26 ms·
This Twitter thread highlights that this is a hyperbole/misinformation: https://twitter.com/samuel_marsh/status/1550883405105168386 https://twitter.com/samuel_m
by w-m 4y ago
This Twitter thread highlights that this is a hyperbole/misinformation: https://twitter.com/samuel_marsh/status/1550883405105168386 https://twitter.com/samuel_marsh/status/1550883405105168386
„I sincerely doubt that the absence of this particular paper and AB*56 from historical scientific record would have significantly changed the last 20 years of AD drug development. That is because there is strong genetic and other evidence for the role of amyloid in disease.“
- bigDinosaur 4y agoThat thread appears to be defending what appears to be one of the deadest ends ever in medical research. How much failure do these people need? I'm genuinely curious.
- jcranmer 4y agoReading it carefully, not really. The author is equally against anti-amyloid drugs as a solution to Alzheimer's--arguing that amyloid is at best a starting gun to the disease, and when it goes off, fixing amyloid won't reverse the disease. Want to see amyloid defenders? Read comments on Derek Lowe's blog, and there's quite a few commenters there who are arguing that a better amyloid drug that actually clears out the plaques is needed (apparently not realizing that's what Aduhelm, and it still didn't work).
- throwawaymaths 4y agoEh, we know diabetes is often reversible with careful diet and there's plenty of amyloid deposits in that disease. Evidence is mounting that amyloid is the downstream result of whatever actually causes these diseases.