 |
| Is the Alzheimer's “Amyloid Hypothesis” Wrong? (2017) (theatlantic.com) | ||
| recommended by 1 user | 2018 | 122 points by daddy_drank | medicine | original thread | | ||
| One user recommended this thread. What they said: |
| kasabali Jul 24, 2022 | on: Two decades of Alzheimer’s research was based on deliberate… | context |
| Also recommended by people who recommended this: | ||
| 1. | How an Alzheimer’s ‘cabal’ thwarted progress toward a cure (statnews.com) | |
| recommended by 3 users | 2019 | 633 points by KKKKkkkk1 | original thread | | ||
I recommend reading these instead:
Alzheimer’s amyloid hypothesis ‘cabal’ thwarted progress toward a cure (2019) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31828509
How an Alzheimer’s ‘cabal’ thwarted progress toward a cure https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21911225
The amyloid hypothesis on trial https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17618027
Is the Alzheimer's “Amyloid Hypothesis” Wrong? (2017) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17444214
Why, at this point should we believe any one scientist writing in that forum wasn't already sunk far deep into amyloid research in their career?
Not to mention that after a quick glance on the comments section, I fail to see where you get the idea that "They all disagree with the notion that Lesné's papers have been important to the field". Apart from the very first comment from karen Ashe (who will obviously be defending her research) and a few other who's working on related topics, other commenters seems to be keeping their suspicion at amyloid hypothesis.