News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Having Alzheimer’s at 38 (2015) by lisper on Sunday July 08, 2018 @02:45PM (#17485385)
> Alzheimer is sometimes referred to as diabetes type 3.

Just because it is referred to that way doesn't mean that it is actually the case.

The hypothesis that AD=Diabetes has been around for at least ten years [1]. If it were true, I would have expected to see some results by now about how diabetes interventions can slow the advance of AD, if not prevent and/or reverse it entirely. AFAICT there have been no such results. That casts the hypothesis into serious doubt IMHO.

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2769828/

Re:Having Alzheimer’s at 38 (2015) by mkrecny on Sunday July 08, 2018 @03:10PM (#17485531)
We're only now just waking up to the reality that type-2 diabetes can be reversed w/ carbohydrate restriction, even though the data to support that has been around for decades. I don't think a decade is an unusual latency for the medical institution to lay idle on.
Re:Having Alzheimer’s at 38 (2015) by will_brown on Sunday July 08, 2018 @04:21PM (#17485985)
>We're only now just waking up to the reality that type-2 diabetes can be reversed w/ carbohydrate restriction

I don’t think this is a new/recent revelation at all (and in fairness, I cut the next part of your quote that acknowledges decades old research).

And while not all cases of type 2 can be reversed (most can) but maybe more importantly 100% of cases can be prevented through diet/exercise.

Re:Having Alzheimer’s at 38 (2015) by Baeocystin on Sunday July 08, 2018 @05:18PM (#17486246)
>100% of cases can be prevented through diet/exercise.

Is that accurate? Honest question. I know adult onset diabetes is strongly linked to obesity, but would have thought there are other potential causes as well.

Re:Having Alzheimer’s at 38 (2015) by anon104 on Monday July 09, 2018 @06:49PM (#17494056)
This is 100% wrong. There are cases of monogenic type 2 diabetes (e.g MODY) which has a similar inheritance as the Alzheimer's case in the story. Though rare, it certainly refutes the 100% assertion.