Good news. Preliminary research from the FINGER (Finnish Geriatric Intervention) Study demonstrate that a multi-pronged lifestyle intervention reduces cognitive impairment. http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/828387
The main aim of FINGER, then, was to reduce cognitive impairment in an at-risk population using a 2-year, multidomain lifestyle intervention that included nutritional guidance, physical activity, cognitive training and social activities, and monitoring and management of all metabolic and vascular risk factors, including hypertension, dyslipidemia, obesity, and impaired glucose tolerance.
This study provides strong evidence that a multi-faceted approach (like many of us are engaging in) resulted in better overall cognitive performance on a comprehensive neuropsychological test battery vs regular health advice Happy dance.
Like your title, Julie. I have to laugh at the fact that this trial included "social activities" as part of the intervention. I wonder how they implemented that. I was trying to find the underlying paper to see if they reported on E4s, but couldn't find it. It looks like it's just a preliminary report, as you say. I did find some more info. about this study (see page 3): http://www.alz.org/aaic/_downloads/AAIC ... -Study.pdf
Here's another paper from April 2014 also co-authored by Professor Kivipelto: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24721528
BACKGROUND: Physical activity may be beneficial for cognition, but the effect may vary depending on personal characteristics.
METHODS: We investigated the associations between leisure-time physical activity (LTPA) from mid- to late life, the risk of dementia, and the role of body mass index, sex, and APOE in the CAIDE study during 28-year follow-up. Cognitive function of a random subsample was assessed at a mean age of 78.8 years (n = 1511), and dementia/Alzheimer's disease (AD) diagnoses were identified from national registers for the entire target population (n = 3559).
RESULTS: Moderate (hazard ratio [HR], 1.46; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.08-1.99) and low levels of midlife LTPA (HR, 1.39; 95% CI, 0.99-1.95) were associated with higher risk of dementia in comparison with the most active category. The benefits were more pronounced among men, overweight individuals, and APOE ε4 noncarriers. Maintaining high LTPA (HR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.06-0.41) or increasing LTPA (HR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.09-0.40) after midlife was associated with lower dementia risk. Similar results were observed for AD.
CONCLUSIONS: The window of opportunity for preventive physical activity interventions may extend from midlife to older ages.
Pal, thanks for the tip about the second Kivipelto paper --
The benefits were more pronounced among men, overweight individuals, and APOE ε4 noncarriers.
We will have to read the full text to see how robust that particular finding is. It's surprising, since, in several well-publicized recent studies (like Denise Head's work), ε4 carriers were the ones who got the most benefit from exercise. Here, we'd have to see, for ex., whether "active" means doing something social that might involve drinking (wouldn't be surprising, given the subject pool is from Scandinavia), and whether they controlled for that.
I searched out the methodology of this study, it was really hard to find, and I can't remember where I found the details, but to cut to the chase, "active" meant that the researchers arranged regular, frequent enriching social events, meetings etc for the intervention group. Though of course there may have been alcohol involved. This is a study I am very interested in.
Stavia- Thanks! That would of course remove the contradiction: alcohol we know (pretty solidly) isn't good for ε4s. So this study would show that being "active" in the sense of drinking doesn't benefit ε4s; being "active" in the sense of exercising does, as shown by other studies. Ergo no contradiction.
They had three aspects to activity iirc.
1. Serious amount of excercise
2. Regular social engagement stuff
3. Regular cognitively enhancing stuff
It's exactly what I try to do. I believe the brain is a supreme adapter to various stimuli and demands, in a very good way. I believe diet is only one of a raft of equally important intervention modalities for us.
Happy dance.
I have to laugh at the fact that this trial included "social activities" as part of the intervention. I wonder how they implemented that. I was trying to find the underlying paper to see if they reported on E4s, but couldn't find it. It looks like it's just a preliminary report, as you say. I did find some more info. about this study (see page 3):
