue 5y agostatistical significance is not the same as clinical significance. statistical significance in a small non-placebo controlled trial is less likely to result in a clinically meaningful result.
- dsign 5y agoThis sounds too good to be true. But if it is true, it's yet another reminder of ageing being "treatable". Perhaps one day, "curable".
- harryleeming 5y agoI'm using 2.4ATA 90min back to back sessions to treat my covid induced brain fog, with great results. It's the first time in a year I can think clearly. Anyone with long covid should seriously look into this as a treatment, it has some solid science behind it and is very safe, albeit expensive. At this point I've tried 14 different drugs, not a single thing has moved the needle except this. More info here on it for long covid: https://oxygenhealing.co.uk/covid-19-hbot/post-covid-trials/ https://oxygenhealing.co.uk/covid-19-hbot/post-covid-trials/
- kragen 5y agoWhat's "ATA"? The scammy-looking commercial page you linked doesn't mention it.
- _Microft 5y agoI found something. "ata" seems to mean "atmosphere absolute" and describes the total pressure: "The ata unit is used in place of atm to indicate the total pressure of the system, compared to a vacuum. For example, underwater pressure of 3 ata would mean that this pressure includes 1 atm of air pressure and thus 2 atm due to the water.", from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_atmosphere_(unit)#Pressure_units_and_equivalencies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_atmosphere_(unit)#Pre...
- spuz 5y agoWhat do you mean by "back to back sessions"? How many sessions are we talking about here? What happens between one session and the next?
- 35mm 5y agoAnyone interested in this should also take a look at Lions Mane Mushrooms. They have been shown to significantly help with cognitive decline.
- Cthulhu_ 5y agoCitation needed; I know research into psychedelics is difficult due to restrictions, but anecdotal evidence is not enough to start recommending it without listing the necessary caveats. I mean "Ivermectin has been shown to significantly help with Covid" has the same weight to it, and I'd never recommend anyone take horse dewormer. Maybe if they had worms and it was the only thing available.
- vncecartersknee 5y agoIvermectin is an FDA approved drug and is regularly prescribed to humans. Sure, it probably doesn't do anything for covid but it's not just 'horse dewormer'.
- ezekiel68 5y agoYou can remove the "probably". The manufacturer of Ivermectin states there is no scientific evidence [0] supporting the use of the drug for COVID-19. So much for the notion some espouse that "Big Pharma" pushes their drugs on us without fail. [0] https://www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use-during-the-covid-19-pandemic/ https://www.merck.com/news/merck-statement-on-ivermectin-use...
- lambdaba 5y agoIt is out of patent
- OneEyedRobot 5y agoJust to throw this out there. https://c19ivermectin.com/ https://c19ivermectin.com/ It's a pity that the whole issue has become politicized, but that's modern times for you. That's why ivermectin is called 'horse dewormer' rather than simply a medicine for parasite infections with a number of human applications. It's a term like 'XXXX denier' which is used to tie a political adversary to concentration camps by playing on our disgust or fears. Does it do anything for COVID? Dunno. Should it be a discussable matter without internet censorship and crazy people twitterstorms? Maybe. Am I sick of being propagandized by everyone? Yes.
- option_greek 5y agoSurprisingly, the reverse is also beneficial (though not for these two diseases): https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphar.2021.643619/full https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphar.2021.6436...
- zzt123 5y agoThoughts that popped up: 1. Isn’t hyperbaric therapy used by athletes to reduce inflammation? 2. Isn’t the failure of the amyloid hypothesis leading to researchers considering whether inflammation is the progenitor of Alzheimer’s? So if hyperbaric therapy does work… could that be a sign in favor of the inflammation hypothesis? Although, the authors suggest the results are due to improved oxygenation rather than any anti-inflammatory effects. Also, I’m not a doctor nor am I educated in medical things.
- lambdaba 5y agoI think the etiology is best summed up as "energy deficiency", basically the mitochondria aren't able to provide enough energy. Nutritional repletion, ketogenic diets, ketone supplementation (specifically ketone esters) and everything else that improves energy supply / circumvents issues (impaired glucose metabolism being #1) will help.
- eurasiantiger 5y agoIs it the oxygen, or the lack of carbon dioxide?
- koolba 5y agoIs this the same thing as scuba diving? And if so, can we look at the medical history of scuba divers to see the relative prevalence of Alzheimer’s?
- pivo 5y agoScuba divers don’t breathe pure oxygen, so that’s one difference
- nradov 5y agoScuba diving oxygen exposures are much more limited. Most divers still breathe compressed air, so a typical dive to, let's say, 66 ft / 20 m would only cause an oxygen partial pressure of 0.63 ATA. Some of us do go deeper and use mixed gasses with more oxygen, but we carefully limit oxygen exposure to ensure safety. Acute oxygen toxicity can cause a seizure which is usually fatal underwater. So we never go above 1.6 on the oxygen, and then only for brief periods.
- zius 5y agoThere has been quite some research on hyperbaric oxygen therapy and other neurological diseases. My dad was involved in MS research in the 80s utilizing hyperbaric oxygen. After some hopeful results, no clear evidence was found.
- sgeisler 5y agoIf this turns out to be true I wonder if it'd be practical (given the financial resources) to have pressure sealed rooms that you spend a lot of time in at home (e.g. your office). These could be precisely controlled (O2, CO2 levels, pressure, …) and possibly both increase current and future performance. The main problem seems the time needed to exit because an abrupt loss of pressure would be hazardous. But if you have a well-structured day it might work. This could be very interesting for high earning knowledge workers imo.
