Why do we hear about so many Alzheimer's and Dementia cases now?

@ jeanne
your probably right but im trying to sell wheel bearing grease here.

Carol F, to start a discussion or ask a question, go to the Home page, and about halfway down at the bottom of the Caregiver Community section there are links to start these things. One thought on some forms of dementia is that the brain, which is normally not thought to need insulin for its glucose uptake the way the rest of the body does, actually does to a degree and becomes resistant to it. Coconut oil has some medium chain triglycerides, which may be usable by brain cells fairly directly; the sugar mannose may also work like this and ketone bodies can be defintiely be used as fuel, but it is all a little unclear. The MCTs are what was in "Lorenzo's oil" and helped though did not cure leukodystrophy. So its not a crazy idea to try and will not be harmful if not overdone. You could always just try coconut macaroons with apple and cranberry juice, and some good salmon and trout for supper a couple times a week. You can also get MCT oil - I even have some orange flavored - and make sald dressing with it (you can't cook with it though, unfontunately.) Those foods did always seem to improve mood, again, not fully reversing anyone's dementia, but helping to feel less irritable and perk up at least. The other thing is to reduce other medications; at some point, prevention and life extension is no longer as important as quality of life. A trial of stopping statins if they are on some should be considered as the cognitive side effects, though rare, can be devastating, and will usually reverse in a few weeks off of them. I've seen someone nearly lose their job over cogntive effetcs of Topamax; if you toerlate it, its great stuff for headache prevention or seizures, but it is also nicknamed Dopamax because some people just don't :-) The individual biochemistry that makes people react differently to commonly used drugs is 1) poorly understood and 2) not likely to have genetic testing funded to find them out in advance anytime in the near future.

Some form of dementia has been around since Biblical times, there is a vers "honor your father though his mind fail him" for example, Isaac and Esau's dad should not have been so easy to fool, and King Solomon apparently was afflicted with something in his later years. People do talk about it more with less embarrassment and shame than they used to, as well as being more ready to "medicalize" it into a possibly treatable, diagnosable condition. That's not all bad, because sometimes it is, and cognitive impairment should not be just accepted as part of normal aging, because it isn't. And the diabesity epidemic due to bad food and sedentary living has got something to do with at least the vascular dementia part of this. I think the wrong fats - trans fats and too much grain fed meat have been part of the problem too. Longer life span/better medical care overall means more will live long enough to develop cognitive impairment before dying of something else; my grandpa who died of MI in his 50s would not have had that happen today, and might not have died with all his wits intact if he had lived with vascular disease for another 20-30 years instead....it is all very worrisome, and I hope the current generations look to being active and eating better as a way of staying vital longer; otherwise each generation will be more burdened by caregiving than the one before.

capnhardass, yes, infant mortality, etc. does have an impact on longevity statistics. And yes, there have always been people who lived into their eighties and nineties and beyond. BUT NOT IN THE NUMBERS WE HAVE TODAY! And that is true whether you are looking at percentages of the population or just plain numbers of people alive. I looked at some demographics of the aging of the population in the last 200 years. OMG! When you see it on a chart it is stunning. (I'll try to find that set of charts again. I just know they blew me away.)

The other thing is that we did not keep track as well of the numbers of people who had dementia. My dear grandmother was pretty sharp into her nineties and then declined significantly. Her family and her nursing home considered her senile. She never made it into the dementia statistics, but today she certainly would.

We have both more people who live long enough for dementia to develop and much better ways of tracking the number of dementia cases. Of course we are going to hear more about it!

i dunno. i read recently that the common knowlege that people died at a young age years ago is just not true. infant mortality and agricultural accidents skewed the statistics. people lived to 100 yrs old and did it without drugs. ill bet ya they were jabbering maniacs after about 80 tho.
dementia has been classified as a fatal disease in only the last couple of years. i think its because science is understanding how organ failure and digestive / immune difficulties are directly linked to brain function..
coconut oil has about as much scientific basis as wheel bearing grease but wheel bearing grease is cheaper..

