Skip to main content

#PreventiveNeurology: is life a sexually transmitted neurodegenerative disease?

Age is a disease vs. Ageing as a natural biological process: have your say #PreventiveNeurology #HealthyAgeing

I have always cracked the joke 'that life is a sexually transmitted neurodegenerative disease with a 100% mortality'. This usually gets a mutated laugh until people start pondering the implications of the joke and realise that I am being serious.




Evolution never designed, and selected, the human brain and nervous system to function much past 35 years of age. It is only relatively recently that life expectancy has increased with the requirement of our brains to function into old age. It is clear that when we measure cognitive function, and brain volume, it is all downhill from about 35 years of age. Those of us who are older than 35 notice the subtle cognitive impairments that increase with age and the gradual malfunction of our nervous systems. When last have you tried tight-rope walking? Your failing balance system is simply a reflection of the global rot that is also shredding your cognition. Fortunately we have enough reserve to adapt and cope with slow decline in our mental faculties. However, if we live long enough we are all likely to become demented. Dementia in this setting is simply the reduction of cognition to a point when you can't manage socially and need help. To prevent the inevitable consequence of ageing is there anything we can do to optimise our brain health so our 'brains outlive' our bodies. 

How to optimise brain health so that we die of a systemic disease with our cognition relatively intact is the aim of our #PreventiveNeurology campaign. Maybe we should call it #HealthyAgeing? We have hypothesised, based on scientific principles, that there is a lot we can do to improve brain health. However, some of the interventions may require the administration of medications. For this to happen and be adopted by society we need to make ageing a disease. By defining ageing as a disease it changes everything. Firstly, it creates the incentives for the pharmaceutical industry to invest in the necessary R&D to get drugs to market. If ageing is a disease healthcare systems will pay for interventions. The corollary is that if ageing is not defined as a disease any interventions, to delay or modify ageing, will be limited to lifestyle interventions. By defining ageing as a disease it will allow us to develop tools for population screening to identify people who are either healthy or in the presymptomatic phase of known neurodegenerative disease. This will then allow us to test preventive strategies to delay the onset of symptomatic disease. 


This is why we want to shift the 'defining of ageing as a disease' debate centre stage! Please have your say. 

Comments

  1. Interesting take on things. I am prepared to have a disease called life if it leads to an improvement in my quality of life. I am interested to know what are your drug targets.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Re: 'Drug targets'. At moment is based on reducing your cardiovascular risk, therefore antihypertensives, statins and aspirin. This is not rocket science.

      Delete
  2. Aging is not a disease. To define aging as a disease may help in the development of medications - that does not mean the definition is accurate.

    Perhaps we need to rethink our lives and life stages, and not extend life spans so much. This means we should start thinking of putting our houses in order at a younger age and be ready to let go

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Are you ready for an EBV vaccine to prevent MS?

"Professor Giovannoni, you tell me that my daughter has a 1 in 40 chance of developing multiple sclerosis and that MS has reached epidemic proportions in parts of the world? Is there anything I can do to reduce her chances of getting MS? Is there anything we can do to stop other people from getting MS?" Although multiple sclerosis (MS) is a complex disease due to the interaction of genetic and environmental factors data on the occurrence of MS at the population level (epidemiology) supports the Epstein Barr Virus (EBV) as being necessary, but not sufficient, for someone to develop MS. In other words, EBV is probably the cause of MS. Of all the putative causative agents that have been proposed to be associated with MS, EBV is the only one where the risk of getting MS if you are EBV negative is close to zero or zero if you limit the analyses to those studies which use a technique called immunofluorescence microscopy as the gold-standard assay to detect anti-EBV antibodies. EBV ...

Smoking: a major preventable MS risk factor

I have been complaining about my low productivity levels since I have gotten back to work after my accident. However, last night with a single one hour webinar we have managed to set-up a new international collaboration to study and address the social determinants of health (SDoH) and their impact on MS. Our focus is going to be on which SDoH can we modify and hence improve the outcome for people with MS (pwMS)? Smoking is one such modifiable factor and needs to be addressed at a (1) population level with policy and legislation, (2) at a local or community level, (3) with the family and (4) at an individual level target the people with MS (pwMS). We know that pwMS who smoke have a worse outcome than people who don’t smoke. The effect of smoking is equivalent to negating the treatment effect of being on an injectable therapy such as interferon beta. Put simply smokers with MS start using a walking stick (EDSS = 6.0) about 6 years earlier than pwMS who don’t smoke. Getting pwMS to stop s...

Corpulence and poverty

Since stating my intention to join the  #BackTo21  campaign to get my BMI back to what it was when I was 21 years of age, I have had several emails and direct messages on social media questioning the wisdom of my intention.  Photo by NeONBRAND on Unsplash It is clear that despite BMI being a relatively poor metric of health there is overwhelming evidence that at a population level it predicts poor health outcomes. Importantly there is new data that indicates the target BMI for the prevention of type 2 diabetes and the metabolic syndrome depends on your ethnicity. For people of South Asian origin, there is a call to reset the BMI cutoff to 23.9, which for most people is within the normal range. At the same time, there is a call to classify obesity as an important social determinant of health. Arnaud Chiolero argues below for using BMI as a socioeconomic indicator. Do you agree? Isn’t it quite amazing that in a previous era corpulence was a sign of affluence, whereas in th...