[HN Gopher] Japanese university finds Alzheimer's drug effective...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Japanese university finds Alzheimer's drug effective in treating
       ALS
        
       Author : amichail
       Score  : 180 points
       Date   : 2021-12-24 10:37 UTC (12 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (english.kyodonews.net)
 (TXT) w3m dump (english.kyodonews.net)
        
       | savant_penguin wrote:
        
       | akimball wrote:
       | ...But they aren't saying what the drug is
        
         | JPLeRouzic wrote:
         | This publication, which has Takeo Kato as author, might be
         | useful (it's about a curcumin derivative):
         | 
         | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34894926/
        
       | ToddWBurgess wrote:
       | I asked a neurologist I know about ALS drugs and he doesn't have
       | a lot of faith in any of them.
       | 
       | On a personal note, my mother had ALS. I can tell you it is a
       | terrible disease and a terrible way to go. I really do hope they
       | find something for it.
        
         | joshocar wrote:
         | I'm sorry that your mother had to go through that. My partner
         | is a neurologist and she hates having to give an ALS diagnosis.
         | It fills her with dread when symptoms align with a possible ALS
         | diagnosis. If she doesn't have a conclusion diagnosis she will
         | sometimes not even suggest that something might be ALS because
         | of the suicide risk. Personally, I think we will have a
         | treatment for it in my lifetime.
        
           | hourislate wrote:
           | >It fills her with dread when symptoms align with a possible
           | ALS diagnosis. If she doesn't have a conclusion diagnosis she
           | will sometimes not even suggest that something might be ALS
           | because of the suicide risk.
           | 
           | This is a huge problem. Someone close to our family spent a
           | lot of money to get a diagnosis because none of the doctors
           | wanted to "go there". They ended up having to visit the MAYO
           | Clinic for 2 weeks and spent a small fortune to find out, it
           | hurt the family financially.
        
             | xyzzy21 wrote:
             | My middle school chemistry teacher offed himself in his
             | backyard with a shotgun when he started noticing symptoms
             | of Huntington's (which his mother died of). I'd taken
             | chemistry with him the previous year and he was easily the
             | best chemistry teacher ever.
             | 
             | It's an issue but without a cure or even viable
             | ameliorative treatment, suicide is 100% a a legit personal
             | choice.
        
               | adamredwoods wrote:
               | Suicide is not personal, as with any pre-mature death. It
               | greatly affects the surviving family.
        
               | actually_a_dog wrote:
               | So does ALS. People only live on average 2-5 years post-
               | diagnosis, anyway, so, suicide really only speeds up the
               | inevitable by a very tiny bit.
        
               | vmception wrote:
               | The immediate family member dying with Huntington's
               | disease also clearly affected the rest of the family,
               | that's basically saying her death wasn't personal either.
               | Maybe this is an overly reductive false dilemma.
               | 
               | Knowing an immediate family member died of something that
               | has a genetic component gives people catalysts to watch
               | closely for.
        
           | loceng wrote:
           | https://www.emcell.com/treatments/als-mnd/
           | 
           | A potential treatment option for ALS, using fetal stem cells,
           | and so why not widely known - especially not in North
           | America; free documentary on the Emcell clinic here -
           | https://stemcellsmovie.com/ - they've been doing research
           | using fetal stem cells for 30 years, and providing clinically
           | for 25.
           | 
           | MS is also apparently stopped and regressed
           | (damage/degeneration healed) if treated/healed if
           | degeneration of the body's healing systems aren't too far
           | degraded.
        
           | ToddWBurgess wrote:
           | It it my understanding from talking to the same neurologist
           | that ALS is a diagnosis of exclusion. When everything is
           | ruled out the last diagnosis is ALS.
        
             | CoastalCoder wrote:
             | Is that because ALS is such an unwelcome diagnosis that all
             | alternative diagnoses are explored first?
             | 
             | Or is there some other reason for testing theories in that
             | order?
        
               | largbae wrote:
               | Generally the exclusion method is used because there is
               | no conclusive direct test (or the test itself is
               | damaging). Alzheimer's has no direct test either to my
               | knowledge, though there is a lot of work going on.
        
           | rewgs wrote:
           | Good. A few years back, I was having questionable symptoms
           | that pointed towards ALS, and my neurologist made the mistake
           | of telling me.
           | 
           | The two months between that day and the round of tests that
           | were able to prove his theory wrong were very easily the
           | worst of my life.
        
       | jeroenhd wrote:
       | Very promising! I hope the human trials will be effective, we'll
       | have to see in a few years how it all plays out.
       | 
       | Until then, it's great news for mice all around.
        
       | Kuinox wrote:
       | in mice.
        
