Alzheimer’s Disease and Its Possible Evolutionary Origin: Hypothesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The enormous, 2–3-million-year evolutionary expansion of hominin neocortices to the current enormity enabled humans to take over the planet. However, there appears to have been a glitch, and it occurred without a compensatory expansion of the entorhinal cortical (EC) gateway to the hippocampal memory-encoding system needed to manage the processing of the increasing volume of neocortical data converging on it. The resulting age-dependent connectopathic glitch was unnoticed by the early short-lived populations. It has now surfaced as Alzheimer’s disease (AD) in today’s long-lived populations. With advancing age, processing of the converging neocortical data by the neurons of the relatively small lateral entorhinal cortex (LEC) inflicts persistent strain and high energy costs on these cells. This may result in their hyper-release of harmless Aβ1–42 monomers into the interstitial fluid, where they seed the formation of toxic amyloid-β oligomers (AβOs) that initiate AD. At the core of connectopathic AD are the postsynaptic cellular prion protein (PrPC). Electrostatic binding of the negatively charged AβOs to the positively charged N-terminus of PrPC induces hyperphosphorylation of tau that destroys synapses. The spread of these accumulating AβOs from ground zero is supported by Aβ’s own production mediated by target cells’ Ca2+-sensing receptors (CaSRs). These data suggest that an early administration of a strongly positively charged, AβOs-interacting peptide or protein, plus an inhibitor of CaSR, might be an effective AD-arresting therapeutic combination.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".