@jontycampbell: I also have the one-page summary graphic that keeps repeating throughout the series in high rez. Would this be useful? I am currently loading pdf and graphics files on the Project Wellbeing site under the "Steve" tab. I could put it there. Let me know. (my apologies for the site interface, I'm looking for better)
@jontycampbell: The presentation format is the automated conversion output from the native PowerPoint via a ppt-to-YouTube software package. I do not know if they have a different output setting that I could use. And the time commitment is daunting to my current schedule. But I do have the original PowerPoint and associated MP3 files. Would these suffice?
@8333P: Thetranslation of this information into the practical was originally untended to be a Reversing Alzheimer's Disease (in your spare time) supplementary video, done in a black-comedy style channeling Letterman for the top-ten therapies. But the project never reached critical mass, so I posted it to the Project Wellbeing website in script form. I am also initiating a series of posts there about the practical therapeutic issues, which could easily become dialogs. Only 6 posts so far.
This is a good story. The steps you assert make sense and are plausible. the big problem is this. Biological systems and science in general are extremely complicated. There are lots of plausible stories that can be made up about how the world works and most of them will be wrong or at best minor factors. You have a hypothesis here, but people have loads of plausible hypotheses about Alzheimers. You need experiments designed to falsify your hypothesis. Then it will be taken seriously.
@shodanxx Challenging ideas is necessary but not even close to sufficient. Challenging ideas only gets you to philosophy, not science. There is no point in arguing what the world is like when there is an unknown number of factors you don't know. I have worked with and read the work of both physicians and scientists and most physicians really don't know how new information is discovered. They are textbook not lab trained. I am not saying he is wrong, just that we really don't know. Will watch vid
@michalchik : But when you make decisions in the world, you can only make wise (as opposed to informed) decisions when you have an appreciation for the what-you-don't-know side of the pro-con equation. Knowing is not the simple thing that most believe. John Ioannidis is showing deep statistical flaws in the current gold standard for knowing (the double-blind study), in which 50% to 90% of unequivocal studies are found to be erroneous within 20 years. Ouch.
@swfowkes Right which is why even double blind studies are not trusted without extensive replication and elucidation of a mechanism. It is a very difficult process indeed but it is much better than just going with plausible explanations. Even those 50-90% false positive figures (frightening I agree) represent more certainty than good stories based on known facts. In fact that is the starting point of those studies that are so flawed.
@michalchik : But when you make decisions in the world, you can only make wise (as opposed to informed) decisions when you have an appreciation for the what-you-don't-know side of the pro-con equation. Knowing is not the simple thing that most believe. John Ioannidis is showing deep statistical flaws in the current gold standard for knowing (the double-blind study), in which 50% to 90% of unequivocal studies are found to be erroneous within 20 years. Ouch.
@shodanxx I just watched "Nutrients for Better Mental Performance." I was initially impressed because he obviously has a scientific background and certainly doesn't come across like a "snake oil" salesman. Still, something about it didn't set well with me. Others commented that he didn't provide any references for his claims, of which there are many! Although many seem plausible, even to a skeptic like me, we need to see testing and peer-reviewed studies. Too bad. It looked so interesting.
someone who claimed to be working in something alzheimers-related who said this video series was "all bullshit", but he didn't really pointed to anything specific so I found that comment to be totally useless
you need to cite your sources, yes
but what about original research (which this is it would seem)
it can still be snake oil of course
but simply not citing sources (just like not publishing raw data) alone doesn't make it so
@Guitcad1 : Ask and ye shall receive. Or, better yet, engage your own values in finding the source material for yourself. People who find source material for themselves value it more. In this day and age, the technology abounds on so many levels. The bottleneck in progress is not references, but imagination. As long as people believe that Alzheimer's disease is a death sentence, it will be, for them. I'm speaking to early adopters. Their results will compel studies in 20 years.
@shodanxx : Thank you for the honorary doctorate. But my degree in organic chemistry is a Bachelors degree, and a Bachelor of Arts degree, to make it even more amusing. (Reed College does not do Bachelor of Science degrees.) And you are right about how science is done, 1) about how institutional science is done, and 2) how the art of science is done. My articles on the CERI web site expose multiple scientific frauds. Critical thinking is good, but expansive thinking is its complement.
@michalchik: Good point. But the Alzheimer's research community will take ten years to test this, if ever. So until Hell freezes over, I want the technology in the hands of the people who can use. I learned a big lesson from the divergent outcomes from my efforts on behalf of Down's syndrome children, which were successful, and on behalf of GHB consumerism, which did a belly flop off the high dive. Change through grass-roots effort works. Change through media and government doesn't.
@michalchik: Good point. But the Alzheimer's research community will take ten years to test this, if ever. So until Hell freezes over, I want the technology in the hands of the people who can use it. I learned a big lesson from the divergent outcomes from my efforts on behalf of Down's syndrome children, which were successful, and on behalf of GHB consumerism, which did a belly flop off the high dive. Change through grass-roots effort works. Change through media and government doesn't.
@jontycampbell: I also have the one-page summary graphic that keeps repeating throughout the series in high rez. Would this be useful? I am currently loading pdf and graphics files on the Project Wellbeing site under the "Steve" tab. I could put it there. Let me know. (my apologies for the site interface, I'm looking for better)
swfowkes 5 months ago
@jontycampbell: The presentation format is the automated conversion output from the native PowerPoint via a ppt-to-YouTube software package. I do not know if they have a different output setting that I could use. And the time commitment is daunting to my current schedule. But I do have the original PowerPoint and associated MP3 files. Would these suffice?
swfowkes 5 months ago
Title is a bit misleading, not much practical help here.
