Thanks for the opportunity to clarify my views, Wasa.My...

Thanks for the opportunity to clarify my views, Wasa.

My understanding of the pathology of AD leads me to the conclusion that a "cure" (from any company's drug, regardless of mechanism of action)is likely impossible.

In these terms, therefore, I don't think ANY of the products in the pipeline will satisy this particular definition of success.

Logically, the earlier any disease is treated (take cancer as an example), the greater the chance of "cure." It follows that diagnosis and treatment in the pre-symptomatic stage provides the greatest chance of such.

Thus, I think many of the products in development might find their place in PREVENTION of AD. if we can get to the point of presymptomatic diagnosis (e.g. via amyloid-imaging PET scans that detect the presence of pathology before it has done critical harm) then PBT2 is as good a candidate as any of the others, many of which we knoe (and this includes the original Clioquinol) can remove amyloid.

One of my previous posts reflects the view that the market needs to readjust its expectations of the benefits of these drugs, rather than focus on "improvement" and "cure." Unfortunately, preventative trials such as I've outlined are expensive, require high patient numbers, and take a very long time to run their course. Treatment, rather than preventive, trials are much cheaper and shorter (despite costing >$100m!)

I hope my posts haven't presented me as too nihilistic, as I am in fact very hopeful that we can reach the stage of presymptomatic diagnosis and treatment, during my practising lifetime.