Charles Piller OpEd in July 7 NY Times

Insights and discussion from the cutting edge with reference to journal articles and other research papers.
Post Reply
User avatar
thumperama
Senior Contributor
Senior Contributor
Posts: 174
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2014 11:54 am

Charles Piller OpEd in July 7 NY Times

Post by thumperama »

Charles is the author of the Science article that exposed the Univesity of Minnesota’s fabricated images in their 2006 AB paper.

He’s writing a book about the fraud, arrogance, and tragedy in AD research.

We need more truth seekers like Charles.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/07/opin ... &sgrp=c-cb
User avatar
TheresaB
Mod
Mod
Posts: 1677
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 9:46 am
Location: Front Range, CO

Re: Charles Piller OpEd in July 7 NY Times

Post by TheresaB »

thumperama wrote: Sun Jul 07, 2024 8:21 am Charles is the author of the Science article that exposed the Univesity of Minnesota’s fabricated images in their 2006 AB paper.

He’s writing a book about the fraud, arrogance, and tragedy in AD research.

We need more truth seekers like Charles.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/07/opin ... &sgrp=c-cb
This is only available to subscribers. Can you post the jist?
-Theresa
ApoE 4/4
User avatar
TheresaB
Mod
Mod
Posts: 1677
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 9:46 am
Location: Front Range, CO

Re: Charles Piller OpEd in July 7 NY Times

Post by TheresaB »

For those of us who do not subscribe to the NY Times, I did find this blurb about Charles Piller's upcoming book, Doctored: Fraud, Arrogance, and Tragedy in the Quest to Cure Alzheimer's scheduled to be available in February.
Nearly seven million Americans live with Alzheimer’s disease, a tragedy that is already projected to grow into a $1 trillion crisis by 2050. While families suffer and promises of pharmaceutical breakthroughs keep coming up short, investigative journalist Charles Piller’s Doctored shows that we’ve quite likely been walking the wrong path to finding a cure all along—led astray by a cabal of self-interested researchers, government accomplices, and corporate greed.

Piller begins with a whistleblower—Vanderbilt professor Matthew Schrag—whose work exposed a massive scandal. Schrag found that a University of Minnesota lab led by a precocious young scientist and a Nobel Prize–rumored director delivered apparently falsified data at the heart of the leading hypothesis about the disease. Piller’s revelations of Schrag’s findings stunned the field and the public.

From there, based on years of investigative reporting, Doctored exposes a vast network of deceit and its players, all the way up to the FDA. Piller uncovers evidence that hundreds of important Alzheimer’s research papers are based on false data. In the process, he reveals how even against a flood of money and influence, a determined cadre of scientific renegades have fought back to challenge the field’s institutional powers in service to science and the tens of thousands of patients who have been drawn into trials to test dubious drugs. It is a shocking tale with huge ramifications not only for Alzheimer’s disease, but for scientific research, funding, and oversight at large.
I assume this opinion piece is a high level pass following his book, about the vast network of deceit, research papers based on false data, and the tens of thousands of patients who have been drawn into trials to test dubious drugs.

About Charles Piller, from the same above link to his upcoming book:
Charles Piller is an investigative journalist for Science magazine and his work has appeared in theLos Angeles Times, The New York Times, The Sacramento Bee, and more. Piller has been honored with many national journalism awards, and is the author of Gene Wars, The Fail-Safe Society, and Doctored. He has reported on public health, biological warfare, infectious disease outbreaks, and other topics from the United States, Africa, Asia, Europe, and Central America. Follow him on X @CPiller.
-Theresa
ApoE 4/4
June
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2024 9:13 pm
Location: Southern CA

Re: Charles Piller OpEd in July 7 NY Times

Post by June »

TheresaB wrote: Sun Jul 07, 2024 9:21 am
thumperama wrote: Sun Jul 07, 2024 8:21 am Charles is the author of the Science article that exposed the Univesity of Minnesota’s fabricated images in their 2006 AB paper.

He’s writing a book about the fraud, arrogance, and tragedy in AD research.

We need more truth seekers like Charles.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/07/opin ... &sgrp=c-cb
This is only available to subscribers. Can you post the jist?
Hi TheresaB - I'm a NYT subscriber and read the excellent piece, happy to "gift" the full article here:

All the Alzheimer’s Research We Didn’t Do

Here is the intro:

"What if a preposterous failed treatment for Covid-19 — the arthritis drug hydroxychloroquine — could successfully treat another dreaded disease, Alzheimer’s?