8333P 5 months ago
@8333P: Thetranslation of this information into the practical was originally untended to be a Reversing Alzheimer's Disease (in your spare time) supplementary video, done in a black-comedy style channeling Letterman for the top-ten therapies. But the project never reached critical mass, so I posted it to the Project Wellbeing website in script form. I am also initiating a series of posts there about the practical therapeutic issues, which could easily become dialogs. Only 6 posts so far.
swfowkes 5 months ago
Can you post a higher definition version of this slide presentation?
jontycampbell 8 months ago
Interesting lessons on the trole of Glutathione and ATP.
I knew for years about trans fat before the mainstream woke up to it....
jontycampbell 8 months ago
Interesting lessons on the trole of Glutathione and ATP
jontycampbell 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
company called adeona pharm has something big cal Reazin and currently big pharm and paid bashers trying to downgrading it Reazin adeona pharm
LASCUEVAS33 10 months ago
This is a good story. The steps you assert make sense and are plausible. the big problem is this. Biological systems and science in general are extremely complicated. There are lots of plausible stories that can be made up about how the world works and most of them will be wrong or at best minor factors. You have a hypothesis here, but people have loads of plausible hypotheses about Alzheimers. You need experiments designed to falsify your hypothesis. Then it will be taken seriously.
michalchik 2 years ago
@michalchik
I believe that Dr Fowkes is aware of how science is done, seeing as he encourages others to always challenge what everyone says including him
you should watch Dr Fowkes' other video on the google talks called "Nutrients for Better Mental Performance"
watch?v=-PA-buwI3q4
shodanxx 1 year ago
@shodanxx Challenging ideas is necessary but not even close to sufficient. Challenging ideas only gets you to philosophy, not science. There is no point in arguing what the world is like when there is an unknown number of factors you don't know. I have worked with and read the work of both physicians and scientists and most physicians really don't know how new information is discovered. They are textbook not lab trained. I am not saying he is wrong, just that we really don't know. Will watch vid
michalchik 1 year ago
@michalchik : But when you make decisions in the world, you can only make wise (as opposed to informed) decisions when you have an appreciation for the what-you-don't-know side of the pro-con equation. Knowing is not the simple thing that most believe. John Ioannidis is showing deep statistical flaws in the current gold standard for knowing (the double-blind study), in which 50% to 90% of unequivocal studies are found to be erroneous within 20 years. Ouch.
swfowkes 5 months ago
@swfowkes Right which is why even double blind studies are not trusted without extensive replication and elucidation of a mechanism. It is a very difficult process indeed but it is much better than just going with plausible explanations. Even those 50-90% false positive figures (frightening I agree) represent more certainty than good stories based on known facts. In fact that is the starting point of those studies that are so flawed.
michalchik 5 months ago
@michalchik : But when you make decisions in the world, you can only make wise (as opposed to informed) decisions when you have an appreciation for the what-you-don't-know side of the pro-con equation. Knowing is not the simple thing that most believe. John Ioannidis is showing deep statistical flaws in the current gold standard for knowing (the double-blind study), in which 50% to 90% of unequivocal studies are found to be erroneous within 20 years. Ouch.
swfowkes 5 months ago
@shodanxx I just watched "Nutrients for Better Mental Performance." I was initially impressed because he obviously has a scientific background and certainly doesn't come across like a "snake oil" salesman. Still, something about it didn't set well with me. Others commented that he didn't provide any references for his claims, of which there are many! Although many seem plausible, even to a skeptic like me, we need to see testing and peer-reviewed studies. Too bad. It looked so interesting.
Guitcad1 1 year ago
@Guitcad1
I mentionned this talk on reddit a while back
someone who claimed to be working in something alzheimers-related who said this video series was "all bullshit", but he didn't really pointed to anything specific so I found that comment to be totally useless
you need to cite your sources, yes
but what about original research (which this is it would seem)
it can still be snake oil of course
but simply not citing sources (just like not publishing raw data) alone doesn't make it so
shodanxx 1 year ago
@Guitcad1 : Ask and ye shall receive. Or, better yet, engage your own values in finding the source material for yourself. People who find source material for themselves value it more. In this day and age, the technology abounds on so many levels. The bottleneck in progress is not references, but imagination. As long as people believe that Alzheimer's disease is a death sentence, it will be, for them. I'm speaking to early adopters. Their results will compel studies in 20 years.
swfowkes 5 months ago
@swfowkes I'm not the one making a claim, you are. The burden of proof is on you.
Guitcad1 5 months ago
@shodanxx : Thank you for the honorary doctorate. But my degree in organic chemistry is a Bachelors degree, and a Bachelor of Arts degree, to make it even more amusing. (Reed College does not do Bachelor of Science degrees.) And you are right about how science is done, 1) about how institutional science is done, and 2) how the art of science is done. My articles on the CERI web site expose multiple scientific frauds. Critical thinking is good, but expansive thinking is its complement.
swfowkes 5 months ago
@michalchik: Good point. But the Alzheimer's research community will take ten years to test this, if ever. So until Hell freezes over, I want the technology in the hands of the people who can use. I learned a big lesson from the divergent outcomes from my efforts on behalf of Down's syndrome children, which were successful, and on behalf of GHB consumerism, which did a belly flop off the high dive. Change through grass-roots effort works. Change through media and government doesn't.
swfowkes 5 months ago
@michalchik: Good point. But the Alzheimer's research community will take ten years to test this, if ever. So until Hell freezes over, I want the technology in the hands of the people who can use it. I learned a big lesson from the divergent outcomes from my efforts on behalf of Down's syndrome children, which were successful, and on behalf of GHB consumerism, which did a belly flop off the high dive. Change through grass-roots effort works. Change through media and government doesn't.
swfowkes 5 months ago