I'm excited by the results being reported by Bredesen and other doctors he's trained. Results mean a LOT when it comes to complex brain disfunction (such as Parkinson's and Alzheimer's), and he's getting them! My goal here is to start a discussion, explore what he's doing in his "protocol", and how I (we?) might best go about using his methods to improve our Parkinson's.
That's the first important point to get your head around: he's IMPROVING actual patients' conditions - not just slowing down their declines or spouting un-backed theories.
As I add more, I will be linking YouTube videos, but I'll also be providing transcripts to a lot of those videos. He's typically interviewed by other doctors, so his message is to them; we non-docs have to wade through some shop talk, so I'll do my best to give you transcripts with time-stamps to help you find the parts that are relevant to us.
For example, in the first video I'm posting, it's clear that although he's focusing right now on Alzheimer's, he sees that Parkinson's is similar to some forms of Alzheimer's. The following video is the best I've found so far. As I find better ones, I'll replace the old ones:
Good for you JAS9. I have his book. I like when he says these conditions are from a multitude of "insults" to the body. Somebody recently asked which insults need to be addressed (rhetorically) and the answer is "all of them".
They are big into testing. I'm not sold on the protocol but I follow them. They have a really friendly FB group facebook.com/groups/officia... and they don't mind when I post about PD or RBD. Super nice people.
I have The End of Alzheimer's Program: The First Protocol to Enhance Cognition and Reverse Decline at Any Age The First Protocol to Enhance Cognition and Reverse Decline at Any Age
Funny story from one of his interviews: he really didn't like the "The End of Alzheimer's" title. He knew that there was (and is) a LOT of work to be done. His wife suggested "Wit's End", which is a clever one, but the publisher over-ruled everyone.
I read Dr. Bredesen's protocol he applied on about 10 patients (if I remember right) who had beginning AZ symptoms. He used a lot of the supplements many PwP use. He also had his patients meditate. I don't remember the type of diet he had them on.
Thanks, Despe. So far I've watched 5 interviews with Bredesen and I've read the pages of his new book that are available on Amazon. I'm ordering the Kindle edition of it today and really get into it. The diet will be the first thing I'll look at in detail and I'll add it here. I do know that he uses a "keto-flexible" diet, which is one that you can flip back and forth between ketosis and non-ketosis as needed. This flexibility seems very important and is used to respond to testing as you go. This is not just your typical new diet plan; it's dynamic and responsive to your lab work.
Yes, he's been developing it for many years, all based on research going back decades. Several YouTbe doctors are interviewing him because he has a new book out. HOWEVER, the very best interview IMHO so far is this one below. But it's easy to get overwhelmed, so my advice is to watch the first 15-20 minutes, go away and let it sink in before coming back for more.:
Bredesen is from the Buck Institute. (Happens to be in my home town). Dr. Brian Kennedy is at the helm their now. There are some good interviews with him regarding fasting.
Hello JAS9 ~ Thank you for your interest, information, and posting these videos. I thought I’d mention another book that I have just started reading, “You Can Fix Your Brain” by Dr. Tom O’Bryan. I only mention this because Dr. O’Bryan mentions Dr. Bredesen and his success with reversing AZ in this book. (This book was written in 2018 if that makes a difference for anyone interested. Regardless, I think this book will be a good read!)
The very best interview IMHO so far is this one below. But it's easy to get overwhelmed, so my advice is to watch the first 15-20 minutes, go away and let it sink in before coming back for more:
Charlatan alert.This link is dated 2017 but I can't be bothered to find the original posted by a very boyish looking perlmutter but it was 2009 or before
Thanks for the warning, Winnie Poo, and I do sincerely mean that. I am not fond of Pearl mudder either, but he is not what we're talking about here. Please focus on Bredesen and ignore the people asking him the questions. There are actually much better interviews which is why I have replaced and no longer provide a link to Pearl motor's.
