
New experimental drug rapidly repairs age-related memory loss and improves mood - howard941
https://newatlas.com/experimental-drug-prevents-memory-loss-depression/58489/
======
hannob
... in mice.

So if you're a mouse of old age and fear alzheimers you can be happy, it's as
good as cured. If you're a human however this likely has little meaning for
you.

~~~
chr1
This comment can be found on all hn threads about medicine. Maybe we need
better models for testing? e.g. remove 14 day limit for testing on embryos,
genetically edit mice to make them more like humans or make very small and
short lived chimpanzees.

~~~
krageon
It can be found on all HN threads about medicine _where the only evidence is
found in mice studies_.

Your proposed changes in testing are either impractical ("genetically edit
mice") to do in a way that actually translates well (and that also translates
in a nonspecific way) or very, very unethical (later embryo testing, earlier
testing on animals which are sapient).

------
mabbo
The scary part for me isn't whether it works- either it does, or doesn't- but
how long it's effective before some part of the brain adapts to it. Imagine it
gets widely marketed, millions of people taking it, then we all learn that
after 3 years it's "Flowers for Algernon".

~~~
klenwell
I remember reading an article years ago (I want to say in the New Yorker in
the late 90s?) that made something like this point and kinda alarmed me. It
pointed out that a second generation of anti-depressants (SSRIs like Prozac)
had emerged and been aggressively marketed just as patents were expiring on
the first generation (Lithium?) and some troubling long-term effects with
those earlier drugs were becoming apparent. It questioned the long-term
effects of this new generation of pharmaceuticals. (Or even shorter-term
effects whose data had not yet been fully collected and analyzed.)

I have tried periodically to relocate this article but have not yet been able
to find it. It's probably old enough now that one could even evaluate the
validity of its forebodings.

~~~
bcOpus
Lithium is a mood stabilizer, and greatly predates modern psychiatric
intervention. I believe that the earlier generations you’re thinking of are
tricyclics and MAOI’s (Monoamine oxidase inhibitors). Both are still used, but
are no longer the first pharmaceuticals of choice.

------
jwildeboer
I wonder if it will be an addictive medication, as it is based on
benzodiazepines which are quite known to have severe withdrawal effects and
causing tolerance quite fast.

------
pdfernhout
Exercise, sleep, omega-3s, and fasting also can improve memory.

[https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/regular-exercise-
changes...](https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/regular-exercise-changes-
brain-improve-memory-thinking-skills-201404097110)

[https://www.sleepfoundation.org/articles/why-do-we-need-
slee...](https://www.sleepfoundation.org/articles/why-do-we-need-sleep)

[https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/252198.php](https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/252198.php)

[https://www.collective-
evolution.com/2015/12/11/neuroscienti...](https://www.collective-
evolution.com/2015/12/11/neuroscientist-shows-what-fasting-does-to-your-brain-
why-big-pharma-wont-study-it/)

But of course big pharma can't make any money from these...

~~~
hannob
> But of course big pharma can't make any money from these...

I hate to break this to you, but big pharma is making lots of money from omega
3 pills.

~~~
TaylorAlexander
Is that big pharma or the smaller generic manufacturers? I genuinely don’t
know.

~~~
epmaybe
The supplement industry in the US is around $122b/yr, whereas the
pharmaceutical industry in the US is around $510b/yr.

Not sure if some of big pharma has a stake in the dietary supplement industry,
maybe the original commenter could provide a link?

------
ryanmarsh
If anyone wants to know what this might feel like, get on a gaba blocker. Then
get off of it. Notice the difference. GABA is important stuff in your brain.

Note: I don’t actually recommend doing this. GABA blockers can fuck you up.

~~~
fucking_tragedy
> GABA blockers can fuck you up.

Drugs of this class are used to induce seizures in studies. They can kill you.

------
plg
I can’t tell from the jargon ... does this drug increase GABA in the brain or
decrease GABA in the brain? How does it compare to for example the drug
pregabalin?

~~~
meowface
From the few details they included, I think it's likely more complex than a
typical GABA analog, so the effects may not be as simple as raising or
lowering GABA.

------
jacques_chester
This is pretty much a pharmaceutical company's dream: it hits a segment with
more disposable income and apparently will require sustained usage.

On the other hand, miracle drugs for dementia and senile decline are announced
every ten minutes and I've just started tuning them out. Everything falls flat
on human trials. We're stuck with what we have.