The sad fact is medicine for sustainment has outpaced the medicines to contain the deterioration of the human body in the aging process.

Heavy metal toxicity. There is STILL a toxic level (25 mcg per dose) of mercury in most flu shots.

Also, refined vegetable oils quickly become sources of free radicals when exposed to any light and heat, even before heating to smoking point. I realize there are countless opinions and beliefs @ dietary fats, but you will find that the leading contemporary experts on nutrition and health are more and more in agreement with this, recommending coconut and palm fruit oil over all vegetable oils

I recommend the book "Stop Alzheimers Now" (...and all neurodegenerative disorders) by Dr Bruce Fife, also known as "Dr. Coconut". You'll also find lots of info on the benefits of coconut oil here at his website http://coconutresearchcenter.org/index.htm.
Also, we now know that overall inflammation is the cause of nearly all chronic diseases, and is caused by dietary issues. Acidic foods are implicated ( as opposed to alkaline) in that inflammation. There is also widespread use of aspartame (artificial sweetener) which is highly neurotoxic. In the book mentioned above, there are countless references to studies indicating statins (cholesterol lowering medications) in neurological disorders and specifically cognitive dysfunction. These drugs are prescribed like candy, for "hypercholesterolemia", which is not a disease, but a lab result. The brain and nervous system need cholesterol to function well, and I believe this too is a cause of the dementia epidemic we are facing

Carol, apparently the problem with vegetable oils is when they are heated TO THE SMOKING POINT. The typical uses of sauteing onions or stir-frying shrimp and zucchini do not cause the carcinogenic changes to the oil. So, hey, don't burn your oil. :)

The other heating practice that can change the nature of the oil is reheating it repeatedly, such as re-using it multiple times in a deep fryer. This change (according to a study published in WebMed) occurs with coconut oil as well as other oils. Don't reuse your oil!

Rancid fats are problematic, too. Coconut oil lasts better than many oils before it becomes rancid. Don't use rancid oil! (And, yikes, unless your nose doesn't work, I cannot imagine using a rancid oil. Gag.)

You can use most oils without worry unless you are heating them to the smoking point or reheating them as in a deep fryer, or using them after they are rancid.

Nothing against coconut oil, for sure. But I'd like to see the whole picture presented a little more accurately.

Use it for popcorn or as butter or cook with it. Get rid of oils like corn or canola because they turn carcinogenic when heated. Coconut oil does not. You can use it without worry.

Hi
I've been reading a bit your discussion on coconut oil and i've heard about using for other conditions too. But I've always wondered how you would consume it. Do you just eat a tsp of it??? or melt it and add it to something or use it to cook with ?. my hubby likes to use it for making popcorn...lol does that count. my mom has Alz and we are willing to try anything and everything to slow down the progression.

OrangeBlossom,

It's good to see someone with your perspective writing here.

If anyone has seen films like "Escape from New York" or Mel Gibson's "Mad Max" series, then you've seen a portrayal of a broken-down society where certain areas are a lawless free-for-all. That's pretty much the way I see our current health practices. IMO, somewhere down the line, maybe 50, 100, or 200 years from now, we will look back at this period as a time of insanely barbaric ignorance.

Medical research has been CO-OPTED and CORRUPTED by Big Pharma. That is beyond a doubt.

Here's a sample illustrating the problem from Science Daily in January 2008:

"Anti-Alzheimer's Mechanism In Omega-3 Fatty Acids Found"

"Many Alzheimer's researchers have long touted fish oil, by pill or diet, as an accessible and inexpensive "weapon" that may delay or prevent this debilitating disease. Now, UCLA scientists have confirmed that fish oil is indeed a deterrent against Alzheimer's, and they have identified the reasons why."

... "the omega-3 fatty acid docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) found in fish oil increases the production of LR11, a protein that is found at reduced levels in Alzheimer's patients and which is known to destroy the protein that forms the "plaques" associated with the disease."

and here's the key...