I take your point but the same red flags are up. "if it looks too good to be true it probably is". And like perlmutter it's lots of anecdotes with never a failure or setback. And then there's an editorial in the lancet - hardly a comic
"A protocol comprising dietary supplements and lifestyle changes that claims to prevent or reverse Alzheimer’s disease and cognitive decline has drawn media fanfare and critical acclaim from health gurus and even physicians. But endorsement of these claims is frequently based on three published papers – all of which share the hallmarks of second-rate science, according to a cognitive neurologist at UC San Francisco."
WTP: "if it looks too good to be true it probably is"
JAS9: Which is more delusional?
New York Times: "Two months before the Food and Drug Administration’s deadline to decide whether to approve Biogen’s controversial Alzheimer’s drug, aducanumab, a council of senior agency officials resoundingly agreed that there wasn’t enough evidence it worked." The FDA approved it anyway.
"They want one magic pill that will simply cure AZ, but the brain is an extremely complex system, and we know of over 36 "holes" in its roof that can leak and cause AZ. It's not just one thing that goes wrong. We've seen and helped hundreds of patients by now. The over 2000 doctors we've trained have seen many hundreds more, and it's never been just one thing that's caused AZ. And it's almost never the same combination of insults that finally does it (the brain) in."
He goes on to describe a few examples of how the brain can usually take some insults and still function (sometimes for decades), but becomes overwhelmed when the insults pile on. Bredesen's protocol is to tackle each of these insults, sometimes with medications, sometimes with diet or lifestyle changes (one insult is herpes, another is insulin insensitivity, and another is airborne mold), but always in an order that makes sense. This seems much more grounded in reality than approving a magic pill when only one study among many indicated that it might've slowed AZ by up to 22%.
WTP: " it's lots of anecdotes with never a failure or setback."
That might've been true 10 years ago (he helped 9 of the first 10 patients who applied his protocol), but this is a sample of his recent data:
WTP: "It's been around since at least 2014 and failed to change Alzheimer's."
There is a reason that the medical establishment has resisted Bredesen's ideas. It's called money. The magic pill they've recently approved can - at best - slow AZ's "progression", yet it stands to put hundreds of billions of dollars into various pockets. Bredesen's work is demonstrating actual improvement in objective scores:
Great. I hope it works for you. Beyond what you would expect to get from exercise, a Mediterranean diet and cognitive and social engagement.If it doesn't it will be down to you doing it wrong (or your personality) since it has already been independently and objectively demonstrated, and is only not being implemented by the medical professionals because their greed exceeds their indifference to their patients suffering.
I'm not quite sure I understand why you feel a need to test the proven protocol.
Ah yes. More than 6000 spent on a remedy which didn't work and made her lab-rat's life miserable. I'm sure that appears in his books and published evaluations of his methodology. Trouble was her lab-rat had the wrong personality. Nothing wrong with Bredesens ideas
That's borderline SPAM Despe. I doubt you are on their direct payroll but that is a gratuitous advert for the organisation making money from yet another magic solution. It deserves reporting
That sound of water running is me washing my hands of this branch of this discussion. I'm exploring something new and complex; I don't have time or energy to do more. When I come across anything interesting that I want to share, I will, but I won't be sharing links to businesses that I can't vouch for. Thanks for understanding.
Just a few things that popped out at me while watching more Youtube videos with Dr Bredesen.
Over 10 years ago, he and his group tried to get a trial approved, but ran into a wall:
They were told that they had to focus on one drug so that they could modify it (put it in or take it away). Otherwise, they couldn't be able to interpret the results.
But, by then, he strongly suspected that what he was looking at was a complex system that could be damaged in many ways, so focusing on a "single-molecule" that could potentially fix all of the damage from all of the insults would be highly unlikely to discover anything useful.
So he continued his work. Eventually, their database (containing what type of AZ might be helped by what treatment) grew to include over 36 "insults" to the brain. New types of AZ were identified. Over 2000 doctors were trained.
They've recently completed a small (n=25) "proof of concept" study, which they hope will lead to a much larger sanctioned study.
The concept that PD and Alzheimers (which I know nothing about) are multi facetted and require an appropriate multi facetted approach to clinical trials I very much agree with. But that is no excuse for the outright amateurism of the methodology in the published papers.I am reminded of my frustration and disappointment when I lent my Dad perlmutters brain maker. Dad's parkinson's was more advanced than mine and he was eager for updates from my research on this forum and elsewhere. He was up for trying anything which might help.
