Sandra Day O'Connor Makes Alzheimer's Plea

Medical research is low on the list of Bush priorities and always has been. He's not exactly a pro-science guy.

Sandra you think Bush gives a Ratz arse? Even Queen Nancy Reagen can't get these Buy-Bull beatin' GOP thugs to change thier mind..on Stem Cell research....

yeah! let's kill a bunch of babies to save a bunch of old farts!

lance, you and disgusted are disgusting!

With a mother who has Alzeheimer's, I was quite moved by her testimony today.
There are substances out there that are natural that can do as much if not more than those offered by the pharms.

now we know why o'conner had a vested interest in keeping partial birth murders ongoing! she was a pathetic & selfish judge - a typical liberal!

It is obvious from some of the prior posts that none of you have had to deal with Alzeheimer's in your families. I can tell you it is frustrating, agonizing and very sad. And I can only hope that it doesn't present in any of your families.
How do you deal with it? Google the NY Times article entitled Zen and the Art of Dealing with Alzeheimer's.
While I do not necessarily agree with some of the former Justice's decisions when she was on the bench, I do sympathize with what she is dealing with.
Sadly A.D is becoming more frequent. Is it a genetic thing or is it more intimately associated with diet and environmental factors?
I do know that Aricept, which was prescribed for my mother does little, perhaps because her stage of A.D. is so far along.
I do know as well that clinical studies have found that acetylcholine is what gets destroyed, but extracts from a plant called the snowdrop and the chinese herb called club moss, and usage of both has reversed the manifestations of A.D. in most of the patients treated.

just had lunch wrote:

yeah! let's kill a bunch of babies to save a bunch of old farts!
lance, you and disgusted are disgusting!

A group of 12 cells is not a baby, even if your sky fairy's book of fables says different.

The Flying Spaghetti Monster says stem cell research is just fine.

May the touch of his Noddly Appendage bring you peace and wisdom.

rAmen!

I guess Alzheimer's didn't mean anything to her until her husband got it. Millions of Americans suffer from this, and other horrible diseases and no one in Washington gives a tinker's damn until it affects one of them personally.

They don't care about the rest of us.

Is Alzheimer's genetic or does it arise from other causes? In some cases the genetic origin has been clearly demonstrated, some families being subject to the onset of Alzheimer's at a cruelly early age.
If it is due to other causes the question is whether it can be prevented from striking in the first place? Keeping one's mind and body as fit as possible may be a start. As one gets older there is sometimes a tendency to fall into repetitive patterns of thought and feeling. It takes an effort to resist them and to move in new directions.

cktirumalai wrote:

Is Alzheimer's genetic or does it arise from other causes? In some cases the genetic origin has been clearly demonstrated, some families being subject to the onset of Alzheimer's at a cruelly early age.
If it is due to other causes the question is whether it can be prevented from striking in the first place? Keeping one's mind and body as fit as possible may be a start. As one gets older there is sometimes a tendency to fall into repetitive patterns of thought and feeling. It takes an effort to resist them and to move in new directions.

The jury is still out, on the causes of Alzheimers partly because there is no animal model for diseases which affect cognition. Geneticists can find a genetic correlate for differences in any given population trait, but that does not constitute proof of causality. A lot of work needs to be done to help people affected with Alzheimer's, to further understanding the causes, and to develop effective pharmacological and psycho-social therapies. A new administration which favors medical research will soon help.

Lance Winslow wrote:

<quoted text>The jury is still out, on the causes of Alzheimers partly because there is no animal model for diseases which affect cognition. Geneticists can find a genetic correlate for differences in any given population trait, but that does not constitute proof of causality. A lot of work needs to be done to help people affected with Alzheimer's, to further understanding the causes, and to develop effective pharmacological and psycho-social therapies. A new administration which favors medical research will soon help.

It may in part be genetic. In my mother's case, she had three of her sisters also 'lose it'. Since both of my brothers are deceased, I have thought about some of those labs that would do genetic testing, though the tests are pretty pricey.
There certainly are some correlations to A.D. and diet. The essential fatty acid phosphatidyl serine can reverse decline especially in the most severe cases. So too can alpha-lipoic acid.
Both of these substances are commonly found in food stuffs.

Lance Winslow wrote:

<quoted text>The jury is still out, on the causes of Alzheimers partly because there is no animal model for diseases which affect cognition. Geneticists can find a genetic correlate for differences in any given population trait, but that does not constitute proof of causality. A lot of work needs to be done to help people affected with Alzheimer's, to further understanding the causes, and to develop effective pharmacological and psycho-social therapies. A new administration which favors medical research will soon help.

The president is not a doctor and he does not do medical research. Drug companies do medical research in the fields were they can get the most money, such as AIDS. Why are billions being spent on AIDS when it is not even close to being the biggest killer? Money not the president.

FromThe South2 wrote:

<quoted text>
The president is not a doctor and he does not do medical research. Drug companies do medical research in the fields were they can get the most money, such as AIDS. Why are billions being spent on AIDS when it is not even close to being the biggest killer? Money not the president.

Bush is staunchly opposed to science. Expect change, soon.

jimmy farter wrote:

now we know why o'conner had a vested interest in keeping partial birth murders ongoing! she was a pathetic & selfish judge - a typical liberal!

..and HOW MANY kids have you adopted? How amny have YOU Fostered?..yea..I thought as much..STFU

Lance Winslow wrote:

<quoted text>Bush is staunchly opposed to science. Expect change, soon.

Change, why do I keep hearing that word? Change- a word used by presidential candidates to buy voters into believing that they can really bring change, fiction.

FromThe South2 wrote:

<quoted text>
Change, why do I keep hearing that word? Change- a word used by presidential candidates to buy voters into believing that they can really bring change, fiction.

Voters' expectations can be self-fulfilling.

Lance Winslow wrote:

<quoted text>Voters' expectations can be self-fulfilling.

Please explain to us why it is that the medical
establishment and pharmaceutical industries, as
flush with cash as they are, need our tax dollars
to engage in research and studies to solve a
problem?

Tell you what, Lance. I'll support such a
proposal if both businesses/professions agree
to furnish whatever product or therapy they
discover at cost. Think they'll buy such an
idea?

The answer is pretty obvious. Its more
immediately profitable to produce a prescription
drug under a different name that cures unsightly
toenails.

I forgot what I was going to say.

Bill R wrote:

<quoted text>
Please explain to us why it is that the medical
establishment and pharmaceutical industries, as
flush with cash as they are, need our tax dollars
to engage in research and studies to solve a
problem?
Tell you what, Lance. I'll support such a
proposal if both businesses/professions agree
to furnish whatever product or therapy they
discover at cost. Think they'll buy such an
idea?
The answer is pretty obvious. Its more
immediately profitable to produce a prescription
drug under a different name that cures unsightly
toenails.

Greed.

Bill R wrote:

<quoted text>
Please explain to us why it is that the medical
establishment and pharmaceutical industries, as
flush with cash as they are, need our tax dollars
to engage in research and studies to solve a
problem?
Tell you what, Lance. I'll support such a
proposal if both businesses/professions agree
to furnish whatever product or therapy they
discover at cost. Think they'll buy such an
idea?
The answer is pretty obvious. Its more
immediately profitable to produce a prescription
drug under a different name that cures unsightly
toenails.

Public money does not fund pharmaceutical companies' research. It's not like the defence industry.