Archive for the 'Alzheimers' Category

Cognitive reserve

Posted on August 1, 2007

Elizabeth Buchen, neuroscientist, science writer and advisor to Lumos Labs, explains the concept of ‘cognitive reserve’, and why people with more education are generally better at coping with brain damage.

The first Alzheimer’s diseased brain I ever touched looked horrific. The cortex was shriveled, the ventricles were large, cavernous voids, and when I stained the sample I saw a galaxy of proteinaceous tangles and masses. The brain had clearly been degenerating steacognitive-reserve.jpgdily for over a decade, and it was difficult to imagine how the patient could have functioned. I was shocked to discover that, according to his charts, the patient’s dementia had only been detectable for a few years. In contrast, certain brains I analyzed appeared dramatically more intact, yet came from patients who had suffered from severe dementia for over a decade.

These patients exemplify the dramatically different ways people can respond to neurodegenerative changes. Even when confronted with the same disease and comparable severity, people vary considerably in the extent of cognitive decline. Specifically, people with higher levels of education and occupational attainment are more successful at coping with the same amount of brain damage.

One hypothesis that accounts for this discrepancy is the concept of cognitive reserve. The cognitive reserve hypothesis posits that people who have challenged their minds for significant portions of their lives (i.e. they didn’t just start playing Sudoku at the age of 60) can compensate for brain damage or degeneration by recruiting alternate brain networks as backup or “reserve.” In support of this hypothesis, functional brain imaging shows that “high-functioning” older adults activate significantly more areas of their brains than both “low-functioning” older adults and young adults when performing certain cognitive tasks. This indicates neural compensation; the “high-functioning” old engage in alternative neural strategies in response to neural deficits or declines in cognitive abilities. Importantly, this type of compensation may be facilitated by a more flexible organization of the brain, which results from early cognitive experience.

Of course, people who did not start challenging themselves until later in life should not despair. Other requisites of compensation, such as plasticity (including the birth of new neurons and enhanced signaling between neurons), may be improved by cognitive experience throughout life (although the earlier the better). Further, in a complementary aspect of cognitive reserve, people who challenge their brains throughout life may be able to protect their existing brain networks. Intellectually stimulating activities may increase the efficiency and capacity of these networks, enabling them to withstand a greater degree of age-related change while maintaining intact functioning (again, the earlier the better).

Road map to a cognitively fit nation, by the CDC and Alzheimer’s Association

Posted on June 19, 2007

The Center for Disease Control (CDC) and the Alzheimer’s Association have teamed up with a concise but ambitious goal, which closely resembles that of Lumosity:

Cdc

“To maintain or improve the cognitive performance of all adults.”

Continue Reading »

Fun stuff that’s healthy #2b: A little bit of booze

Posted on May 22, 2007

It might seem irresponsible of me to post twice on the benefits of alcohol consumption, so consider this a continuation of my earlier post on red wine.

The journal Neurology today published evidence indicating that about one drink per day may help people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) delay the onset of dementia. People with MCI exhibit some (mild) iBig_daddympairment in cognitive abilities and are 3-4 times more likely to develop Alzheimer’s disease. About 12% of people over the age of 70 have MCI.

This study, conducted by  Solfrizzi et al, followed 121 MCI patients for 3.5 years. Those that consumed about 1 drink per day were significantly less likely to progress to dementia than those that had 0 drinks per day, or those that had more than 1 drink per day.

An important limitation of this study, as well as many descriptive longitudinal studies, is that the subjects were not randomly assigned to 0, 1, or >1 drinking groups. Therefore, the causal relationship is not clearly determined, and it is conceivable – though not terribly likely – that those who are most resistant to dementia prefer 1 drink each day.

For more info, see the press release or abstract.

Cheers!

Archives