He stopped reading it on the 3rd chapter
"everything he tries works every time. There are no setbacks or exceptions. I don't believe it"
Dad met mum in the research labs of the welcome foundation where they both worked, and had a lifetimes experience.
I am sorry to learn of your father. Once again. let me remind everyone that this discussion is about Dr. Bredesen's work and not Dr. Perlmutter's. Please try to separate the two in your mind.
When you state: "that is no excuse for the outright amateurism of the methodology in the published papers." Are you referring to Perlmutter or Bredesen? One of the links you provide elsewhere is to a paper by Bredesen that provides (IMHO) a lot of information and details. I can't speak to whether someone more experienced or learned would find them "amateurish". Your link cites some people who would know, but their complaint wasn't in the science ("He's an exceptional scientist") but in the cost of it. The cost is a problem, I agree. So far that's the one thing we can agree on.
Dr. Bredesen has authored or co-authored over 220 papers. I haven't read, much less studied all of them of course; only a small sample. The few I've looked at were not groundbreaking by themselves (for example, the effect of an herb on a particular condition). But I didn't detect any obvious shortcomings or "amateurism".
Looking only at the one trial that he recently completed, I've downloaded the publication and it's quite impressive (at least to me). Can you please provide examples of "outright amateurism" that you see? Again, it's hard for me to judge, but it seems really well done and complete. kKAlso from your referenced article:
"They say he strays from long-established scientific norms by relying on anecdotal reports from patients, rather than providing evidence with rigorous research."
As for the lack of trials, he and his group have shown great patience in dealing with the powers that be. He's had the problem of having a square peg and attempting to put it into a round hole. That is, he's been stopped by a pre-conceived notion of what a trial is. But he has persisted. I give him high marks for that. Here's an extract from one of his many interviews:
Dr Heather Sanderson with Dr Dale Bredesen
Reverse AZ Summit
69:54
Dr Heather Sanderson: So one of the reasons I'm so excited to be recording this now at this time is because you and your group have just published a trial, taking 25 participants through basically your whole program. So I'm thrilled that we can finally share with the world what you guys are finding. There is now a study that we can point to - not just the one patient here or there that is getting better in someone's clinic, but that there's robust science coming out.
So, would you please just describe the trial; how (and why) it was set up, the protocol, and then also what you found?
Dr Bredesen: Yes, great point. So you know way back in 2011 we proposed the very first trial that would have addressed all the different pieces; the things that we had identified in the laboratory over the years that were critical things, like specific pathogens and things like specific toxins and all the things that you deal with with your patients as well.
And we were not allowed to do the trial back in 2011, because it was "multivariable" and the RBS wanted this to be single variable... of course we objected and said "Hey, wait a minute! This is not a one variable disease."
We wanted, then, to collect anecdotes and, as you know we published anecdotes in 2014, 2016, and in 2018 we published 100 (anecdotes) showing improvements that were documented.
So then we went back in 2018, after that publication, and said "Okay, can we do the trial now?" and they said "No". And so, I know; still crazy!
So, finally, in 2019, we were allowed to do a proof of concept trial. It's only 25 patients but the idea was it would allow us then, if we got good results with that, to go to a randomized controlled trial which is what we're now in the midst of doing.
So, (we were) really very fortunate to link up with Diana Merriam and the Four Winds Foundation that supported this trial. They were just fantastic. And then, also, three absolutely outstanding functional medicine physicians: Dr Ann Hathaway, Dr Kat Toups, and Dr Deborah Gordon. Really honored to work with them.
And, as you know we basically took this from the test tube straight to the people...
Hi JAS9. Thank you for starting this thread. I find this a fascinating topic. Have heard Dr. Bredesen being interviewed on various podcasts, webinars and such and have always wondered how his work translated to Parkinson's. From what I gather, he feels he needs to prove that it's list of changes that one needs to make to be effective. It can't work focusing on just one thing on the list, which is why his trials will never meet scientific standards. I'm okay with that and willing to follow a program that makes sense in a big picture sense. His work aligns well with Dr. Mischley and a few others interesting thinkers in this area. Keep up this research for us and ignore the cynics.
