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

Have you read any of the latest research that has labeled dementia as diabetics of the brain? It is not being promoted very loudly, but it explains why the coconut oil has helped Bruce and a number of other people.
And it is also somehow connected to the reason why nitrites are so bad for the brain, but I don't remember the details.

Carol, no I have not....I would be interested in reading it. If you find the title again, please post it on my wall. Natural remedies (and supporting research) are rarely "promoted very loudly" - unless someone can profit from it :o(

Nice to see you again. I appreciate your input and directing us to more info. about coconut oil.
Lilli

CarolF, that is a study conducted jointly by a university in the US and one in Brazil, right? It sounds like it is in the test-tube stages at this point. It is a very promising idea, but there is much work ahead. It seems to apply specifically to Alzheimer's, not dementia in general, although more research may broaden the scope.

Interestingly, a spokesman for Alzheimer's Research Trust says "The most exciting implications are that some diabetes drugs have the potential to be developed as Alzheimer's treatments."

My husband's grandpa died of what they called 'hardening of the arteries' which looking back was probably Alzheimer's. No one thought anything of it, cause it was just to be expected when you got old.

I have two theories. One theory of mine is HRT. Reasoning being, my mother started taking it back in the 80's in her early to mid 40's. My mother went off of it COLD TURKEY sometime in 2005. There is at least a 15yr window of use. Mom never went thru Menopause. She continued to have her periods regularly till she stopped taking it.She continued to have slight periods until 2 1/2 years ago.Thats when she went totally "out there" so to speak and she was diagnosed with Dementia. Around the time she abruptly stopped her meds is when my dad passed. My mother was strange but we thought it was the grief of losing a husband of 43yrs.
I feel that Menopause is a natural process and should be left alone. Our brains and bodies as women are wired to go thru this change. And when you are a healthly woman who adverts menopause, what are the longterm effects?
My mother was always a healthy eater, very active, never drank nor smoked. My moms only downfall was OCD and anxiety issues never treated. Which could play into the Dementia too.

My other theory is moms father had resonable early onset ALZ. But 20some yrs ago it wasn't heard of to much. He never had an autopsy to confirm. But he was referred to as "senile". My memories of him I seen alot in my mother. I do believe strongly in Genetics. My grandfather was a sufferer of OCD and anxiety issues along with others in his family.There have been alot passed that was considered "senile" So maybe the "weakness" mentally is there for Dementia and how we live our lives might be a factor if we will develop Dementia. Its scary cause I am my mothers child and I do see some patterns in me that align with mom. Moms obsession was "cleaning" and "pleasing" she lived in her own world of reality. I am obsessed with "pleasing everyone" I have the approval addiction. My sister is a hoarder and shopaholic, and my brother is a drug addict and compulsive liar. All 3 of us at one point in our lives have suffered from sex addiction. We all have inherited some form of mental weakness. And it goes on now to our children. My nephews have problems(1 has ADHD, one is ADHD with Aspergers syndrome,and one is Autistic and I am now starting to see some issues in my older child. So since there is such a prevelent psychalogical pattern in our family does that mean we could possibly suffer from dementia at some point in our lives? If there is an accurate test I want to know about my possible future. So I can do everything in my power to prolong it now.

naheaton, your husband's grandpa and my grandma were cases that didn't get counted as dementia in their day, but very likely would now. More diligent statistic gathering is certainly one reason that dementia looks more prevalent today.

yellowfeever, if it is true that something like 50% of all people who live beyond 80 have some form of dementia, then it is probably best that all of us consider the possibility that it could happen to us, whether it seems to be in our gene pool or not.

I don't believe for a second that Alzheimer's has anything to do with diet, exercise,
mental stimulation, or social activity. My mother has been declining for 5 years, since age 80, and she ate an incredibly healthy diet, exercised regularly, including yoga, weight training and aerobics, is a college graduate who read avidly( serious fiction and non-fiction, not romance novels and People magazine), and was socially active and involved in community activities. She was adventuresome in every way, traveling and expanding her horizons. My grandmother also had Alz.
and she was college educated, active, lively and social. This disease strikes people of all backgrounds, personality and intellect regardless of their diet and exercise regimen. My mother was the least likely candidate for this disease except that her mother also had it, and probably her grandfather as well. It's much more likely to be related to genetics than anything else. There are a lot of people out there who just believe nonsense!

Did she limit her fats? And did she use unsaturated oils?

catchlab, this kind of blame-the-victim mentality has always bothered me, too. I discussed the topic with two different researchers. What they said made sense to me.

No one knows yet exactly what causes dementia. Therefore we don't know how to prevent it. The advice to keep fit and healthy and to exercise your mind is not intended to be a prevention but to build up resources to cope if dementia strikes. Staying mentally active builds new pathways in our brains. The more pathways we have, the longer it will be before the dementia pathology can take them all over. In fact, keeping mentally active in the early stages may (we hope) keep building pathways that the pathology has to subdue, lengthening the early stage.

