Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Wednesday July 15 2020, @09:35AM   Printer-friendly
from the tl;dr dept.

Cambridge study finds apathy, not depression, is an early sign of dementia :

A new study, led by neuroscientists from the University of Cambridge, has identified apathy as an important early sign of dementia. The research finds apathy is distinct from depression, and offers a more accurate longitudinal association with the onset of dementia.

[...] To study this particular distinction between apathy and depression, and their relationship with dementia, the researchers looked at two independent cohorts with cerebral small vessel disease (SVD), totaling more than 450 subjects. SVD is a common age-related condition and it's the leading cause of vascular dementia, so following SVD patients for several years before dementia develops offers a good insight into the earliest pre-clinical signs of cognitive decline.

Affirming the hypothesis that apathy is an early sign of cognitive decline, the researchers reference recent MRI studies finding SVD damages specific white matter networks relating to motivation and healthy cognitive functions. This suggests as SVD progresses, an early stage of pre-dementia neurodegeneration can manifest in apathetic behavior.

"This implies that apathy is not a risk factor for dementia per se, but rather an early symptom of white matter network damage," the researchers write in the study. "Indeed, recent theoretical work proposed that certain symptoms of apathy are synonymous with defined cognitive deficits. If this is the case, then apathy may manifest early as a reduction in attention towards reward stimuli, then later, as an inability to learn or remember rewarding behaviours."

Journal Reference:
Jonathan Tay, Robin G Morris, Anil M Tuladhar, et al. Apathy, but not depression, predicts all-cause dementia in cerebral small vessel disease [open], Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry (DOI: 10.1136/jnnp-2020-323092)

If you really don't care about this study, you might be in trouble...


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by RS3 on Thursday July 16 2020, @07:07PM

    by RS3 (6367) on Thursday July 16 2020, @07:07PM (#1022522)

    Thank you so much. You're truly one of the best here or anywhere, and I can't thank you enough for your contributions here. You enrich my life.

    You kind of went down a path of steps that resulted in talking about paying for soapbox, which you (properly IMHO) dispelled, and it was a complete offshoot of what I was writing about. People do that to me from time to time- series of "stream of consciousness" steps based on something I say/write, and then put those thoughts back on me- it's just a sore spot for me, so please keep that in mind- that I'm the slightly "triggered" one. :o

    Really the bigger question is: what do the owners / founders / admins of SN want the site to be? To some extent I look at this site in the light of what _I_ would want it to be, and it's almost there. I just don't agree with 1 person's downmod moving 1 post down 1 reading level. To understand the thought process, one must keep in mind the whole reason for a mod system, which is mainly to remove trash posts from view.

    But, then whose opinions are guiding what I read?

    So wisecrackers say "browse at -1". That's the kind of smartass answer that gets me irritated because my point is not about what level _I_ read at, but what levels everyone reads at, and what happens to perfectly good posts (mine included) that 1 or 2 "triggered' people downmod because they disagree with an otherwise perfectly good post.

    I generally read at level 0, but there's plenty of cruft at 0, and lots of great stuff.

    People argue that the mod system is self-righting, that enough people will upmod something that was unfairly downmodded. I hope those people don't program computers- they've forgotten logical thinking 101. How will anyone see said post to then think to upmod it?

    I've tried to help rescue some great posts, but 1) I run out of mod points, 2) 4 or more upmods toward 1 person and they all revert and I lose the points, and 3) someone else downmods the post again anyway.

    My point: it's not okay, in my mind, to move someone's post out of view just because you have a different opinion, but that's what we have.

    I just don't have time to go into it, but I've thought about an involuntary mod system, for example. IE, you would _have_ to vote on a post or the system won't let you read any more posts. Just a thought. The idea being- I want a true system-wide democratic vote on whether something needs to be downmodded.

    If I ever do run such a system, downmods would have to be approved by first ME, then as the system grows in membership, trusted admins / editors (like you). But even then it would be a vote system, and if I owned said system, I'd always final say, but most likely would go with the votes.

    To bolster my points, this system's admins take "spam" mod very seriously, and you'll lose a month of mod points if you improperly downmod with "spam". I just wish they'd do the same for "troll" and "flamebait".

    Bottom line- I think this site could be even better if cleaned up- it would encourage better discussions, freer expression, more vigorous and inspired brainstorming, and, well, I'd spend too much time here and I have a life that's calling! :)

    Thank you!!

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2