Yes, it would be great to find some comments by Bredesen about how much his AZ ideas should translate to PD. I've only found 2 or 3 times that he mentions PD at all, but in those cases, he's just implying that PD is another disease that should be treatable in a similar way. I think that he's being very cautious and probably feels that focusing almost entirely on AZ at this time gives him the best chance at successfully proving his case. If that's right, then we (you or I) might be able to make some progress by duplicating his methods. I know that PwP have something like double the chance of getting AZ too, and I seem to be having more and more "senior moments". So I think there's more than a fair chance that his methods could help me with PD too.
I like what I've heard in his interviews (I've listened to 5 now, including 2 with Dr. Mercola), but I'm wondering how his approach differs from any naturopathic approach? (other than his proprietary tests and supplements) Assuming of course that you have a decent doctor.
His approach doesn't actually differ fundamentally - it's about finding the underlying root cause of the complex multifaceted disease, just as in PD. What he has accomplished is changing the rooted perception of the previously "incurable" hopeless disease such as Alzheimer through documented objective evidence that proved otherwise with true survivors of over 9 years, giving hope that something can be done especially if you begin early to address the disease that actually starts 20years+ before diagnosis. He began with successful anecdotes after repeatedly getting turned down for trials, but the recently completed proof of concept trial on Dec 2020 showed that people actually did get better and reverted their symptoms, not just slow the disease progression. They've been approved for a randomized controlled trial early next year, but it'll be a complex one to hash out given everyone's disease cause is multifactorial and complex.
He highlights different major groups as potential insults to a disease -
1. Inflammation of any cause - poor dentition, sinusitis, Lyme, leaky gut, metabolic syndrome, etc. must be identified and removed.
5. Stress - part of above 3 & 4, but a huge factor
Sounds familiar? - all of the above apply to PD. The long immutable silly assumption that a single pharmaceutical drug could address such a complex problem is simply illogical and this must change moving forward. The naysayers will insist on the practice of the past looking at one measurable variable at a time denigrating this multifaceted holistic approach to pseudoscience simply because it doesn't fit the existing model that hasn't worked despite billions wasted - good old ingrained appeal to authority fallacy even when documented evidence is undeniable.
The bottom line is that something can be done, and it's ultimately about aging better and addressing and removing multiples obstacles that contributed to a diseased state in order to have a chance at getting better.
This type of approach is what I am looking for. I have 2 likely candidates, and hope that one of them will be a good fit. I'll be reading this thread with great interest.
The one issue that I have a problem with is the cost. Those among us who have the money to spare, the cost isn't a problem, and I haven't seen anyone successfully assail his science, but it seems to me that a little competition is in order. Nothing he's doing is patented after all.
It does 'put me off' that everything is filtered through one of his approved doctors. They do not appear to be vetted, other than having completed his coursework.
Hmmm. This has become my main focus right now. Using his doctor finder page, there's one trained person near me. From her web site information, she sounds very capable. But this is an expensive gamble, no question. I'm wondering just how difficult and expensive it would be to find, say, a Naturepath Doctor who isn't trained in his protocol but able to help... but would that even be a good idea?
Better yet (than a plain Naturopath), I think, might be to locate a functional medicine doctor.
I was filling out my intake forms and one question was, "What do you know about the functional medicine approach?" which prompted me to look at ifm.org/functional-medicine...
How so? What types of things do they ask you?Anything you'd care to share about your experience with the functional medicine gang, especially how it relates to PD and/or Bredesen, would be greatly appreciated!
I don't remember exactly (my son delivered them to her office yesterday). Several about expectations & commitment; what do you do that supports your health, what are potential obstacles that could be undermining. What do you love to do... history of diagnoses, and what treatments were done... current problems, and what have you tried for them so far. There was so much more but I can't remember.
Yes, but there was only one visit as we are several hundred miles away! I received the below email today.