         | hunterb123 wrote:
         | Is this trope necessary every time? It's clearly in mice in the
         | article.
         | 
         | Just consider it an update if you're skeptical, now they'll be
         | moving on to the next set of mice w/ sporadic or non-inherited
         | ALS....
        
           | ekianjo wrote:
           | It took them 6 paragraphs to mention mice. Thats astonishing
           | how much they oversell this kind of stuff.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | shawnz wrote:
             | Is it really such a big deal for them to build hype around
             | a potentially promising medical advancement? What's the
             | downside of this kind of reporting? Even if the drug fails,
             | maybe it will spur more research into similar candidates
        
               | toast0 wrote:
               | This type of reporting contributes to announcement
               | fatigue. What use is all this hype now for something that
               | is probably 5 years out from the market, if it even works
               | (which past results suggest is unlikely).
        
               | shawnz wrote:
               | Has that actually been demonstrated? I don't personally
               | feel fatigued by medical advancements which ended up not
               | panning out. In fact they make me feel hopeful about the
               | future and glad to exist in a society where such research
               | is even possible.
        
         | cblconfederate wrote:
         | If people are so bothered by mouse research, why don't we have
         | a line of research aiming to make humans look more like mice?
        
         | msie wrote:
         | They could have tried the drug on humans but they wouldn't have
         | had the results they got with mice.
        
           | TheChaplain wrote:
           | They probably have plenty of candidates, but if the outcome
           | would make the situation worse for the patient... Well,
           | they'd be in for a world of bad PR and possibly legal issues.
           | 
           | Imagine the headlines.. "Company X ruined the last living
           | days of patient"
        
         | omgitsabird wrote:
         | This low-effort comment is popping up more and more.
         | 
         | I would say just assume the title has "in mouse disease model"
         | at the end of it.
         | 
         | Then we can get away from the large dismissive negativity
         | spiral that all of these threads turn into.
        
           | busyant wrote:
           | Low effort, but high information density.
        
           | xyzzy21 wrote:
           | The warning is 100% correct. What works in mice only works in
           | humans about 20% of the time and it's even smaller that it
           | works without toxicity or adverse effects in humans even
           | then. So eagerly expecting a human treatment is irrational
           | and pollyanna.
           | 
           | Typically it's 10-20 years after animal studies such as mice
           | or monkeys before you can expect doctors to have it
           | available. And that's assuming everything work just right.
           | 
           | This is the same mistake MANY people make when some new
           | wonder-technology is announced from university labs - it's
           | another 20 years before an economically viable product that
           | actually is available to consumers will be appearing. It's
           | often called the "20 year rule". New battery technology could
           | solve green energy? But it's just a lab discovery? Nope. Not
           | anytime soon!!
           | 
           | I recently did a study of this for penicillin: it was almost
           | exactly 20 years from Fleming discovering it to when
           | consumers could get it from their doctors or hospitals post-
           | WW2!
           | 
           | Transistors didn't start to eclipse vacuum tubes in consumer
           | electronics until 20 years after the invention of the
           | transistor (1948 to early 1970s). Same for integrated
           | circuits - 20 years before the Silicon Valley boom took off
           | (1959 to mid-to-late 1970s) and consumers started to benefit
           | with PCs.
        
           | junon wrote:
           | Not really low effort if it points out a huge problem in the
           | world of scientific journalism...
        
             | omgitsabird wrote:
             | Isn't this more of a problem with HN guidelines for
             | submitting articles than anything else?
             | 
             | If someone reads the article, they see where it says this
             | is in a mouse model of an uncommon form of ALS.
        
               | actually_a_dog wrote:
               | Yes. There are lots of problems with the HN "guidelines,"
               | not least of which that they're actually _rules_ you get
               | punished for breaking and not  "guidelines" you can
               | choose not to follow.
        
             | scoopertrooper wrote:
             | The article stated exactly the limitations of the
             | experiment. It was conducted with mice and only mice with a
             | less common form of ALS.
             | 
             | I'd say the problem is less with journalism in this
             | instance, and more-so with peoples limited attention spans.
        
               | ProjectArcturis wrote:
               | The article didn't even name the drug. It's a terrible
               | article.
        
               | scoopertrooper wrote:
               | I had a quick look around, no article seems to mention
               | it, but the article leaves enough clues that it's pretty
               | easy to find. The drug is curcumin derivative GT863, I'm
               | not sure how much that enriched either of our
               | understandings though.
               | 
               | https://www.researchgate.net/publication/356971571_Therap
               | eut...
        
               | maximus-decimus wrote:
               | It's a problem with the title.
        
