Did anyone read the articles? I did. From the way I read it, it seems like none of the trials going on right now are showing much promise. It also sounds like they author believes that instead they should be focusing on early intervention vs after diagnosis. Whatever, it was not a very encouraging article in my opinion.
I did email the author to see if that was what he was saying in the article. Will be interesting to see if he replies.
Just wondered if anyone else had read it. The link is on the home page under Breakng News.
I read the article before I put it up, and my reaction was the same as yours. Actually, it's been my reaction to all of these trials right along, but some of our members are having good results with the trials.
On Early Intervention - the consensus of professional opinion, based on all the speakers I have heard at various conferences is DELAY. They figure that if most people begin to develop symptoms at 80, and with early intervention, they can delay the progression for just 5 years, the person will die of something else before AD causes a problem for them. If they catch it early at 70, and delay the progression for 10 years, they figure the same. Don't everyone shoot the messenger - I'm just relaying what I have heard the experts say.
Of course, that does nothing for EOAD sufferers. If you get it at 50, and it's ravages are delayed until 55, you're going to get the full blown disease.