Validated, unified theory of Alzheimer Disease illuminates two essential research questions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background A 2001 unified theory of thiamine deficiency (TD) in Alzheimer Disease (AD) (1‐p.85) was validated in 2015 (2), and published in 2017 (3). Update? Method Scientific literature review on topic of thiamine and/or AD. PUBMED, elibrary.wiley.com, mspace.lib.umanitoba.ca Result 1. Thiamine supplementation can potentially correct key AD abnormalities: the cholinergic deficit (1‐p.64, 4), B‐Amyloid (1‐p. 77, 3), tau (5), neuroinflammation (4, 5,6, 7) and memory (1‐p59). 2. Limited oral thiamine supplementation trials in AD have had mixed results (1‐p49, 6). Conclusion Essential research questions: a. What causes TD in AD? (altered thiamine requirements, excretion, absorption, transport, metabolism, or diet and other factors*?) (1) b. What is the optimal treatment of TD in AD? (control for medications*, medical conditions* and dietary components affecting thiamine intake and utilization* (1‐p. 52, 1‐p.53,9). Consider advantages of intramuscular injections vs. oral treatments (8), need for other nutrients (1‐p.52), proven thiamine treatments in TD diseases. References: 1. Kennedy, A.R. (2001). The potential role of thiamine in the pathogenesis and treatment of Alzheimer’s Disease. M.Sc. dissertation. University of Manitoba, Winnipeg. http://mspace.lib.umanitoba.ca/handle/1993/19635 2. Pan, X. (2015). Measurement of brain thiamine metabolites for Alzheimer Disease diagnosis. 2015 Nov 26. doi: 1016/j.ebiom.2015.11.039 3. Kennedy, A.R. (2017). Scientific evidence supporting a unified theory of Alzheimer Disease. Alzheimers Dement,13(7S)_ Part_31/p.P1478‐P1478 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalz.2017.07.551 4. Lu’o’ng, K., Nguyen, LT (2011). Role of thiamine in Alzheimer’s Disease. Am J Alzheimer’s Dis Other Demen., 26(8):588‐598. https://doi.org/10.1177/1533317511432736 5. Tapias, V. et al. (2018). Benfotiamine treatment activates the Nrf2/ARE pathway and is neuroprotective in a transgenic mouse model of taupathy. Hum Mol Genet Aug 15; 27(16): 2874‐2892. https://doi.org.10.1093/hmg/ddy201 6. Fessell, J. (2021). Supplemental thiamine as a practical, potential way to prevent Alzheimer’s disease from commencing. Alzheimers Dement: Translational Research and Clinical Interventions. 7 (1)/e12199. https://doi.org/10.1002/trc2.12199 7. Sambon, M. et al. (2021). Neuroprotective effects of thiamine and precursors with higher bioavailability: Focus on benfotiamine and dibenzoylthiamine. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 22(11):5418. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22115418 8. Baker, H., et al. (1980). Oral versus intramuscular vitamin supplementation for hypovitaminosis in the elderly. J Am Geriatr Soc., 28(1):42‐45. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.1980.tb00123.x . 9. Vora, B. et al. (2020). Drug‐nutrient interactions; discovering prescription drug inhibitors of the thiamine transporter ThTF‐2 (SLC19A3). Am J Clin Nutr., 111(1), 110‐121. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/nqr255
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 | 0.024 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".