- tomcooks 5y agoIsn't the Big Blue Room this precisely controlled environment where you're supposed to spend a lot of time in, breathing oxygen?
- rbanffy 5y ago2ATA is like a 10 meter dive. I don’t think you’d need to decompress after a 90 minute dive like that.
- api 5y agoDepends on your financial resources.
- R0b0t1 5y agoIf true this is even bigger, as it indicates new directions to look for cures. No longer stuck on plaques; it may be metabolic, respiratory, or pulmonary. This could be more direct evidence of it.
- wkyle 5y agoOn a more feasible scale, a similar idea could be better air filtration/ventilation. Better ventilation in homes or offices to decrease CO2 levels could be an easier way to achieve a similar effect. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/06/health/conference-room-air.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/06/health/conference-room-ai...
- nradov 5y agoBreathing oxygen at a partial pressure over about 0.5 atm causes progressive pulmonary oxygen toxicity (loss of vital capacity). Brief exposures like the treatment protocol described in this paper are fine but it's not something you want to do all day every day. Saturation divers who live under pressure for days are careful to control chamber oxygen pressure below that limit. Nitrogen is regular air is an anaesthetic. It literally makes you stupid, and the effects increase with pressure. If you want to be smarter you need to replace the nitrogen with helium. The high pitched voices are going to make Zoom meetings hilarious. So generally working under pressure is totally impractical.
- sdze 5y agoThis approach flopped already for the case of rejuvenation. I doubt this therapy carried any fruits in future.
- lthornberry 5y agoHBOT is a widely used 'alternative' treatment for other neurological conditions. It's controversial, in part because there are very good reasons that it can cause neurological damage. This study is NOT a reason for anyone to run out and get HBOT. Even if the effect is real (and I don't think the study has enough info to draw than conclusion), you would need much larger trials to balance benefits and side effects.
- gfodor 5y agoIf HBOT is potentially beneficial, the proper response to a study is to tell people to raise it to their doctor to see if it makes sense for them.
- orangepurple 5y agoDoctors are stressed, overworked, and only keep up on cutting edge research at yearly conferences and sometimes through the grapevine. Your typical doctor won't know anything about HBOT.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- gfodor 5y agoThat’s why you should see a good doctor not a typical one. A good doctor would be interested in any research that is well founded despite being non-consensus. That doesn’t mean that they will endorse it. But people like the person I was replying to cuts them out of the process by presuming they already know the right choice for a patient.
- rectang 5y agoLots of treatments are "potentially beneficial", according to various "authorities", such as grapefruit as a cure for cancer. Going outside the scientific consensus is essentially an argument for alternative medicine.
- hinkley 5y ago
- light_hue_1 5y agoAnother horrific failure of reviewers. 6 subjects!? Did anyone actually check the study they registered? https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02790541 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02790541 Their actual clinical trial had 62 subjects and it had a control arm. The paper has only 6 subjects and no controls. If I run an experiment with 60 people, I can find evidence for anything (precognition, telekinesis, etc.) if I'm allowed to cherry pick 6 data points and drop any controls. The authors should be ashamed for polluting the scientific record with this junk.
- parliowl 5y agoit sounds like you are assuming they collected more data than they reported, is there evidence of that? They preregistered to collect 60, but they couldve simply been unable to collect that many (eg COVID). If it was preregistered perhaps the journal were obligated to publish the results no matter the outcome. Some journals do this ostensibly to combat publication bias. I didn’t read the whole thing: are the authors actually claiming the human data are informative? If so, that is wrong. But if they are just saying “hey, these are the data!” I wouldn’t be so harsh. Edit: Just read the methods. Data collection was 2016 to 2020, so COVID probably wasn’t the issue. They were selected for poor memory yet normal cognition in other domains, so it is possible they couldn’t recruit the number of subjects they proposed who met this criteria and also were willing and able to complete the treatment. I’m now quite confident the memory result is regression to the mean, and therefore nothing to do with the treatment. I also read the portion of the discussion related to cognition. They are claiming to have found something meaningful (in the human data) when they definitely haven’t.
- stuartbman 5y agoI would absolutely be harsh on this. There might well be reasons why they didn't include the other 54- perhaps these were the only 6 to maintain cognitive function sufficiently to continue to receive the treatment, or even be alive! This is why we analyse on an intention-to-treat basis rather than who actually received the treatment. The publication makes no such attempt to explain this potential source of bias.
- 5y ago
- zarmin 5y agoI prefer hyperbolic chambers. They are literally the greatest chambers anyone has ever seen anywhere ever.
- whoisthemachine 5y agoI'll be the one to say, I don't usually upvote jokes on Hacker News, but this one was deserving of the site.
- abakker 5y agoIgnoring the obvious problems with the study design that others have pointed out, it does seem like an interesting concept. We see several stories a year discussing the links between air pollution and dementia, and also a link between more exercise and less dementia. so it makes some sense to me that there might be a link between decreasing lung function and increasing dementia. if the function of the HBOT is to increase the ability of lungs to oxygenate blood, maybe there is a subtle but important threshold of blood oxygenation that we don't understand well enough. note: I am not a medical professional at all, it just seems like there is a "lung function" commonality in several of these stories.
- MichaelMoser123 5y agoWhat happened to the Lsd theraphy? Are there any follow ups on that one? https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnsyn.2020.00034/full https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnsyn.2020.0003... https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32973482/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32973482/