               | scoopertrooper wrote:
               | My point regarding attention span stands. The title could
               | certain do with improvement, but people should not be
               | consuming their news of the basis of titles.
        
               | maximus-decimus wrote:
               | I do because most articles are crap. The comments are
               | simply better quality. For example, I was able to tell in
               | 2 seconds that this was on mice from reading the comments
               | and so that I don't care about the article.
        
               | scoopertrooper wrote:
               | Quite often comments are wrong, top-rated comments are
               | often reflective of bombastic conclusions arrived at (and
               | upvoted) by people who had not read the article.
        
               | D-Coder wrote:
               | The first page of HN has thirty articles. I can't read
               | all of them. I don't recognize the author's names, so I
               | can't judge by that. The number of comments does not tell
               | me if I will be interested in the article. The title is
               | all I have to go on.
               | 
               | Admittedly, I should probably assume that anything
               | relating to Alzheimer's or Parkinson's has an implicit
               | "(in mice)" tag.
        
           | cute_boi wrote:
           | "Mice lies Monkey Exaggerate"
           | 
           | The title is deceiving and it should contain mice. And such
           | criticism are okay in my book.
        
           | jtbayly wrote:
           | No.
           | 
           | The title is clickbait. It claims there is an effective
           | treatment for ALS.
           | 
           | It is so bogus. In mice should be added to the title.
           | 
           | Thank you, GP, for the "in mice" comment. In this case it was
           | absolutely crucial for me getting what was going on.
        
           | fareed79 wrote:
           | It appears to be on mice only in the 5th paragraph, and the
           | sole photo is of a patient (before it is said to be on mice).
           | Sarcasm/negativity is a normal reaction when you spot an ad
           | for a local university with a random research with especially
           | touches most of us. It is not so hard to be honest and
           | support honest research and these respectable advances
           | without such tricks.
        
         | dorkwood wrote:
         | How do they find mice with ALS?
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | moffkalast wrote:
           | If a medical researcher can't give a mouse cancer and cure it
           | he ain't any good.
           | 
           | Somewhat better ones can do the same for ALS it seems.
        
           | ekianjo wrote:
           | Mice models which have pretty much nothing to do with actual
           | ALS.
        
             | ProjectArcturis wrote:
             | You're getting downvoted, but this is exactly right. We
             | create a mutant mouse that has symptoms that are somewhat
             | similar to the disease we're studying. Then we find a drug
             | that cures the "disease" in the mouse. Then we try it in
             | humans and it fails and we make the shocked Pikachu face.
        
               | sva_ wrote:
               | Similar deal with Alzheimer's.
        
             | chaps wrote:
             | Can you clarify? Like, I would assume that if it's still
             | named "ALS" that there are _some_ commonalities. If those
             | differences are big enough (to the extent that the models
             | are nothing alike) why is the naming shared?
             | 
             | Happy to accept "bad journalism"!
        
               | johnisgood wrote:
               | I dunno, but when they do research on MS (multiple
               | sclerosis), they do it on mice with experimental allergic
               | encephalomyelitis (EAE), which is an animal model of MS.
        
         | Aaargh20318 wrote:
         | Every time I read about some drug that appeared to work in
         | animal models but not in actual humans I wonder how often the
         | opposite is true. We are necessarily limiting ourselves to
         | drugs that work in humans + at least one other species.
        
       | elektor wrote:
       | If anyone is interested in a promising drug tested in humans and
       | not mice, AMX0035 is under FDA review and had positive Phase II
       | results.
       | 
       | https://www.clinicaltrialsarena.com/comment/potential-fda-ap...
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | nefitty wrote:
         | Valdenafil (Levitra) has shown some effect on ALS [1].
         | Coincidentally, the related sildenafil (Viagra) was identified
         | through computer-aided research as a drug of interest in
         | Alzheimer's prevention. [2]
         | 
         | 1.
         | https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S096999611...
         | 2. https://www.everydayhealth.com/alzheimers-disease/viagra-
         | may...
        
           | therein wrote:
           | It has very interesting effects. You'll find that it helps
           | with ingrown hairs. They'll begin to get out on their own,
           | within hours of taking it orally and in general become very
           | eager to come out with simple hand motions.
           | 
           | Someone should look into it. Consistent effect. I looked into
           | it years ago and indeed PDE5 inhibition has something to do
           | with ingrown hairs.
        
             | skrtskrt wrote:
             | It seems like a commonality if all these drugs that have
             | multiple positive effects is that they all increase blood
             | flow in some way? Am I wrong?
        
               | arrosenberg wrote:
               | Yes, Viagra in particular works by causing vasodilation.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-12-24 23:01 UTC)