"But he (Dr. Cole) is hopeful that the NIH will conduct a large-scale prevention clinical trial using fish oil at the earliest stages of the disease -- particularly because it is UNLIKELY that a pharmaceutical company will do so, since fish oil in pill form is readily available and inexpensive.

So, Alzheimer's is big, it's obviously important, but key research into nutrient-based prevention is something for which we can only HOPE. Meanwhile drug research goes on like wildfire.

Let's think about part of our "cultural wisdom" - "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure". Is that the way medical research shapes up today? A 16 to 1 ratio in favor of prevention?

How about Thomas Edison?

He stated that "The doctor of the future will give no medicine, but will interest her or his patients in the care of the human frame, in a proper diet, and in the cause and prevention of disease.” Looks like he had no idea how far off "the future" would be.

It's preposterous that we spend so much on drug research when we haven't even mastered the ABC's of good health. You mentioned that "the soil was far less contaminated with artificial fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, industrial pollutants, acid rain, etc". That might correspond to the letter 'M'. "Naturally occuring vitamins, minerals, and natural enzymes" might be letter 'N'. And so on.

Now, consider the statement, "Proper functioning of the lymphatic system is a cornerstone of good health, yet it is often over-looked by Western medicine." How can something as straightforward as "the basic plumbing system" be overlooked? How about, "In Europe, Lymphatic Drainage Therapy is frequently performed prior to radiation or surgery to prevent the complication of lymphedema."? Is Europe part of a different planet?

We really need to attack the basics of health with an engineering mentality. How does this system truly work?

Anyway, I could go on forever, but I won't. I'll just say that IMO medical science should have listened to Edison. By now we would each have a wonderful "Owner's Manual" for the human body, instead of the random half-assed guidelines we may or may not make up for ourselves.

But despite all that, I see a lot of wonderful signs that the times are changing, and I am optimistic that we are going to get back on track.

Coconut oil is what we used to slather ourselves with in the '60's and lay in the sun with. Now I find out that I should've been putting the coconut oil IN my body, and keeping my body OUT of the sun. Go figure...

After reading everyones views on Coconut oil. I am on the fence personally. But I think maybe I will do my own test with mom. Mom is last stage Dementia. Her ability to walk, talk or do things on her own are far in the rear view mirror. So I will put the coconut oil to the test. I know if it doesn't work it won't harm her.

I am curious! I seen coconut oil at walmart and its not expensive. Maybe I'll get some on Monday after moms dr appointment. I was thinking of starting a discussion thread on here to track moms progress good or not or maybe an outside site blog. Mom eats a pretty good diet(pureed). Everything I feed her because of low food intake is healthy. So if this oil does help it shouldn't matter what stage of Dementia your in.Though chances of later stage improvement might be slim or slight. I am going to experiment with a open mind. Since mom is bad cognitively I would notice any improvement. I am not going to let my mind use the wonderful "power of suggestion" I am going into this with no expectations.

I am NOT trying to disprove Carol. I just want to see it for myself. I will let everyone here know when I start.

My mother-in-law was a legal secretary for 30 years and crossword puzzles were her life. She was on a diet for most of her life and I rarely saw her eat anything sugar or fat related. It's only been the last 2 years that she's allowed herself to have ice cream on a regular basis. She is not diabetic. Point is, she doesn't fit any of the dietary criteria that has been discussed nor the history in her family of Alzheimer's but she still has it. Maybe someday some researcher will have an epiphany and know what causes this awful disease, but right now it just looks like Russian Roulette to me.

HI LIL!

Talk about a brain teaser. Daddy used to say "When in doubt, find out. Don't jump to conclusions."


Gotta go pump up. See y'all later.

-- Ed

CarolF, since I seem to be one of resident skeptics on this thread, I want to be sure to make it clear that I am sincerely glad for you and Bruce, and I do believe in that remarkable recovery.