Mark Hyman MD <drhyman@drhyman.com>
Wed 9/15/2021 3:52 PM
Reversing Multiple Sclerosis And Autoimmune Disease With Functional Medicine
The most profound cases of healing I see are in people who refuse to give up. Even if they’ve found some things that improve their condition, they continue searching for new ways to feel better and better.
This is how we break down walls in medicine. It’s how people who are told they’ll never walk again end up biking to work every day.
I’m honored to have one of those incredible people on today’s episode to talk about her journey as a patient with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. Dr. Terry Wahls never stopped searching for answers and has changed the prognosis of MS and autoimmune diseases for herself and so many others in the process. Throughout this episode, we dive into Dr. Wahls latest tweaks and updates to the healing protocol that’s been so successful for her and countless others.
Dr. Terry Wahls is a clinical professor of medicine at the University of Iowa. Her secondary progressive multiple sclerosis confined her to a tilt-recline wheelchair for four years, but she restored her health using a diet and lifestyle program she designed specifically for mitochondrial health and now pedals her bike to work each day.
She is the author of The Wahls Protocol: How I Beat Progressive MS Using Paleo Principles and Functional Medicine, The Wahls Protocol: A Radical New Way to Treat All Chronic Autoimmune Conditions Using Paleo Principles, and the cookbook, The Wahls Protocol Cooking for Life: The Revolutionary Modern Paleo Plan to Treat All Chronic Autoimmune Conditions.
Dr. Wahls’ diagnosis led her to create The Wahls Protocol, which is responsible for her amazing recovery. While this program has provided her with a long-term framework for health, we discuss the new things she’s trying these days and the benefits she continues to discover. One example is hormetic stressors—we talk about hot and cold therapy, and Dr. Wahls explains how taking ice baths actually improves her sleep, as well as how to safely work your way up to the right level of temperature dysregulation for your body.
Diet is a huge component of Dr. Wahls’ healing process. With 9 cups of colorful vegetables and some fruits, it might be the most nutrient-dense diet on the planet. She explains the benefits of things like sulfur-rich foods, as well as the rationale behind embracing organ meats. I find this is something many people struggle to incorporate, but she provides some great tips on how to start including more high-quality organ meats in your diet with maximum flavor.
Dr. Wahls conducts clinical trials that test the effect of nutrition and lifestyle interventions on MS and other progressive health problems, like autoimmunity, neurological dysfunction, and traumatic brain injuries. We talk about some of her exciting research findings, as well as why the corruption of research funding has forced her to rely on private donors for these studies.
It’s people like Dr. Wahls who create the future of medicine. I hope you’ll tune in to hear her inspiring story and learn about some updates to her personal routine.
Wishing you health and happiness,
Mark Hyman, MD
Listen on Apple Podcast
Listen on Spotify
Click here to listen on the web
We're grateful for our sponsors:
This episode is brought to you by HigherDOSE, BiOptimizers, and MitoPure.
Right now, you can save $75 off a HigherDose Infrared Sauna Blanket or Infrared PEMF Mat. Just go to HigherDOSE.com/farmacy today and use my exclusive Promo Code: FARMACY75 at checkout.
You can try BiOptimizers Magnesium Breakthrough for 10% off by going to magbreakthrough.com/hyman and using the code HYMAN10. For a limited time, BiOptimizers is also giving away free bottles of their bestselling products P3OM and Masszymes with select purchases.
MitoPure, from TimeLine Nutrition, regenerates mitochondria and supports cellular energy production. Right now you can get 10% off MitoPure, which you can get in a capsule, powder, or protein blend, at timelinenutrition.com/drhyman.
Yes, I looked at Wahl's diet before. It's all pretty much in line with a lot of other diets for neurodegenerative diseases. I could see Bredesen adopting her diet for his MS patients, but it's always important to point out that B's protocol is different for different neurodegenerative diseases and their sub-types. So, once he and his team finish studying MS, they may well find subtypes and will provide subprotocols for each.
