The facts here paint a pretty different picture. 10 of the 11 scientists on the panel voted "no" and the last member voted "uncertain". These no votes were prec

The facts here paint a pretty different picture. 10 of the 11 scientists on the panel voted "no" and the last member voted "uncertain". These no votes were precisely because the only "successful" study of the drug only showed plaque reduction and failed to show any direct improvement in Alzheimers outcomes. To me that indicates that this isn't a controversy between scientists, but an example of corruption / regulatory capture. Biogen spent a bunch of money researching a drug based on an unproven theory. When their results were very poor, the FDA allowed them to switch to accelerated approval, then ignored their unanimous panel of experts to grant that approval. This allows Biogen to sell an extremely expensive drug and recoup some of their loses before the ongoing studies required under accelerated approval further undermine the drug's claims of effectiveness.