If you use a device running an Android version prior to 7.1.1, beginning January 11 your access from that device to this site and many others will be impaired. For details and solutions, see this topic.

Strawberries and 34% lower risk of AD in Rush Memory Cohort

Alzheimer's, cardiovascular, and other chronic diseases; biomarkers, lifestyle, supplements, drugs, and health care.
NF52
Support Team
Support Team
Posts: 1394
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 9:41 am
Location: Eastern U.S.

Strawberries and 34% lower risk of AD in Rush Memory Cohort

Postby NF52 » Fri Dec 27, 2019 1:18 pm

This Dec. 2019 article may be of interest to those wondering whether berries have an independent association with reduced risk of Alzheimer's. Here's a bit of background and a description of the study participants, a subset of the long-studied Rush Memory and Aging Project in Chicago, provided by the authors of the article Association of Strawberries and Anthocyanidin Intake with Alzheimer’s Dementia Risk:
The Nurses’ Health Study...reported slower cognitive decline among older women who consumed strawberries more than two times per week when compared to those consuming less than once a week [17]. In the present analysis, we investigated the association between strawberry consumption and the risk of Alzheimer’s dementia in a community cohort of older adults...

The analytical sample of 925 participants was on average 81 (±7.2) years of age, 75% female, 98% White, had a mean educational level of 15 (±3) years, and 21.5% had an APOE-e4 allele. A total of 245 participants developed Alzheimer’s dementia over the mean follow-up of 6.7 (±3.6) years. Strawberry intake ranged from 0 to 2 servings/week (mean intake of the population: 0.64 servings/week)...

The baseline characteristics of participants consuming strawberries more than once a week were similar
to those consuming strawberries rarely or a few times/month (Table 1). Strawberry consumption was
weakly correlated with the consumption of other healthy foods, including other fruits, leafy green
vegetables, seafood, beans/legumes, olive oil, and nuts...

And here's the results:
we controlled for other foods that reported to be associated with better cognition, including leafy green vegetables and seafood... we further adjusted for presence of hypertension, diabetes, myocardial infarction, and stroke but there was little change in the effect estimates (HR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.60, 0.95), indicating that the association is not mediated by cardiovascular conditions. We also assessed any confounding by total vitamin E intake and found no difference in the association (Table 2). Overall, participants consuming one or more servings of strawberries per week had a 34% lower risk of developing Alzheimer’s dementia when compared to those consuming none or less than once per month
https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/11/12/3060
4/4 and still an optimist!

User avatar
Julie G
Mod
Mod
Posts: 8608
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2013 6:36 pm

Re: Strawberries and 34% lower risk of AD in Rush Memory Cohort

Postby Julie G » Fri Dec 27, 2019 6:52 pm

Great find! Thanks for sharing :D

User avatar
dfmcapecod
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 24
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 9:04 am
Location: New England

Re: Strawberries and 34% lower risk of AD in Rush Memory Cohort

Postby dfmcapecod » Sun Jan 12, 2020 1:04 pm

Isn't this counter to Dr. Gundry's anti-lectin diet?
DM
ε4/ε4

NF52
Support Team
Support Team
Posts: 1394
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 9:41 am
Location: Eastern U.S.

Re: Strawberries and 34% lower risk of AD in Rush Memory Cohort

Postby NF52 » Sun Jan 12, 2020 2:39 pm

dfmcapecod wrote:Isn't this counter to Dr. Gundry's anti-lectin diet?
Hi dfmcapecod,
As a 67 year old 4/4, I have come to accept a fairly wide level of ambiguity in my life! I saw your post asking for a clear answer on Dr. Gundry's protocol and the only honest answer, in my opinion, is that no one diet or food can account for the heterogenity of Alzheimer's disease in mechanism of pathogenesis, presenting symptoms, age at onset, course of disease or co-morbid vascular or other dementias.

Nor can anyone with precision personalize the broad range of risk for those of us with ApoE 4/4. If people in the age range of 60-75 who are currently healthy can have a predictive, population-based meta-analysis risk of between 30-55% for a diagnosis of MCI or AD by the age of 85, that suggests a lot of intervening genetic, epigenetic, lifestyle, environmental and to-be-identified personalized risk factors. I respect the amount of work Dr. Gundry has done with ApoE 4's and the results some of our members have had with his protocol. But for me, strawberries are going to be part of the plan for the foreseeable future--if only one small part.
4/4 and still an optimist!