~~~
bufferoverflow
Metformin and rapamycin look promising.

~~~
toomuchtodo
Someone recommended Metformin on HN, and I’ve been taking the recommended
maintenance dose without issue for a few months. Can’t tell how well it works
though for aging, as it’s binary (still alive be dead).

I do notice I have lower blood sugar levels, which helps me keep weight off
with less diet strictness and exercise.

~~~
onetimemanytime
Just sayin...did you talk to a doc or is that harmless for side effects?

~~~
toomuchtodo
Worst side effects are similar to a bad batch of Taco Bell.

No, did not talk to a doctor. I’m a responsible adult and did my research.

~~~
patagonia
Then how did you get an Rx?

~~~
toomuchtodo
Internet order from outside the US.

~~~
masonic
If you can get a prescription, it's dirt cheap.

~~~
toomuchtodo
I don’t have a PCP, and am not willing to exert the effort finding one who is
onboard with my aggressive approach to self-directed healthcare.

~~~
webninja
Use Zocdoc to find a local PCP with lots of availability. The ones with lots
of availability are more likely to prescribe whatever the patient wants and
needs.

------
billsmithaustin
Great. I’ll buy some for my old, senile mouse. Maybe.

~~~
api
You got downvoted for snark but it is quite important to draw attention to the
fact that mouse results seldom map straight onto humans. This is particularly
true for aging drugs since mice are shorter lived anyway and their aging is
faster and different.

~~~
odyssey7
I've wondered recently how much the reverse is true.

Can we reliably determine that a product is safe for humans by testing it on
animals, or is that also a fallacy?

~~~
loeg
Generally we don't test products on humans if they kill animals first.

~~~
cortic
We've likely missed cures or treatments with this method to, there are lots of
nutritious foods that are effectively poison to some animals. New (unnatural)
compounds and chemicals would very likely be even more varied in their
effects.

~~~
loeg
I think this is a well known downside. The upside is we kill fewer humans, and
I think IRBs are very comfortable with that tradeoff.

~~~
cortic
Not sure this is a valid argument; An unknown number of deaths[a] caused by
possibly _not_ developing a treatment, vs an unknown number of deaths[b]
caused by possibly developing a treatment.

Where as deaths[b] could be, in theory, a controlled and limited number of
willing participants, deaths[a] could, in theory, be millions of disease
victims.

a is not fewer than b.

~~~
JetSpiegel
Utilitarianism doesn't change the fact that it would be immoral to randomly
kill a bunch of people for questionable gain, in a pharmaceutical setting.

How many of those "willing participants" should be referred to a psychiatrist
for suicidal tendencies, or are desperate people being exploited by the
pharmaceutical industry.

~~~
cortic
>Utilitarianism doesn't change the fact that it would be immoral to randomly
kill a bunch of people for questionable gain, in a pharmaceutical setting.

Actually loeg made the Utilitarianism argument 'well known downside[let sick
people die]. The upside is we kill fewer humans' my disagreement was limited
to the use of the word _fewer_.

>How many of those "willing participants" [are willing]

Good point. The best reasoning would be [for the test subjects] that in their
current financial situation it makes sense to take this chance.. If this is
immoral then we should be questioning every dangerous job out there. i don't
know, maybe we should be.

I feel like a lot of animal testing is worthless; And i get the impression its
done to prove to the wrong people(CEOs Shareholders media) that we value human
life. The point here is that it might very well cost human life, and not a
small amount at that.

~~~
JetSpiegel
> If this is immoral then we should be questioning every dangerous job out
> there.

Precisely, and for the same reasons.

> I feel like a lot of animal testing is worthless; And i get the impression
> its done to prove to the wrong people(CEOs Shareholders media) that we value
> human life.

I don't know enough about pharmaceutical testing, but I do feel the animal
testing phases are a bureacratic requirement.

As I'm not mistaken, when creating the Ebola vaccine is the last few years,
many steps were skipped and large scale human testing happened very fast.

