Does Alzheimer''s Disease Really Exist?

頁數：128    裝訂：平裝 　開數：16K 　印刷：黑白

Foreword

Alzheimer disease was proclaimed erroneously by Kraepelin in 1910. It has since been taught to consist of two hallmarks at every medical school throughout the world. The persistence of the error is evidenced by the statement and histopathological illustrations in the November 3, 2006 issue of Science. In this book, I have written three articles the short versions of which were presented at various international conferences, including two at the Annual Meetings of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Pacific Division. The title of this book, however, was that of a poster presentation at the Brain07&Brain PET held in Osaka in May, 2007. The summary of these three chapters, albeit with the same title, was presented at the Second World Congress on Controversies in Neurology, October 23-26, 2008, in Athens, Greece; the substance is much more extensive, controversial, and provocative than the poster presentation.
The purpose is to ask whether or not Alzheimer disease really exists and, if not, whether Alzheimer deserved the eponym or not, by presenting evidence that the two so-called allmarks?of AD should have been attributed to Oskar Fischer.
Publications were examined from a historical perspective. Through such an examination, the convincing evidence proves that AD is a misnomer, that Alzheimer did not deserve it, and that the whole credit should be rightly given to Oskar Fischer for his contributions which have been ignored, overlooked, or otherwise brushed aside. My results in the three articles presented in this book clearly indicate that the claim that AD consists of the two hallmarks is a sheer fallacy, because Alzheimer was not the attending physician of Auguste who did not have the two so-called allmarks? she had four brain diseases:
(1) arteriosclerosis,
(2) an evenly atrophic brain,
(3) miliary foci (plaques), and
(4) strange substance (tangles).
She also had untreated DM and decubitus angina which caused her worsening stupors; the worsening stupors are evidence that the direct cause of her death was her decubitus angina which escaped Perusini detection and has not been reported in the literature till now.
In keeping with this line of reasoning, each chapter will be presented in such a way that the focus will be on a particular realm of investigation, so that there is a common theme that runs through the question raised as the title of this book. That is to say, each chapter presents evidence to answer a part of the question, so that the totality of the answer to the question can be appreciated only when the three chapters in the book are comprehended at the end. In order to remind the reader what has been said before and what will be said next, a certain amount of redundancy is built into the text of each chapter on purpose.

Table of Contents

Acknowledgments ix
Foreword xi
Rationale and Methods xiii
Dementia and Alzheimer掇 Disease: Nosology or Fallacy?
1.1 Introduction 2
1.2 Discussion 4
Fallacy of the Two Hallmarks 4
1. Background Information 4
2. Detailed Information 10
(1) Why Did Bonfiglio Undertake The Case? 10
(2) The Pathological Nature of Bonfiglio掇 Case 14
(3) What Did Bonfiglio Prove with His Case? 15
Semantic Confusions in the Historical Connection 17
1. First Major Semantic Confusion 17
2. Another Major Semantic Confusion 19
3. Further Semantic Confusion 22
Absurd Nosological Classification 26
Kraepelin掇 Power Play and Subsequent Fabrications 30
1.3 Conclusion 36
References 43
Did Alzheimer Deserve the Eponym, AD?
2.1 Introduction 46
2.2 Historical Facts in Time and Space 47
Historical Facts in Time 48
Historical Facts in Space 51
2.3 The Geographic and Academic Circumstances 52
The Beginning of Alzheimer掇 Relationship with Kraepelin 53
Questions 55
2.4 What Did Alzheimer Contribute in 1907 57
Initial Statement 58
Concluding Remark 58
Description of the Patient掇 Behavioral Alterations 60
Casual Observations 60
Comments 61
More Comments 62
Informal Testings 62
Comments on Perusini掇 Casual Observations and Informal Testings 62
2.5 What Is AD, then –after 1910? 64
Additional Observations 66
Comments on the Additional Observations 66
Description of the Autopsied Materials 69
Comments on the Autopsied Materials 70
Discussion of the Autopsied Materials 72
2.6 Conclusion 79
References 84
Senile Dementia and Fischer掇 Presbyophrenia: The Forgotten Giant掇 Contributions
3.1 Introduction 88
3.2 Discussion 91
What Went Wrong? 91
1. Fallacy of the Two Hallmarks 91
(1) What Did Auguste Have in her Conditions? 92
(2) What Else Did Auguste Have in her Conditions? 92
(3) Were there Really New Cases as Evidence of Auguste掇 Conditions? 93
2. Alzheimer掇 Disease Is A Misnomer: He Did Not Deserve It 94
What Did Fischer Contribute in 1907? 96
1. Fischer掇 Insightful Contributions 96
(1) Miliary Foci or Plaques 97
(2) The Involvement of glia cells 100
(3) The Development of Plaques 106
(4) Glandular Necrosis or Tangles 107
(5) Were There Differences between Redlich and Fischer? 109
2. Fischer掇 Conclusive Arguments 111
(1) Evaluation of the Pecular Plaques 111
(2) Presbyophrenia 113
3.3 Conclusion 114
References 118
Epilogue 119
Index 127
Author Index 127
Subject Index 127