User avatar
dfmcapecod
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 24
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 9:04 am
Location: New England

Re: Strawberries and 34% lower risk of AD in Rush Memory Cohort

Postby dfmcapecod » Sun Jan 12, 2020 3:41 pm

Thanks for the response, but to be blunt, I think this forum in particular should do better to answer this concern. As someone who has lurked here for years, it seems strange that there is not a definitive up/down consensus of all the SME's here on whether the protocol is or is not "beneficial" to APOE 4/4's. Which then yes gets us back to what happens when someone throws up a study about how strawberries seemingly correlate to REDUCTION of risk and how relevant that is or not. :)

This doesn't mean getting to one diet, one food, that's not it at all. It's the question of, if someone is an APOE 4/4, all things considered equal, do they stand a better CHANCE compared to a Mediterranean diet. Note the word "chance". It's probability. Medicine, studies, scientific data thankfully produce that answer, when they are properly applied. However, I see no evidence that it is. I sadly see someone trying to maximize profit from a fear factor for everyone who does a genetic test and gets a positive on the AZ risk/APOE line item.

What values could be used to prove it one way or the other? IR? BP? Cholesterol or TG levels?

In my perusal, I cannot find empirical evidence to support that "you are better to do it than not". Observational, let alone clinical. I appreciate the n=1 approach, and I partake in my own, however for a diet that is specifically tailored to our exact genetic "mutation" I find it odd that we appear to be intellectually lazy about making that decision. Or maybe we have and I can't find it? Link please?

I've gone back and read the primers, I've gone back and read the welcoming kits, the Wiki, but there is nothing suggesting one way or the other whether the Gundry 4/4 specific approach is better or not (probabilistically).

Shouldn't the most definitive public resource for this mutation have guidance on this? Or maybe the NIA could take a stand on it?

If we haven't done this yet, what do WE need to do as the community to get to this answer? Again, I'm in my 40's, so partaking in an actual trial and documenting the results are possible, over decades. I'm offering myself up, to help gather scientific data on whether it matters or not. Maybe if enough people from this forum got involved, we could get the n value up into 3 digits, I bet we could.

Maybe I'm missing it, maybe someone can show it to me. But of course I have raised my cortisol levels now continuing to be frustrated, so all my diet adjustments are now being affected by the very discussion of the prevention. ;)
DM
ε4/ε4

NF52
Support Team
Support Team
Posts: 1394
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 9:41 am
Location: Eastern U.S.

Re: Strawberries and 34% lower risk of AD in Rush Memory Cohort

Postby NF52 » Sun Jan 12, 2020 5:39 pm

dfmcapecod wrote:Thanks for the response, but to be blunt, I think this forum in particular should do better to answer this concern...
If we haven't done this yet, what do WE need to do as the community to get to this answer? Again, I'm in my 40's, so partaking in an actual trial and documenting the results are possible, over decades. I'm offering myself up, to help gather scientific data on whether it matters or not. Maybe if enough people from this forum got involved, we could get the n value up into 3 digits, I bet we could.

Maybe I'm missing it, maybe someone can show it to me. But of course I have raised my cortisol levels now continuing to be frustrated, so all my diet adjustments are now being affected by the very discussion of the prevention. ;)
I'm sincerely sorry if I've contributed to raising your cortisol levels. My adult children would certainly attest that I have occasionally raised their cortisol levels also.

I am strongly in favor of clinical trials, as well as observational trials without a specific intervention and population-based epidemiology studies, which can sometimes retrospectively identify (or suggest) risk and protective factors. I am also in favor of basic research, and have been a Consumer Reviewer on applications involving academic research across multiple topics related to AD. Having listened to biostatisticians explain about the "power analysis" and range of statistical tools which need to be chosen with care, I start by assuming that it's much harder to prove something prevents AD years or decades in the future than it is to prove something is harmful in the short-term.

So I also in general assume a protocol using multiple interventions and recommendations (whether in the Primer, or Dr. Gundry or Dr. Bredesen) is based on both applied research in small populations, reasoning from clinical observations and observed short-term improvements in health. That doesn't mean we are going to agree as a group on one set of recommendations--I don't even claim to act consistently in my own life!

I am in the final stages of the Generations I (GS1) clinical trial for healthy people ages 60-75 with ApoE 4/4 of a BACE-1 inhibitor. The Generations 2 (GS2) trial included people with ApoE 3/4 and 4/4.
According to a recent symposium session, when recruitment was halted, 704 people with ApoE 4/4 across 200 sites in 23 countries were enrolled, and 913 people with ApoE 3/4 (all of whom were amyloid-positive) were enrolled, About 1600 people, after about 3 years of recruitment, including about 90,000 people who signed up online for GeneMatch. Not an easy thing to get hundreds of people into a randomized clinical trial with a 5-8 year plan for enrollment. https://link.springer.com/article/10.14283/jpad.2019.47

Per the Generations organizers report in late 2019:
This is the largest cohort of APOE4 HMs [homozygous]...and amyloid-positive APOE4 HTs [heterozygous] recruited in a global clinical trial program. The anonymized study data, biomarker samples as well as images collected will be shared with the scientific community after study completion and reporting.
[Emphasis added.] https://link.springer.com/article/10.14283/jpad.2019.47

I deeply hope "the largest group of ApoE 4/4 and 3/4s ever recruited for a clinical trial" produces meaningful data beyond the effects of the study drug. But until then, I have no choice but to make decisions every day about what to worry about, and what to choose to put aside.

