Peter Attia· MD
traditionally 18 months has been a standard length for alzheimer's trials because it's the amount of time you know you have to remember these trials cost lots of money
Loading…
The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
traditionally 18 months has been a standard length for alzheimer's trials because it's the amount of time you know you have to remember these trials cost lots of money
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
so knowing how alzheimer's progresses particularly in that group you know 18 months is a spot where you're going to see okay so in 18 months if they're better well that's crazy because that doesn't happen um if they're stable well that's good because it's usually there's some drop off in that period of time and if they're worse then clearly it's not working
no they were usually about 18 months