Dr. Madhav Thambisetty, a neurologist at the National Institute on Aging, thinks the drug’s suppression of inflammation, commonly associated with neurodegenerative disorders, might provide surprising benefits for dementia.

It’s an intriguing idea. Unfortunately, we won’t know for quite a while, if ever, whether Dr. Thambisetty is right. That’s because unconventional ideas that do not offer fealty to the dominant approach to study and treat Alzheimer’s — what’s known as the amyloid hypothesis — often find themselves starved for funds and scientific mind share.

Such shortsighted rigidity may have slowed progress toward a cure — a tragedy for a disease projected to affect more than 11 million people in the United States by 2040."

Happy Sunday!
June 4/4 yet hopeful
Former biotech executive
NF52
Support Team
Support Team
Posts: 2957
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 9:41 am
Location: Eastern U.S.

Re: Charles Piller OpEd in July 7 NY Times

Post by NF52 »

Moderator Note: I've added the quotation icons for the article excerpt below.
thumperama wrote: Sun Jul 07, 2024 8:21 am Charles is the author of the Science article that exposed the Univesity of Minnesota’s fabricated images in their 2006 AB paper.

He’s writing a book about the fraud, arrogance, and tragedy in AD research.

We need more truth seekers like Charles.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/07/opin ... &sgrp=c-cb
TheresaB wrote: Sun Jul 07, 2024 9:21 am
This is only available to subscribers. Can you post the jist?
June wrote: Sun Jul 07, 2024 11:02 am Hi TheresaB - I'm a NYT subscriber and read the excellent piece, happy to "gift" the full article here:

All the Alzheimer’s Research We Didn’t Do

Here is the intro:
"What if a preposterous failed treatment for Covid-19 — the arthritis drug hydroxychloroquine — could successfully treat another dreaded disease, Alzheimer’s?

Dr. Madhav Thambisetty, a neurologist at the National Institute on Aging, thinks the drug’s suppression of inflammation, commonly associated with neurodegenerative disorders, might provide surprising benefits for dementia.

It’s an intriguing idea. Unfortunately, we won’t know for quite a while, if ever, whether Dr. Thambisetty is right. That’s because unconventional ideas that do not offer fealty to the dominant approach to study and treat Alzheimer’s — what’s known as the amyloid hypothesis — often find themselves starved for funds and scientific mind share.

Such shortsighted rigidity may have slowed progress toward a cure — a tragedy for a disease projected to affect more than 11 million people in the United States by 2040."
Happy Sunday!
4/4 and still an optimist!
NF52
Support Team
Support Team
Posts: 2957
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 9:41 am
Location: Eastern U.S.

Re: Charles Piller OpEd in July 7 NY Times

Post by NF52 »

Dr. Madhav Thambisetty, a neurologist at the National Institute on Aging, thinks the drug’s suppression of inflammation, commonly associated with neurodegenerative disorders, might provide surprising benefits for dementia.

It’s an intriguing idea. Unfortunately, we won’t know for quite a while, if ever, whether Dr. Thambisetty is right. That’s because unconventional ideas that do not offer fealty to the dominant approach to study and treat Alzheimer’s... often find themselves starved for funds and scientific mind share.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/07/opin ... &sgrp=c-cb

Obviously drug companies and biotech companies can fund research of their choosing. Donanemab (trade name Kisluna) was funded entirely by Eli Lilly. ALZ-801, which many ApoE 4/4 users appropriately are excited about, is funded by Alzheon and its investors.

Mr. Piller didn't cite evidence that inflammation research is "starved" for federal Alzheimer's funding, or that researchers who don't focus on amyloid have no share of a "scientific mind" in Alzheimer's or related dementia research. So I went to two sources I trust:

The Alzheimer's Drug Discovery Foundation (ADDF) does not partner with pharma companies:
We partner with nonprofit organizations, government, industry and others to leverage our collective funding and expertise. In all our partnerships, the goal is to fast-track programs to prevent, treat, and ultimately cure Alzheimer's disease
https://www.alzdiscovery.org/about-addf/our-partners