If you mother had been less fit and less intellectually active, who knows? Perhaps she would have started declining noticably at 70.

At this point there is no known way to avoid getting dementia. Being physically healthy is an asset if you do get dementia, and having lots and lots of pathways in your brain may keep the pathology from being so immediately successful.

It is kind of insulting, isn't it, to think of your mother and grandmother and my husband and the loved ones of members of my support group and hear that staying mentally active prevents dementia. Nonsense!

So do the crossword puzzle, match wits with the fictional detective, balance your checkbook by hand once in while, learn a new piece on the piano -- use your brain! Not because then you won't get dementia, but because you will have more resources if you do.

Thank you jeannegibbs, for your thoughtful response. You sound like an expert, even though there's a limited amount of knowledge about this horrible disease.

CarolF

"Did she limit her fats? And did she use unsaturated oils?"

That is right on the money.

As a point of reference, the brilliant physicists who worked on the Manhattan Project all understood that they "Stood on the shoulders of giants". IOW, their work would not have been possible without all the theorizing and research that had gone before.

Now comparing that to nutrition and in particular Essential Fatty Acids, then back when catchlab's mother was in her 30's, 40's, 50's, and maybe even 60's, their were no EFA giants in sight. So IF the EFA's truly are ESSENTIAL - meaning that you MUST get them in your system or suffer long term degenerative consequences - then how likely is it that his mother really had ideal nutrition? Not very, IMO.

Anyway, it's very late now, but since catchlab ended that post with the incredible statement that "There are a lot of people out there who just believe nonsense!", I will just provide 2 quick scoops of.... nonsense.

First scoop, from July 2008, "medpage today", reviewed by Zalman S. Agus, MD; Emeritus Professor, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine:

"In patients with early Alzheimer's disease, a high level of cardiorespiratory fitness was associated with less brain loss in the hippocampus, a cross-sectional study showed.:

"All analyses were adjusted for age, gender, education, and whole brain volume. "

"We found that, in early-stage Alzheimer's, cardiorespiratory fitness is correlated with regional brain volumes in key areas affected by the disease," Dr. Hornea said. "This suggests that maintaining cardiorespiratory fitness may positively modify Alzheimer's-related brain atrophy."

"She said that "this is the first study to show any relationship between fitness and the hippocampus in Alzheimer's patients."

"An association between physical fitness and the degree of age-related brain atrophy has been established in healthy patients but not as well in those with Alzheimer's.

"This is the first time that MRI brain imaging has been used to demonstrate the connection between cardiorespiratory fitness and Alzheimer's-related brain changes in the hippocampus, an area of the brain important for memory and spatial navigation. In Alzheimer's, the hippocampus is one of the first regions of the brain to suffer damage."

So folks, think about that. If ordinary, run-of-the-mill age-related brain atrophy correlates with dementia, and "cardiorespiratory fitness" correlates negatively with the brain atrophy, then what does that suggest?

Second scoop of nonsense, from July 2011, an article entitled "The 9 Brain-Fitness Foods that Protect Against Alzheimers Disease":

"Research published in the journal Archives of Neurology indicates that certain foods protect the brain and reduce the chance of developing Alzheimer's disease."

"The researchers were able to identify certain dietary patterns which correlated strongly with a lower risk of Alzheimer's. The diets which seemed to protect the brain were high in omega-3 fatty acids, omega-6 fatty acids, vitamin E and folate. The brain-fit diets also featured lower intake of saturated fats and vitamin B12."

"It was found that the participants who followed this eating pattern most consistently had a 38% lower risk of developing Alzheimer's than those who deviated from it most widely. Interestingly, it was discovered that the use of dietary supplements and/or alcohol did not affect risk levels for developing Alzheimer's."

Coconut oil, anyone?

Ish: Well said and thank you for the additional information. I do not think that we can afford to close off any avenue of inquiry.

There is also a correlation between type 2 diabetes and Alzheimer's. This says something.

This thread is fascinating to me... am learning a lot... recently was told there is a new test to see if you had dementia or Alz... I cringed... no way do I want to know... I work with Alz patients, and until they have some concrete ideas or meds that are for this ugly disease, I don't want to experience the hopelessness of knowing that I have it.... I have said many times that Alz is the new AIDS, and look how far they have come with that awful disease... but unfortunately, we can not wear a condom and prevent Alz.... so I thank each of your for your contribution to this thread, the really sad part for me is, families are not prone to listen when I want to share these ideas and discoveries...but I will continue to educate myself and hope this thread becomes a regular on this sight.... thanks again, an Alz, caregiver....

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!

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).

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.

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.

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.

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.

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!

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?

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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

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.

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.