Brindabellas said:
buffy said:
SCIENCE said:
buffy said:
Divine Angel said:
ms spock said:
SCIENCE said:
Wow! š²š²š²
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-07-30/health-dementia-alzheimers-blood-test-centre-signs-diagnosis/106975294
The ability to test for signs of Alzheimerās disease decades earlier could be a step closer with a new blood test set for clinical trials within months.
Laboratory test āpTau217ā is thought to give results in as little as 18 minutes and can detect changes in the brain decades before someone might develop symptoms.
It works by detecting a protein called phosphorylated tau 217 which is a biomarker for a build up of amyloid plaque in the brain.
A medical research group says the rollout for doctors to refer patients is expected in the next six to nine months.
In what way would having this biomarker change the way you live your life? Is there any gain in this knowledge?
maybe after getting a diagnosis they could donate more to preventative research
I was trained to ask, when considering a test or an intervention, āwill the result of this test make a difference to how this person is treated (if not, donāt do it), or doing this intervention make a difference to the patientās life (if not, donāt do it).ā
There is currently medication that delays the progression of Alzheimerās. If started early, the progression would be even slower. and new medication is currently underdevelopment.
we mean aside from being facetious in our rebuffal and we apologise for that
one without a way to measure a condition at a given stage then itās even more pointless to have interventions that could target the condition at that stage
two partially accounted for by one there is a difference between the application of a test to a given individual for individual purposes, and the application of a test to individuals in a population for broader purposes like research and policy and epidemiology