Howard Fillit, M.D., Co-Founder and Chief Science Officer at the ADDF released this statement on July 2 after the approval of donanemab (Kisluna) by the FDA:
The current pipeline is primed to deliver in the next few years, with nearly 75% of drugs in development focusing on targets beyond amyloid and tau. ... “We are no longer asking whether or not we can diagnose Alzheimer’s, but, rather, how early can we detect the disease?” adds Dr. Fillit. “With the validation of new biomarkers, especially blood tests, we can now diagnose the disease with ease and intervene earlier than ever, including in the preclinical phase, opening the door [to] prevention
https://www.alzdiscovery.org/news-room/ ... -donanemab

My second source was the NIA, where Dr. Thambisetty works. Below is a chart of current NIA-funded clinical trials with a full-size image and details of each trial within a category available at: https://www.nia.nih.gov/research/ongoing-AD-trials
Image 7-7-24 at 3.23 PM.jpeg
Eight (8) separate clinical trials in Phase 1 and 2 focus on inflammation. Inflammation is the largest focus of emerging research, which refutes the idea that it is starved. Two more inflammation trials are in Phase 2/3..

Below are the 8 Phase 1/2 trials grouped by their projected completion dates. Successful Phase 1 and 2 clinical trials have a high likelihood of getting Phase 3 funding and accelerated support from the FDA on trial design.

2024 completion

First-in-Human (Phase 1) Study to Evaluate the Safety, Tolerability, and Pharmacokinetics of IBC-Ab002 in Persons with Early Alzheimer's Disease (AD)

Development of a stress kinase inhibitor therapeutic candidate for Alzheimer's Disease and related dementia

GM-CSF/sargramostim treatment to improve cognition in Down syndrome

MCLENA-1: A Clinical Trial for the Assessment of Lenalidomide in Amnestic MCI Patients

2025 completion

Phase II trial of GM-CSF/sargramostim in Alzheimer's Disease

BEACH: Biomarker and Edema Attenuation in IntraCerebral Hemorrhage Phase 2a Trial

Central and peripheral immune cross-talk in Alzheimer's disease and their modulation by a novel immunotherapy

Phase 1 Trial to Assess Safety and Immune Effects of Xenon Gas in Healthy Human Subjects

These are multi-target trials that include inflammation as a target:

2024 completion date:

Phase 1 Clinical Trial of CMS121, a Novel Therapeutic Candidate for Alzheimer's Disease Note: this is described as "CMS121, a small molecule therapy to reduce neuroinflammation" being studied in healthy volunteers.

2025 completion
Allopregnanolone as Regenerative Therapeutic for Alzheimer's: Phase 2 Clinical Trial Note: Roberta Britton is the PI and has done extensive work on women and Apoe4.

Phase 2B and Phase 3 trials:
2026 completion date:

A Phase 2b Clinical Study of the P38 Alpha Kinase Inhibitor Neflamapimod in Patients with Mild-to-Moderate Dementia with Lewy Bodies (DLB)

2028 completion date:
REVERSE-Long COVID: A Multicenter Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial of Immunomodulation (with Baricitinib) for Long COVID Related ADRD The target population is : "Adults with Long COVID and cognitive impairment at high risk for long-term Alzheimer's disease and related dementias"

Aside from inflammation are a wide range of prevention and intervention trials, including time-restricted eating for vascular dementia, HIIT for cognition, light therapy, Apoe4- related effects on triglycerides of high-fat consumption, etc. etc.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
4/4 and still an optimist!
User avatar
Julie G
Mod
Mod
Posts: 9205
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 6:36 pm

Re: Charles Piller OpEd in July 7 NY Times

Post by Julie G »

We need more truth seekers like Charles.
Agree, Thumperama. Thank you for sharing! The book is entitled "Doctored: Fraud, Arrogance, and Tragedy in the Quest to Cure Alzheimer's." You can pre-order it here.
User avatar
Julie G
Mod
Mod
Posts: 9205
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 6:36 pm

Re: Charles Piller OpEd in July 7 NY Times

Post by Julie G »

Mr. Piller didn't cite evidence that inflammation research is "starved" for federal Alzheimer's funding, or that researchers who don't focus on amyloid have no share of a "scientific mind" in Alzheimer's or related dementia research.
Have you been able to preview the book manuscript before it's publication? Please share more! And, thank you for posting all of the promising new research in the pipeline. It's gratifying to see research branching off in different directions after such a heavy emphasis on the amyloid hypothesis. Given the multifactorial nature of AD, it will undoubtably be helpful to explore other avenues using both a both pharma and non-pharma approach.
Post Reply