My husband’s story is somewhat similar. His diagnosis is Dementia with Lewy Bodies, and he dove into it at the deep end. He had sudden onset of very severe symptoms 8 years ago – cognitive decline, memory problems, paranoia, hallucinations, mobility issues, frequent falls – it was terrible. These started in June and by October he was in a wheelchair. His cognitive test result the first time he went to Mayo clinic was 7 out of 38. I’ve just looked through the annual records from Mayo, and other years the test results were 33, 30, 35. This year it was 29.

He still has dementia. He did not return to “normal” as Bruce did, but he bowls each week, he is very high functioning, and has a decent quality of life. Most importantly, instead of needing 24/7 care of a skilled nursing facility he is doing fine at home. I say that we’ve had 7 years of early dementia, and 1 year of advanced dementia, and the advanced year came first!

If I had been doing something deliberate or unusual in those first dreadful months, like giving him rhubarb juice daily or soaking his feet in Epson salts, or giving him lard spread on Wonder bread, or holding a crystal pyramid over his head and reciting an incantation, or feeding him coconut oil, you’d better believe I would give it credit and that I would still be doing it. But we did nothing of the kind.

Catchlab is correct that at this time dementia is progressive and irreversible. And yet, Carol, you and I have experience of apparent reversal or partial reversal of apparent dementia. (My husband is not the only person in the Mayo study that this has happened to.)

Wow, huh? How can that be? Nobody truly knows. (Researchers now have some theories in cases like my husband’s.) In Bruce’s case, it might indeed be coconut oil that makes the difference. That doesn’t account for our case. Whatever is behind these “miraculous” improvements, I hope science can identify it (or probably more than one it) and use it to help other dementia victims.

Until then, I am truly grateful for our partial reprieve.

And I don’t think that our unusual experiences really answer why we hear about more cases of dementia today than we did in the past.

The more I consider Lilliput's question, the more impressed I am with how it is worded. Why do we hear more about dementia cases -- not why are there more. Because we simply do not know if there are more, as a percentage of the elderly population. We don't have accurate statistics to make that judgment.

If there are more, orangeblossom5's observations about cultural changes in attitudes toward the elderly and the dispersal of family geographically seems logical and compelling. But it breaks down as I try to apply it to the cases I know. Our 5 children lived within easy driving distance when their dad was struck with dementia. There was no estrangement. We did family things together. He was active socially and mentally. He enjoyed retirement. He did not feel useless or disregarded. That explanation just doesn't fly for him. Dr. Thomas Graboys (Life in the Balance) was at the pinacle of a highly regarded career in cardiology when he was struck with Parkinson's with Dementia. There is no indication in his book that he was estranged from his family or had feelings of lack of worth. The societal explanation offered by orangeblossom5 is interesting, but it just doesn't seem to match the celebrity cases we all know about or the private cases I hear about in my caregiver support group.

Those of you who are caregiving someone with dementia -- do those societal changes fit the situation of your loved one?

Once again I think jeannegibbs is right on with her comments. Also orangeblossom5 makes good points. And CarolF, I'm sorry about my snarky comment. I just don't buy the dietary explanation but that is only my opinion, not fact.

Orange Blossom I believe you are dead on. It is a known fact that dementia worsens with depression. Also, the foods in nursing homes are usually highly processed, and not in any way exciting or worth looking forward to. So they are neither healthy to the body nor to the spirit. Elders living alone fare just as bad. They don't usually eat properly and they don't have much reason to keep mentally upbeat.
Catchlab, You say "most people would agree that coconut oil does not cure dementia nor does dementia get healed spontaneously by anything. At this time, it is progressive and irreversible." There are a few hundred people in this area, including doctors and nurses, who would have to disagree with you after watching my husband get worse and worse until he had cognitive skills of 11 out of 30 and then suddenly "get healed spontaneously". So stick to your story if that is what you wish to do, and I'll stick to mine because I am an eye witness to the fact.

