5 ms·

My pet hypothesis is that Alzheimer's is the effect of fungi on the body. I think depending upon genetics we have a certain resistance and as we age it weakens.

My pet hypothesis is that Alzheimer's is the effect of fungi on the body. I think depending upon genetics we have a certain resistance and as we age it weakens. Possibly early onset Alzheimer's could be any factor of exposure levels throughout one's life and or from genetics possibly weakening the resistance of the body towards fungi. While the type of dementia that most elderly develop is possibly the outcome of long-haul exposure to fungi. I've already read some research between fungi and Alzheimer's but not all. I'm just someone who has/had family members with the illness and I'm curious about it. edit: whoever downvotes me, please reply because I'm very curious on if you're downvoting for any specific reason from research that makes you highly doubt my pet hypothesis.

forum_ghost 4y ago
what made you think it's fungi exposure?
- iosystem 4y ago
  I've been reading research on Alzheimer's from the start of when I became informed about my family members having it. There's multiple approaches that research is going over of course. Some is on fungi like what my comment asserts. If you do a quick google search you can read about it in great detail.
  - TedDoesntTalk 4y ago
    “The End of Alzheimer’s” by Dr Dale Bredesen mentions mold as one vector, but I don’t recall fungi as one. Key insights from that excellent book are that there are several different types of Alzheimer’s, each with a different cause. Other causes have been mentioned in these comments but not all and not comprehensively.
WhompingWindows 4y ago
I didn't downvote you, however I think people may dislike the idea of one having their own pet hypothesis without linking serious evidence to back it up. Amyloid plaques have been heavily studied and may have some tangential but real link to Alzheimer's, it's a plaquey protein found in the brain along with Beta-Tau which is another protein I believe. I personally haven't heard of any fungi theory yet, the main ones I've heard were viral things, pollution, or perhaps some breakdown in the brain's ability to clean itself up over time. And why are certain individuals spared and not others? I know there are genes that predispose one to it, and there are early-onset cases which come on more often than others. If it was anything obvious in the environment, I'd hope we'd know by now...but it may be something hard to measure in large epidemiological studies like a more rare pollutant or something we overlooked in creating large observational datasets? Anyway, I'd encourage you to link the best studies you've found and that may help some to read them.
- iosystem 4y ago
  I don't think we should discourage people from having a pet hypothesis if they're open about it. I seriously doubt that in academia most don't have their own pet hypothesis. I think the problem is when persons aren't open about whatever being their pet hypothesis and or even deliberately going out of bounds on what's acceptable based on their own pet hypothesis. As I said to another person that replied to me, you can google "fungi and Alzheimer's " to easily see the research in great detail. Maybe even visiting researchgate and doing the same. Also thanks for replying because I do have family members that have it.
  - robbiep 4y ago
    Most pet hypotheses of researchers are informed by actually knowing about the disease, and not disregarding things such as 1) years of schooling (protective) 2) early onset alzheimers (genetic) 3) APOE2 (protective) 4) APOE4 (higher risk) and the multitude of other factors. Basically, if you’re going to make a claim and not be some armchair scientist, you need to not Dunning-Krueger yourself. I’m not saying you have, but the way you’re representing yourself suggests you’re at risk of it
    - iosystem 4y ago
      I think people are acting unfair towards me if what you're asserting is the cause of the behaviour. Unless my interpretation and expression of a "pet hypotheses" was truly wrong of me to do. Since I don't think writing about one's pet hypotheses is making a claim in what would indeed warrant negative behaviour.
kjs3 4y ago
So we're suppose to provide 'research' if we downvote your 'hypothesis', but you can just toss it out there and expect us to take it serious without the same consideration.
- iosystem 4y ago
  I'm not arguing against downvoting if someone believes what I did is actually against hackernews if it truly is? My edit expresses how I would be grateful for anyone informed in the research to explain if they obviously disagree enough to downvote me. They would've likely read what I've read anyhow on the fungi & Alzheimer's research.
Cupertino95014 4y ago
OK, I didn't downvote it (yet). But is it too much to ask that you provide a few references, given that this not a well-known theory, at least for me?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

forum_ghost 4y ago

what made you think it's fungi exposure?

iosystem 4y ago
I've been reading research on Alzheimer's from the start of when I became informed about my family members having it. There's multiple approaches that research is going over of course. Some is on fungi like what my comment asserts. If you do a quick google search you can read about it in great detail.
- TedDoesntTalk 4y ago
  “The End of Alzheimer’s” by Dr Dale Bredesen mentions mold as one vector, but I don’t recall fungi as one. Key insights from that excellent book are that there are several different types of Alzheimer’s, each with a different cause. Other causes have been mentioned in these comments but not all and not comprehensively.

WhompingWindows 4y ago

I didn't downvote you, however I think people may dislike the idea of one having their own pet hypothesis without linking serious evidence to back it up. Amyloid plaques have been heavily studied and may have some tangential but real link to Alzheimer's, it's a plaquey protein found in the brain along with Beta-Tau which is another protein I believe. I personally haven't heard of any fungi theory yet, the main ones I've heard were viral things, pollution, or perhaps some breakdown in the brain's ability to clean itself up over time. And why are certain individuals spared and not others? I know there are genes that predispose one to it, and there are early-onset cases which come on more often than others. If it was anything obvious in the environment, I'd hope we'd know by now...but it may be something hard to measure in large epidemiological studies like a more rare pollutant or something we overlooked in creating large observational datasets? Anyway, I'd encourage you to link the best studies you've found and that may help some to read them.

iosystem 4y ago
I don't think we should discourage people from having a pet hypothesis if they're open about it. I seriously doubt that in academia most don't have their own pet hypothesis. I think the problem is when persons aren't open about whatever being their pet hypothesis and or even deliberately going out of bounds on what's acceptable based on their own pet hypothesis. As I said to another person that replied to me, you can google "fungi and Alzheimer's " to easily see the research in great detail. Maybe even visiting researchgate and doing the same. Also thanks for replying because I do have family members that have it.
- robbiep 4y ago
  Most pet hypotheses of researchers are informed by actually knowing about the disease, and not disregarding things such as 1) years of schooling (protective) 2) early onset alzheimers (genetic) 3) APOE2 (protective) 4) APOE4 (higher risk) and the multitude of other factors. Basically, if you’re going to make a claim and not be some armchair scientist, you need to not Dunning-Krueger yourself. I’m not saying you have, but the way you’re representing yourself suggests you’re at risk of it
  - iosystem 4y ago
    I think people are acting unfair towards me if what you're asserting is the cause of the behaviour. Unless my interpretation and expression of a "pet hypotheses" was truly wrong of me to do. Since I don't think writing about one's pet hypotheses is making a claim in what would indeed warrant negative behaviour.

kjs3 4y ago

So we're suppose to provide 'research' if we downvote your 'hypothesis', but you can just toss it out there and expect us to take it serious without the same consideration.

iosystem 4y ago
I'm not arguing against downvoting if someone believes what I did is actually against hackernews if it truly is? My edit expresses how I would be grateful for anyone informed in the research to explain if they obviously disagree enough to downvote me. They would've likely read what I've read anyhow on the fungi & Alzheimer's research.

Cupertino95014 4y ago

OK, I didn't downvote it (yet). But is it too much to ask that you provide a few references, given that this not a well-known theory, at least for me?

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]