While this study isn't proof that Bredesen is correct, I think it's interesting to note that it fits in with some of his assertions. In particular, one of his main assertions is that the amyloid plaques found in both AZ and PD are NOT the culprits they are made out to be. At least in his model of AZ, he claims that the brain, under attack by perhaps multiple "insults", decides that in order to survive it must downsize, pull back, strategically retreat. In his model, the plaque is an anti-microbial peptide (as shown by this study: pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/295... ) which the brain puts up to protect itself. Researchers have seen this strange behavior and interpretted it as an attack on the brain.
Instead, Bredesen asserts that the brain is purposefully using the plaque to defend what it can against the true insults (of which there are potentially many). For me, seeing that this idea, which he talked about at least 6 years ago, is supported by a study from 2018, at least indicates that he's well attached to reality (at least in this one area).
It also suggests that the work being done to remove the plaque might be pre-mature. He says repeatedly that removing the plaque before removing all of the insults to the brain may cause further harm. At least in AZ's case, that's his position. To paraphrase him from some of his interviews: "Medicines to remove this plaque might well prove very beneficial once the true insults are removed. Then, if the brain doesn't remove the plaque itself, we may find it beneficial to do it; like removing a bandaid from the skin once a cut has healed."
If this turned out to be true, the brain would then be free to grow, expand, and build new neurons again. He says that he's seen this, even without having to use medicine to remove the plaque. In his most recent 25 participant study, he claims that the brains of some (not sure how many - I'll look into that) of the subjects actually are doing better (have grown more physically) than people who have never had AZ. Just amazing.
So, are the trials that are attempting to remove these plaques before addressing the "insults" well-intentioned mistakes? Interesting to think about.
I finally found a great reference to PD and how they're fitting it into their strategy. I'll comment on it more tomorrow but here's a bit of the transcript:
35:36
Dr. Bredesen:
With social networking, we're now seeing thousands instead of hundreds, and so we're hearing more and more. And, of course, with the trial, we're looking very carefully at each thing, but we've also started something called the 'Arc Project' where we look very deeply at one or two people who have each of the neurodegenerative diseases. So we've started with Macular Degeneration, we're now going on to Parkinson's and Louis Body and things like that. So we'll learn more from each of these, but you're absolutely right; (we're learning) tremendous lessons.
One of the ones I learned first (which is now eight years ago): we started to see people who weren't responding. These were the ones that turned out to have mycotoxin exposure, so that's what we didn't know about that. Initially, we just had type 1 and type 2. We didn't know about type 3, and so we had to reorient and ask: why do these people actually look different? As you know, they tend to present differently; they tend to be younger, they tend to have a more non-amnestic presentation, more executive dysfunction dyscalculia primary progressive aphasia posterior cortical atrophy things like that so and they often will have stress as a big inducer of the cognitive decline. You have to treat them differently you have to recognize the problem and jump in one of the things that we're now just you know you see new concepts and you say wait a minute, am I missing something?
In addition to this podcast (and even more Youtube interviews), I've spent a little time on their FB page. I've also perused his first 2 books and skimmed his third. (Skimming is slightly more thorough than perusing.) There are a few misconceptions that have leaked into this discussion that I'd like to clear up. First, there's been no pressure on me to spend money, much less a lot of money. The 3 books provide a LOT of detail about how Dr B's protocol works. There's no need to spend more unless you feel that you need the help, and then the trained doctors, nurses, etc. are available. You can get your own supplements based on what his books say, or you can buy his supplements for more money (but with more confidence). That's when it can get a bit expensive. Unfortunately, that's just the way things are as of now. Hopefully, someday, rich people won't have the advantage when it comes to health treatments.
Second, comments about someone blaming the patient for not doing everything exactly right are impossible to judge without a thorough investigation, which we have no way of doing. We can hope that this is not common and that bad apples can be kept to a minimum. I will mention this to people on their FB page and see what happens.
Finally, the good stuff: how does the protocol relate to PD? On FB they encouraged me to try the protocol, but from what I've seen, first one needs to be evaluated (or evaluate yourself). As he mentions many times, one of the breakthroughs with his protocol is the recognition that not all AZ is the same; there are different types, and each type, in effect, has its own protocol.