Dear Lilliput, I hit the wrong button and lost everything I just wrote! Your topic elicted many diverse answers, and some of us (including me) got off topic, as I'm sure you noticed. To address your comments more specifically: I believe that both the changes in societal/family dynamic as well as dietary considerations play a significant part in the puzzle of Dementia/Alzheimers as we know it today. In the past generation, families lived much closer, interacted more often, and our elders were right there in the mix, acknowledged, revered, consulted, assisted, and not ignored (I guess that was the original 'assited living' scenario that we now pay mega-bucks for). "Senility" was generally accepted back then, and taken in stride by most family members. Seniors were not usually ignored or excluded from the family unit. Nursing homes were a dreaded prospect to all and most relatives did all they could to delay that option. Today, immediate family members are spread out all over the country, wrapped up in their own careers, their own families, and outside interests and responsibilities. Consciously or not, for some siblings, the needs of our elders tend to hold less importance than our own needs (rather than equal importance), and I believe our elders sense this detachment, leading to feelings of abandonment, unimportance, lack of worth, helplessness, depression, etc. What would that do to your mind, let alone an elderly person? We have evolved into a 'high-tech' vs. 'high-touch' society and to many elders, that shift means they don't belong anymore. They become depressed, self focused on their ailments, confused, withdrawn, irritable (pesonality changes?), etc., and less likely pursue former interest in their usual activities and socialization. It is very likely a factor in the development of this condition, unless it is actually hereditary. As respects dietary issues, I believe you are again on the right track. In our grandparents' generation, the soil was far less contaminated with artificial fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, industrial pollutants, acid rain, etc. Therefore, our food was more nutritionally complete with naturally occuring vitamins, minerals, and natural enzymes. The meats, poultry, eggs and dairy naturally contained high amounts of essential fatty acids like Omega-3's, which are absolutely crucial to healthy brain function. Today, our soil is virtually depleted of all these critical elements, and then our food is subsequently processed, irradiated, preserved, artifically colored and dyed, thereby destroying any significant nutritional value. The food industry then "fortifies" these now inferior products with a couple of vitamins and prounounces them "healthy". This is what we eat in modern times and it won't get any better. To me, it isn't any wonder that our brains are under-nourished and the incidence of dementia/alzheimers is on the rise in the elderly, and exhibiting at a younger age as well.

Why do we hear about so many dementia cases today?

I've read that if you live to be 80 your chances of developing dementia are 50/50. Yikes, I hope that isn't true. But let's just use that as a discussion point.

I spent some time looking for population of the US by age.
population age 80 and older
In 1900 : 373,847 (less than .05% of the population)
In 1950 : under 2 million (I had to estimate from graphs)
In 2000: 9,184,954 (more than 6% of the population)

I came across a couple of sites with neat animated graphs that showed age groups as portions of the total population and how they shifted from decade to decade in the last century. Oh my stars! The aging of our population is staggering seen that way.

Many people, of course, develop dementia before they are 80. (My husband was 77.) But just using the 50/50 prediction and age 80, assume for a minute that dementia has not been increasing but has held steady. (We don't really know, one way or the other, since we only have recent statistics to look at.)

That would mean in 1900, less than 200,000 cases of dementia ("senility") existed in the US, and no one was particularly keeping track of them.

In 1950, less than 1,000,000 cases existed, and we still were not accurately diagnosing or tracking them.

In 2000, about 4.5 million cases existed, and they had all kinds of publicity, research, fund-raising, and public awareness focussed on them.

Why do we hear of more cases now? It may not because there really are more, proportionately. For all we know, dementia might be decreasing (I doubt it, but we have no proof.)

With the population much, much larger, and more importantly, with the portion of the population within the age range of typical onset of dementia increasing even faster, how could we not hear more about this devastating disease?