At age 42, you have a significantly longer window to watch the research unfold, and to monitor a range of your own biomarkers. For the sake of your cortisol and your enjoyment of those New England summers, I hope the lack of an answer here will be a frustration, but not one that lasts.
4/4 and still an optimist!

User avatar
dfmcapecod
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 24
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 9:04 am
Location: New England

Re: Strawberries and 34% lower risk of AD in Rush Memory Cohort

Postby dfmcapecod » Sun Jan 12, 2020 6:19 pm

Well aware of the trials underway as well as their size, and I presently am part of a LEADS study sponsored by NIA myself. None of that has anything to do with Dr. Gundry's specific work that is targeted again for selling products to this very specific community. Which again, circling back to the topic at hand, would advise AGAINST consuming strawberries at all, especially as 4/4's... because yes, well lectins.

As for research, I don't intend to watch it. I intend to help produce it, challenge it, participate and stimulate solutions. I stand by my point that this community as a whole could do more to apply some additional scrutiny and logic to what has been produced by these individuals like Dr. Gundry in particular. To get to more concrete "best effort" advice about whether members of this community should or should not be spending their I'm sure often fixed income savings on his products.

I believe in "parallel incrementalism", a concept that discusses how we as a people move forward on complex problems, at a societal level. Which in a nutshell means, we cannot get to perfect answers, so until we do we all work as a team to push good answers forward even if they are partial ones. Anyone that studies Ray Dalio's philosophy also subscribes to this methodology as well.

I'm doing my part, I think we need to have a real conversation about whether "lectins" have anything at all to do with stress, IR, and other components that we believe contribute to risk and intensity of AD development.

Maybe this community should say "no, it doesn't" and let those that are profiting come to the table and demonstrate that with peer reviewed and accountable science to the contrary on their dime.

Now I have to go order my $40 pint of special Dr. Gundry EVOO which I have to consume a L of per week. Otherwise I'll get Alzheimers! That's pretty much the way he spins it for 4/4's.
DM
ε4/ε4

circular
Senior Contributor
Senior Contributor
Posts: 5157
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 10:43 am

Re: Strawberries and 34% lower risk of AD in Rush Memory Cohort

Postby circular » Sun Jan 12, 2020 7:15 pm

dfmcapecod wrote:I believe in "parallel incrementalism", a concept that discusses how we as a people move forward on complex problems, at a societal level. Which in a nutshell means, we cannot get to perfect answers, so until we do we all work as a team to push good answers forward even if they are partial ones.

I think this is a great description of this forum! Some people are highly enthusiastic about one approach or another because they either feel well or have improved from a former state of poorer health, but I think the foundation of our discussions rests solidly in parallel incrementalism. At least that's what I've thought.

I think Dr. Gundry would generally be against strawberries for the sugar content rather than lectins, but someone can correct me if I'm wrong. Many of us, Gundry followers or not, use berries as a source of whatever carb amount we allow ourselves because of what I've taken is their strong association with brain health.
ApoE 3/4 > Thanks in advance for any responses made to my posts.

User avatar
Lisa G
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 62
Joined: Sat Aug 03, 2019 7:05 am
Contact:

Re: Strawberries and 34% lower risk of AD in Rush Memory Cohort

Postby Lisa G » Sun Jan 12, 2020 7:56 pm

dfmcapecod wrote:Now I have to go order my $40 pint of special Dr. Gundry EVOO which I have to consume a L of per week. Otherwise I'll get Alzheimers!

Hi dfmcapecod! I understand your frustration and agree, we need to come to some conclusion on lectins. I for one have not been on that bandwagon (I am not ApoE4). On another note, if you are serious about buying EVOO, you may want to look at the Fresh Pressed Olive Oil Club. I get three bottles a quarter, and while they are not inexpensive, they are fabulous. There is always a mild, medium and strong. The guy who created the club goes around the world checking out the olive farms. They are amazing, and he provides a story about the farmer, the region, the climate, etc. And then he provides recipes that incorporate the oils in that shipment! Yum. I always look forward to the new batch!
Regards,
Lisa
Lisa H. Gerardi, MA
National Board Certified - Health & Wellness Coach
Functional Medicine Certified Health Coach
Integrative Nutrition Certified Coach

User avatar
dfmcapecod
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 24
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 9:04 am
Location: New England

Re: Strawberries and 34% lower risk of AD in Rush Memory Cohort

Postby dfmcapecod » Mon Jan 13, 2020 4:43 am

I think Dr. Gundry would generally be against strawberries for the sugar content rather than lectins, but someone can correct me if I'm wrong. Many of us, Gundry followers or not, use berries as a source of whatever carb amount we allow ourselves because of what I've taken is their strong association with brain health.


In his Matrix Protocol, he lists Strawberries as an approved safe food. HOWEVER, for 4/4's he says no because of the lectins specifically.
DM
ε4/ε4


Return to “Prevention and Treatment”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 guests