The Canadian Guitar Forum banner

1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,576 Posts
Though there's some real science in that link, it's mostly scare tactics. At the very least deeply speculative.

I sure hope not, I volunteer with seniors and am regularly around dementia patients.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,372 Posts
Prions are one of the emerging explanations of some neurodegenerative diseases. Do not confuse the slowly unclouding theoretical explanation of some dementias that have been around forever, with things that have emerged only recently, like HIV.

I'd be far more concerned about cleaning up e coli in waste water than worried about prions.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,164 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
I would like to know if they have found prions in the bottled water that many people are drinking.
That's the haunting question. Water sources "inland" show be fairly good yet. Like Keto said, I wonder/hope a lot of that article is "scare tactics". I followed that chain into sewage treatment around the world, and how many countries/cities are still dumping raw untreated sewage into oceans and rivers. They use a figure of a 70% increase in Alzheimer type diseases in the last 20 years, and blame it on these "prions" in the water system that waste treatment plants are ineffective in removing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,372 Posts
That's the haunting question. Water sources "inland" show be fairly good yet. Like Keto said, I wonder/hope a lot of that article is "scare tactics". I followed that chain into sewage treatment around the world, and how many countries/cities are still dumping raw untreated sewage into oceans and rivers. They use a figure of a 70% increase in Alzheimer type diseases in the last 20 years, and blame it on these "prions" in the water system that waste treatment plants are ineffective in removing.
Understanding the incidence of various diseases is similar, if not identical, to the statistical concept of "sampling without replacement". If I shuffle a deck of cards, and pull out 3 hearts in a row, the statistical odds of the next 3 cards being clubs, spades, or diamonds goes up, simply because there are now not as many hearts in the deck. If I were to put those 3 hearts back, and reshuffle the deck, the statistical probability of pulling a spade, club or diamond would not be any different than before those 3 hearts were pulled, because I have replaced all cards.

People have to die of something. If it's not X then it will be Y or Z. If they have died of X, then it can't be Y or Z. The consequence of preventing some diseases and sources of mortality is that other potential sources of mortality increase. Prevalence (the general rate of occurrence) gets confused with incidence (the number of new cases). When discussing things like contagious diseases that can occur at any age, like ebola or flu, that distinction is important, since it can flag new outbreaks that can be effectively addressed. In the case of diseases of late life, any seeming increase in the incidence of Alzheimer's disease is largely because of a decrease in the prevalence of other sources of mortality. You died of cancer or heart disease, not because they are somehow now a "greater threat", but because you didn't die of black lung (respiratory diseases were a more common source of mortality during the 19th century than heart disease or cancer) or yellow fever or Spanish flu or gun violence first. Stated the other way, because you died of one of those other things first (and earlier), you never lived long enough to die of heart disease or cancer.

The takehome message is that, as modern medicine has made "us" more effective at preventing and/or treating things that have traditionally been sources of early mortality, other sources of mortality in later life have had greater statistical probability of occurring. Heritage cemetaries going back hundreds of years, are chock-a-block with tombstones of people who lived well into their 90s. The trouble is, those same cemetaries are also full of children who died before age 5, and never had the opportunity to die of whatever the 90 year-olds died of, because something else got them first.

I think one also needs to take into consideration that we tend to have a rather geocentric view of health challenges in North America. If neurodegenerative diseases of late life are on the rise, they are on the rise here, because we have taken steps to prevent earlier sources of mortality. There are a great many nations around the world, and some sub-populations within them, where one is unlikely to expect any sort of "spike" in Alzheimer incidence for some time to come, until other health challenges are addressed. For instance, amongst Canada's First Nations, there is a whole lot more in the water that'll kill you long before prions do. Concerns about rising rates of dementia are more germane to the GTA than to Sioux Lookout or James Bay. Not because indigenous people are somehow hardier or more resistant to it, but because GTA peeps are successfully avoiding sources of mortality that afflict northern communities.
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top