Interesting how the FDA and other anti-nutritional supplement govt agencies are trying to put the kibosh on our freedom to choose natural supplements over drugs? It's all about money - if they acknowledge that many supplements can do as good a job as some drugs of alleviating symptoms without any dangerous side effects, the pharma companies might lose their research funding or possibly go out of business - OMG can't let that happen! Seroiusly not suggesting that would be a good thing, but look how many drugs the FDA approves that have serious side effects when taken alone, and even more when combined with other drugs. Then a few years later the drug gets taken off the market, and you see advertisements about class action suits over certain drugs. You rarely hear of such instances even with multiple natural supplements. The FDA is supposed to judge not only drug safety, but also whether the benefits outweigh the risks. If you closely read the printed info that comes with your RX's, there are some possible side effects that are so scary you would rather keep your disease! I find it extremely difficult how the FDA could say the benefits of certain drugs outweigh the risks. Truly, in whose best interest does the FDA operate? They say that the nutritional supplements are not 'proven' in spite of extensive research history and even clinical trials. The FDA does not seem to be practicing what they preach. They want to eliminate the natural supplement industry and have even gone so far as to 'steal' them and incorporate them into new drugs. A perfect example is a popular heart and cholesterol medication that is now incorporating Omega-3 Fatty Acid into the formula and making it out to be the next wonder drug. You have all seen the ads on TV. It seems like they demand more proof from the NS industry than they do from the drug industry. I am not totally against drugs - they are necessary in many instances (my 86 y/o Mom is on several that she cannot live without in spite of the side effects -worsening dementia for one). However, for myself, I always opt for the natural supplement that can achieve the same results for me without side effects. I have to be in dire straights before I will go for even Tylenol or Aleve. And that is usually my own fault because I slacked off on my usual regimen of a natural glucosamine & herbal supplement my body needs at this age (60's) to keep the joints flexible and the inflammation and pain at bay. It has proven itself time after time, but when I slack off, for whatever reason (in a rush or too busy) the pain comes back. It then takes few days back on it for the symptoms to disappear - like someone said earlier, natural supplements take longer to work than drugs. In the meantime, if I need to, I take an OTC pain remedy for quick relief. The public needs to be more educated on natural remedies, but do you see ads for them on TV? No, the govt would rather keep us all in the dark and dependent on drugs. Just my two cents folks!

I gotta say, jeannegibbs, you are one smart, savvy cookie. Your posts are thoughtful, considered, and right on! BTW, I think most people would agree that coconut oil does not cure dementia nor does dementia get healed spontaneously by anything. At this time, it is progressive and irreversible. When a cure is found, it will be because of gene alteration or modification. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Unfortunately we do not have the choice of raw milk here unless the person who provides it is willing to go to jail. As far as the coconut oil goes, the farmers, who have always lived off the nuts chop it up the same as they would any food and then let it stand in some water and very naturally the oil rises to the surface. They use the rest in different ways but they do use the whole coconut. Filipinos tell me they call the coconut tree the tree of life because of all it does for them.
As far as the apples are concerned, I do wish we could go back to the original strains, but that is not the same as what they have done with canola.

But this is not what we are discussing here, and all I want to do is explain my own and my husband's experience. It could be that he was miraculously healed of dementia and the coconut oil is just a coincidence. It was a miracle either way.

And the reason, CarolF, you are not eating whole fresh coconut, they way God created it, is ...? Ah well, it doesn't matter. You probably have far fewer inconsitencies in your nutritional practices than I do. I confess to loving key lime pie, though I've never seen one growing in the wild, and truth be told, I couldn't even get the ingredients to make one if I limited myself to what grows naturally in my climate.

Linus Pauling was a bigger and more credible proponent of vitamin C than Adele Davis, wasn't he? That didn't make him right, especially for your family.

Do you think it is OK to monkey around and develop new strains of apples (mmm honeycrisp) but not ok to come up with new plants to produce salad oil?

I think our brains are our greatest natural resource, and the ingenuity we come up with to feed ourselves is pretty remarkable. That we often don't get it exactly right doesn't surprise me -- hey, we are human -- but not all of our efforts are counter productive. I'm pretty happy to drink pasteurized milk -- thanks Louis -- but I know there are others who think we'd be better off drinking it raw. Isn't it great that we have so many choices and can usually follow our own preferences and beliefs?

