• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Trouble with one of the latest Alzheimer's treatments:

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
There's always diseases from chickens. And pigs. And cows. So drugs manufactured with serious, serious side effects is not unusual. The ads say that death can result from taking certain well touted drugs.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Newsmax? They are not exactly reputable.
But those drugs are banned in other countries. Are those countries not reputable, is that what you're also saying? Maybe those other countries don't know what they're doing, but the U.S. does? (There are more sources than Newsmax that tell which drugs are banned in other countries.)
 

Secret Chief

nirvana is samsara
There are drugs approved in the u.S. that have many serious side effects. Doctors do not usually tell their patients what those side effects are.
The side effects are listed in with the rest of the drug details. All drugs have side effects.
 

pearl

Well-Known Member
Has there actually been found a way to diagnose Alzheimer disease before death? There are many, many forms of dementia, Alzheimer's only one, usually among younger, pre-senile persons. Unlike other dementias it attacks the entire body.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
First the setup . There are potentials to use monoclonal antibodies in Alzheimer treatments. This is the story of one that has advanced to human testing:

https://www.cms.gov/newsroom/press-...antibodies-directed-against-amyloid-treatment

From the article:



But when this drug goes wrong it can go wrong in a big way:

Science | AAAS



With only moderate improvements and a possible time bomb waiting to go off in many patients it appears that this drug will not be approved.
If I faced a nasty case of dementia decline (much
worse than currently), the possibility of improvement
would justify the risk of death. I've already made it
clear that if/when I'm no longer aware of things, kill me.
So the drug is all upside.
Anyone who dislikes this risk need only refuse the drug.
 
Last edited:

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
If I faced a nasty case of dementia decline (much
worse than currently), the possibility of improvement
would justify the risk of death. I've already made it
clear that if I'm no longer aware of things, kill me.
So the drug is all upside.
Anyone who dislikes this risk need only refuse the drug.
Unfortunately the drug had only modest success. To me only making one slightly less daft at a possible risk of a very painful, though quick, death does not seem to be worth the risk. If there was a clear improvement I could see the benefit. I might die or I might get better, sign me up. You might get slightly better or you might die painfully does not seem to be worth it.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Unfortunately the drug had only modest success. To me only making one slightly less daft at a possible risk of a very painful, though quick, death does not seem to be worth the risk. If there was a clear improvement I could see the benefit. I might die or I might get better, sign me up. You might get slightly better or you might die painfully does not seem to be worth it.
Research continues.
Gotta start somewhere.
A journey of 1000 miles begins with a single step.

Enuf cliches for ya?
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Unfortunately the drug had only modest success. To me only making one slightly less daft at a possible risk of a very painful, though quick, death does not seem to be worth the risk. If there was a clear improvement I could see the benefit. I might die or I might get better, sign me up. You might get slightly better or you might die painfully does not seem to be worth it.
Well, what about a natural death? (Only kidding, slightly) There are medical directives in the United States you can sign that may ensure your wishes if you cannot speak for yourself. I'm sure you're aware of that.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Well, what about a natural death? (Only kidding, slightly) There are medical directives in the United States you can sign that may ensure your wishes if you cannot speak for yourself. I'm sure you're aware of that.
Yes, one has control over one's life to an extent. But one still cannot opt out. The scary thing about diseases like Alzheimer's is the slow erosion of self.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
And they supported my claim about our close relationship with them.
right. so people can die if they eat a close relative. Or a virus escapes from a bat maybe? Or a chicken or mad cow. Very problematic. Me personally I'll eat chicken. I will eat beef but not often. I will not eat octopus or monkeys or gorilla meat. In any case, virus or no virus because the thought does not appeal to me.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Yes, one has control over one's life to an extent. But one still cannot opt out. The scary thing about diseases like Alzheimer's is the slow erosion of self.
Certainly there are other illnesses that are unpleasant. You're not asking me, but I think that all the chemicals put in the soil and food we eat change our brains and possibly bodies not to the betterment. Not to mention plastics and bug sprays.
 
Top