"Nine of the 10 displayed subjective or objective improvement in cognition beginning within 3-6 months, with the one failure being a patient with very late stage AD."

The way this sentence (from the abstract) hedges by including "subjective OR objective" hardly makes this sound like a "real cure". As the summary notes, "These anecdotal results suggest the need for a controlled clinical trial of the therapeutic program."

Notwithstanding the cautious phrasing of the author, 9 of 10 patients had such huge improvements, from not being able to work and forgetting everything, to the opposite, that I take the liberty of calling that a 'cure'.

A sample size of 10 is hardly something to base any meaningful conclusions on.

9/10 cured? Not even close. If you know anybody with Alzheimer and Parkisons you'll know that while exercise can help, it's not remotely a cure for these devastating diseases.

Yes, very close! The wrong idea about medicine is that an illness should be cured by one medicine. But what if a patients has 3 problems? Or 5? Then with the current 'science' one will never find a cure since this science will look only for cures that contain one single medicine. Dr Dale Bredesen is vary courageous to deviate from this path and to make a treatment plan with 30+ variables. And why argue with that if the results are amazing?

No, it doesn't boil down to that, and no that's not a magic cure-all. Looking at Table 1 in http://www.impactaging.com/papers/v6/n9/full/100690.html there are about 40 different supplements mentioned (many of them conditional based on lab tests).