When German neurologist Fritz Heinrich Lewy identified clumps of what turned out to be microscopic deposits of alpha-synuclein protein in the autopsied brains of persons with Parkinson's disease a hundred years ago, I don't think he was looking at the result of too much canola oil or skim milk.

But, since no one knows the exact causes of dementia pathologies, speculation as to whether and why it has increased is wide open and interesting.

I was in the Adelle Davis era too. I remember My Mom taking huge amounts of vitamin C and lots of orange juice. During the same period of time she got badly crippled with arthritis. Then when they couldn't afford the vitamins and juices any more the arthritis mysteriously went away. It didn't take her long to figure out that for her and Dad, and I later found out for me too, large doses of acid, even vitamin C, is deadly.
You are right that different people react different ways to different foods.

But the one thing that I have seen to be true across the board is that when we try to improve upon the original, we mess things up. Margarine never held a candle to butter, the scientifically altered canola oil does a lot of damage that olive oil never did; forcing ourselves into a low fat diet by eating only egg whites and not the yolks; or drinking milk that has been stripped of its natural fats and enzymes instead of straight from the cow; or isolating parts of a food and turning it into supplements or even sugar, never works as well as the way God created the food to be eaten in the first place. The more man plays around with our food sources the worse our health becomes.

I've had some interest in "health foods" since my twenties (I'm now in my sixties). I go back to the Adelle Davis era. My interest has been more in reading than in practicing. It has been fascinating.

My husband participated (as a subject) in a huge international lipid study, for 9 years. We followed the "heart healthy" diet through that period.

In that 4+ decades I've come to some conclusions.
~ The human body is amazingly adaptable and can get by on eating meat, not eating meat, eating nuts, never having access to nuts, eating earth worms, eating fruits native to the person's habitat, eating fruits from far away, etc. etc. etc. Truly amazing.
~ What is health-promoting for one person is dangerous or deadly for someone else. (Peanuts anyone?) What is adequate intake of particular nutrient for one person is a deficiency for someone else, and an overdose for yet a third person. We are each highly adaptable, but we are also unique and have our own limits and needs.
~ What we can "get by with" is not the same as what is optimal.
~ Nobody knows for certain what is optimal. Nobody. Not a hundred years ago, not forty years ago, not today. But we do keep refining our notions of what is best for us.

The official version of what constituted "heart healthy" food changed in the course of the 9 years we were in the study, and has continued to change since. I'm all in favor of further research. I just don't take any of it as the final word on what is optimal.

The American Diabetes Association changed its stance on sugar in the 1990s, based on a better understanding of how the body (most bodies) metabolizes carbohydrates.

If you are going to eat a "healthy" alternate diet, you'd better pick your guru, because what one toutes as essential another disdains as harmful.

I don't believe that dementia is caused by a lack of coconut oil any more than I believe that headaches are caused by a deficiency of asprin. That something may alleviate a problem is not proof that it is lack of that something that caused the problem.

And yet, without having the final word on what is optimal for feeding the human body, mankind has managed to survive and even thrive, eating what is available.

I try to eat a wide variety of foods. I try to minimize the amount of highly processed food I eat. I try (not always successfully) to eat amounts that maintain an even weight and energy level. I take every nutritional proclamation, whatever the source, with a grain or two of salt (which is pretty much all the salt I need).

Sorry Ish, and everybody else, for my "nonsense" statement, but in my mother's case it does seem that way. She was very fit, cardiovascularly, and otherwise and she she ate a very healthy diet always, including the healthy oils, long before it became more mainstream to eat that way. I realize she is just one person among millions suffering from AD, but what I'm saying is that you can do every preventive thing possible and still get AD and the longer you live, the greater the risk. So I believe it is much more genetically influenced and the genes set you up for when you'll get it, early onset or late onset. I know my view may be very subjective but that's my story and I'm sticking to it!