
'Ideal biomarker' detects Alzheimer's disease before the onset of symptoms - nzp
https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2017-10/afea-bd100217.php
======
jdpigeon
This sounds almost too good to be true. It's published in a lower impact
journal so I'm wondering if the sample size was very small. Also, how did they
confirm the 'topography of the pathophysiology' (where the disease is) without
taking people's scalps off?

~~~
w458cmau
Looks like n=20 from skimming. MEG and MRI scans were used.

[http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hbm.23724/epdf](http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hbm.23724/epdf)

~~~
joelthelion
Yep. Far too early to get excited.

------
sxg
The article claims this test will promptly be used clinically. Diagnosing
Alzheimer’s while there is no cure or treatment available is useless. If used,
the test unnecessarily burdens patients sooner. I can see the importance of
this test in helping to find the root cause of Alzheimer’s, but I can’t see
why this test would be used clinically while we can’t do anything about
Alzheimer’s.

~~~
criddell
I'd definitely like to know if my future includes Alzheimer's. At the very
least, I'd stop saving for retirement. You say we can't do anything about the
disease, but as an individual, I can certainly decide how far I want to let
the disease progress.

~~~
wyager
It seems unwise to assume that we won’t find a cure or treatment in the next n
decades.

~~~
criddell
I wouldn't say it's unwise, but there's definitely a decision to be made.

If I decide to let the disease progress to the point where I don't know my
family members and am acting violently, how likely is it that a cure is going
to be found that can reverse that damage? I don't think it's very likely and
so I would probably choose to die before that point.

~~~
wyager
Yes, but it doesn’t make sense to avoid saving for retirement.

