Thanks for the additional links. Much better information than the original article.
This was such an exciting piece of news, I did a little googling. The Alzheimers Research Forum has done a lot of inquiry here http://www.alzforum.org/new/detail.asp?id=1738
Aside from the aforementioned problems with the study, studies, it seems that this NOT a University of California research study as claimed in the Belfast article posted—and many other articles as well. It’s a case study. The Journal of Neuroinflammation, in which the study was published, is an “open-access” publication, not peer reviewed. It sometimes charges to run an article.
Drs. Tobinick and Gross do these injections as part of their private practice, which they call The Institute for Neurological Research. (It’s right next door to Dr. Tobinick’s primary practice—dermatology and laser hair removal.) Looks like reporters glommed on to the Drs.’ UCLA and USC associate professorships on their resumes and assumed it was a UC study.
Dr. Tobinick is evidently on some sort of notice for the use of enteracept mood disorders and as of January 2008, the Medical Board of California lists Tobinick as being on probation for advertising a back pain treatment that’s unproven.
It’s also worth noting that Amgen, makers of entanercept, have distanced themselves from the study, saying they were neither involved in nor supported the study.
http://wwwext.amgen.com/media/rapid_cognitive_improvement.html
All that said, I think this is certainly worth fast-tracking to figure out if it does have value. Just because Tobinick and Gross are doing this for-profit and seem more than a little flaky doesn’t mean it doesn’t work. It may simply mean that they have no interest in treating Alzheimers—just individual Alzheimer’s patients willing to pony up the big bucks at their offices. (You cannot charge patients for research study treatments.) Unfortunately, the way Tobinick has gone about this practically begs the medical community to dismiss this out of hand—which would be a shame, because it seems that most of the objections to
Tobinick’s claims seem not to argue with the underlying premise/science. So it may have promise.
Yep, I was disappointed to notice this as well. While that's not to say it might be an effective treatment, there's a bit left to do before it's peer-reviewed and accepted as an effective treatment by the medical community.