Dogman wrote:

http://www.jerrynaughton.com/?p=462

"What is suddenly triggering this amyloid response, and why is it
accelerating? Three co-factors are implicated. First, our hysterical
avoidance of essential natural fats; compounded by their replacement
with carbohydrates, which are inflammatory; and finally, the zealous
prescribing of statins to lower cholesterol, compromising this
essential nutrient’s ability to transport fat to the brain without
being damaged in the bloodstream.

"If that’s a correct analysis, the solution to the accelerating rates
of dementia — and also obesity, diabetes, celiac, and other “diseases
of civilization” — over the last 30 years isn’t another expensive
lifetime drug prescription.

Few of us low carb fans are surprised that a standard issue low carb,
medium protein, high fat diet plan is good for yet another condition.
Few of us who read about the "Big Fat Lie" are surprised that a standard
issue low fat, medium protein, high carb diet plan makes yet another
condition worse.

Brain - That's an essential fatty acid issue combined with a fat
transport issue. It should be possible with very careful planning to
get it right on a low fat plan. In the meantime low carbers are already
ahead of the curve when it comes to essential fatty acids.

"Now the developers are hoping the remaining drugs in trial will “hit
their target.” Meaning, if they reduce plaque without killing or
making the patient worse, they can declare victory and start selling
them at $1,000-$2,500 a week. Note that definition doesn’t include
curing or stopping Alzheimer’s."

Reduced plaque shold reduce the symptoms. Well worth doing. It's a
partial cure. Better than nothing, if it's better than a standard issue
low carb diet plan anyways.

Big Pharma keeps pushing drugs that affect so-called risk markers, but
do very little to nothing to actually affect DISEASE & MORTALITY. It
does, however, keep the cash registers going "Ka-Ching!"

Big Pharma does not target a cure for any one specific condition.
Medical professors do however. Cures beat treatments in the market,
when they are available. The economic situation is a strange one where
it's harder to get a cure through the process than to get a treatment
through the approval process but the cures that do make it through the
approval process get used. Big Pharma can't quite suppress cures but
they can and do make the approval process difficult enough that a cure
needs to be strongly wanted to be able to make it through.

Note that antibiotics are cures for bacterial diseases and Big Pharma
does pursue new ones. Sort of the "exception that proves the rule".

Also note that vaccinations prevent and therefore outperform cures. In
the current market vaccinations are low money items so Big Pharma does
little to fund them other than the annual flue shots that act like a
renewable consumption. So there are government labs that work on
vaccines and there are large private charitable endowments that work on
vaccines.

When an HIV vaccine happens it won't help anyone currently infected.
Anyone currently infected wants a cure. Not gonna happen unfortunately.
Folks who debate the link between HIV and AIDS will see the number of
new cases drop after that, or they will not. I'm one of the ones who
expects the rate to drop. I'm also one of the ones who avoids all known
vector behaviors to not get infected in the first place.