Alzheimer's = An Insidious Disease State (AIDS)
by Mark S. Senak
Eye On FDA
In the Sunday New York Times Business Section, there was an article about Alzheimer's research. As I read it, I was struck by the current state of research and the way it mimicked the AIDS epidemic during the late 1980s.
As many of you know, I was an "AIDS Activist". I've never been sure what that exactly meant. We were only people stuck in something that was happening with frightening speed and killing people around us who were motivated to act on it and many took to demanding speed in research and approval. And we were determined to make that happen. That resolve resulted in shorter approval times for drugs and pathways for early adoption of new treatments.
The AIDS epidemic took health care adovacy and recast it in a new mold. Since then, other disease groups have sought to emulate it. But no other disease group has more potential for that than does Alzheimer's.
And as I read the Tmes article, I was struck by the fact that there are so few treatment options today, and what exist, as stated in the article, appear marginally effective. It reminded me of the time when, in 1986, my partner had his first capsules of AZT, the only drug then available, and was about to swallow them. All of our hope went with them. But AZT could not stem the onslaught of the virus to the degree that any of us who were not infected could see a real difference. So, it is similar with Alzheimer's today. We have the playbook, let's do it.
A good part of the article profiles Robert Essner, chief executive of Wyeth (WYE), which is working on new Alzheimer's medications rooted in both theories of the disease - that the plaque build-up in brain causes Alzheimer's (though many think it a symptom) and those thinking that the cause is another protein.
Clearly what is needed is more research. The current state of treatment, like the early days of AIDS, is not sufficient to meet the need. New treatments need to come forth. One hopes that all of the concern these days of risk over benefit does not impede that progress. But what is sorely needed is, as Robert Essner pointed out in the article that "Alzheimer's should garner the same attention that AIDS received during the 1980s and 1990s, when a coalition of government and industry worked feverishly to find treatments."
That did not just happen by itself. Remember, AIDS was affecting the most disenfranchised groups in the United States - gays and IV drug users. Yet that mobilization took place because of a grassroots effort that was a combination of activism - and activism is well planned, well messaged public affairs work. It is not an accident.
According to the article, Robert Essner recently testified before the Senate that a doubling of NIH budget is needed to research Alzheimer's - from its current $643 million. Given the impact of Alzheimer's on the Boomer generation, and the threat that is being faced, that is an understatement.
But it won't happen by itself. A movement is not created by a DEO testimony.
It would seem that given the victims of this disease are not the most disenfranchised - they are our mothers and fathers and even ourselves as we become care-partners to the people who raised us, demands that sort of clarion call. But it isn't going to happen by itself. AIDS research and discovery would not have happened on the same timeline if it were left on its own. Someone needs to get the ball rolling with an effective public affairs campaign. Our parents depend on us.
For more on Alzheimer's, see the Alzheimer's Foundation of America.
Source: EyeOnFDA.com
RELATED READING:
- Alzheimer's Data Pumps Medivation & Neurochem
- Barron's Alzheimer's Article Only Scratches the Surface
BioHealth Investor.com
_________________________________
Eye On FDA
In the Sunday New York Times Business Section, there was an article about Alzheimer's research. As I read it, I was struck by the current state of research and the way it mimicked the AIDS epidemic during the late 1980s.
As many of you know, I was an "AIDS Activist". I've never been sure what that exactly meant. We were only people stuck in something that was happening with frightening speed and killing people around us who were motivated to act on it and many took to demanding speed in research and approval. And we were determined to make that happen. That resolve resulted in shorter approval times for drugs and pathways for early adoption of new treatments.
The AIDS epidemic took health care adovacy and recast it in a new mold. Since then, other disease groups have sought to emulate it. But no other disease group has more potential for that than does Alzheimer's.
And as I read the Tmes article, I was struck by the fact that there are so few treatment options today, and what exist, as stated in the article, appear marginally effective. It reminded me of the time when, in 1986, my partner had his first capsules of AZT, the only drug then available, and was about to swallow them. All of our hope went with them. But AZT could not stem the onslaught of the virus to the degree that any of us who were not infected could see a real difference. So, it is similar with Alzheimer's today. We have the playbook, let's do it.
A good part of the article profiles Robert Essner, chief executive of Wyeth (WYE), which is working on new Alzheimer's medications rooted in both theories of the disease - that the plaque build-up in brain causes Alzheimer's (though many think it a symptom) and those thinking that the cause is another protein.
Clearly what is needed is more research. The current state of treatment, like the early days of AIDS, is not sufficient to meet the need. New treatments need to come forth. One hopes that all of the concern these days of risk over benefit does not impede that progress. But what is sorely needed is, as Robert Essner pointed out in the article that "Alzheimer's should garner the same attention that AIDS received during the 1980s and 1990s, when a coalition of government and industry worked feverishly to find treatments."
That did not just happen by itself. Remember, AIDS was affecting the most disenfranchised groups in the United States - gays and IV drug users. Yet that mobilization took place because of a grassroots effort that was a combination of activism - and activism is well planned, well messaged public affairs work. It is not an accident.
According to the article, Robert Essner recently testified before the Senate that a doubling of NIH budget is needed to research Alzheimer's - from its current $643 million. Given the impact of Alzheimer's on the Boomer generation, and the threat that is being faced, that is an understatement.
But it won't happen by itself. A movement is not created by a DEO testimony.
It would seem that given the victims of this disease are not the most disenfranchised - they are our mothers and fathers and even ourselves as we become care-partners to the people who raised us, demands that sort of clarion call. But it isn't going to happen by itself. AIDS research and discovery would not have happened on the same timeline if it were left on its own. Someone needs to get the ball rolling with an effective public affairs campaign. Our parents depend on us.
For more on Alzheimer's, see the Alzheimer's Foundation of America.
Source: EyeOnFDA.com
RELATED READING:
- Alzheimer's Data Pumps Medivation & Neurochem
- Barron's Alzheimer's Article Only Scratches the Surface
BioHealth Investor.com
_________________________________
posted by Nico at
9:03 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home