As of August 17, 2021 (just a month ago as I write this) he and his team are just now taking a deep look at some PwP. This is understandable. If anyone doesn't get why focusing on AZ had to come first, let me know. So, when might this new protocol (subprotocol?) be ready? He points out that every new branch of neurodegenerative disease has taught them new things. PD will take time to decipher, but OTOH they're learning all the time, so I would expect that it won't take years. But OTOOH, testing to verify a protocol might take 1 to 2 years? Just guessing.
So, should you or I begin to use a protocol designed for a different neurodegenerative disease? That's up to each of us, and I haven't completely decided yet. I'm already doing some of it, and I might do more if it makes sense to me. But that's just me. It also makes sense to wait. Why? Because, as he points out fairly often, doing things in an order that makes sense is important.
In the meantime, I'll ask what I can on FB and see if anyone there knows anything about this Arc Project.
I'm off on a tangent, but this might be something to investigate. I'm wondering if the following information could be used to improve the effects of Bredesen's diet? In short, Dr B's diet (aka ketoFLEX) puts you into ketosis. Ketosis, of course, is well-studied and has certain advantages (the most useful for Dr B's work is that it gives the mitochondria of the brain cells a better source of energy).
Fasting Mimicking Diets are something fairly new. So new that, although Dr B is *probably* aware of them, they haven't been fully tested on humans yet. BUT, if they continue to be safe and effective in upcoming trials, they could potentially turbo-charge Dr B's work. How? Well, they go beyond just ketosis and they mimic what happens when someone goes on an extended fast (but without the actual starvation)! What happens? A LOT!! Watch this video for more:
Actually, that "not fully tested on humans" part seems to be old news. He's now saying that over 20,000 people have used his "Longevity Diet" in carefully controlled trials and that it's now proven to be safe (though he's still saying that the 5-day simulated fasting should be carefully monitored by medical experts). The effectiveness is being trialed right now on several conditions, including Alzheimer's (but not PD yet I guess).
I've learned more about Longo's Fast Mimicking Diet and am becoming a convert! While Dr Bredesen's ReCODE protocol tries to repair specific damage caused by various "insults", Dr Longo's FMD (Fasting Mimicking Diet) moves a person's entire body and mind into a state which clears out all the bad (dead or damaged cells and bits and pieces of various detritus and toxic "exhaust gasses (like hydrogen peroxide) leftover from the many-decades-long non-stop party that your cells have been having) and replaces it all with the good (new stemcells for everybody!)
If you're still thinking that Bredesen also has a keyto diet, so there's no real difference, take a minute to catch up! Ketosis is insufficient to get all of the benefits of a long-term fast (5 or more days). So, although an FMD does begin with ketosis, it goes on to do so much more!
Or, if you're thinking that fasting is too hard, or tends to weaken muscles due to lack of nutrients, that's wrong too! Sure, you go on a strict diet for 5 days, and the first day's calories are reduced from your usual (maybe 2000 is cut to 1100) but it sounds doable. (The remaining 4 days are cut again to 800 calories.) The whole goal is to avoid nutrient deficiencies and make it easier to get the very important benefits of long-term fasting.
I've found a local DNM (doctor of natural medicine) who's open to discussing these options. Here's a good, concise article:
I wrote to Dr. Bredesen inquiring about his protocol being used for PD. I don’t remember his exact verbiage but the gist was a definite yes. I wrote to Dr. Terri Wahls and she responded “many people with PD use the protocol.” So she asked not making any claims but stated the obvious. For me, cutting out gluten and grains was devastating (I was an avid baker) but it has been well worth it.
So what's the latest? Given the (typical) life expectancy of someone dx with ALZ or PD, I would hope that 8 months would be enough to bring into focus some possible interim results?
Content on HealthUnlocked does not replace the relationship between you and doctors or other healthcare professionals nor the advice you receive from them.
Never delay seeking advice or dialling emergency services because of something that you have read on HealthUnlocked.
What causes Parkinson's Disease in most people? Is it mostly toxins?
New here just joined in
My Brother Died from Parkinson's
