Alzheimer: Is It Right To Call It A Disease?

Ocean County Observer

December 17, 1984

 

What heretofore was called Senility is now called Alzheimer’s Disease. Better to call it senility if it occurs in an elderly person. Alzherimer’s disease was originally defined as premature senility, a mental deterioration that occurred in people in their early forties or fifties. The symptoms are more or less clear cut. There is a loss of recent memory, and a quite satisfactory memory for things long past, which initially confuses the family of the ill person. This may be followed by a forgetfulness for objects, disorientation as to time and place, excessive restlessness, finally concern about money, paranoia and ultimately total lack of recognition of surroundings or identity of self.

 

The pathology, that which is seen under the microscope in both Alzheimer’s and the senile patient is quite similar, so the definition of the presenile dementia originally described by Alzheimer has been extended to the senile state, about which Mark Twain remarked so sensitively in The Mysterious Stranger.

 

The problem with calling senility “Alzheimer’s Disease” is that by dignifying the process with a name, creating it as a disease, sort of frightens people. After all, every organ in our bodies flag towards the end of life. The heart gets tired and muscles certainly cannot do what they used to. Kidneys have lost perhaps half their substance, and skin loses its elasticity. The entire body becomes senile, why not the brain? When the entire body of a young person becomes prematurely aged we call it progyria. That distinguishes premature aging from the usual (normal) ageing process. In the same way the term Alzheimer’s distinguished an abnormal pattern of premature senility of the mind and brain from that which might be expected in a percentage of the elderly.

 

It has no cure. However, there is mounting suggestive evidence that tends to relate this to what is known as slow virus disease. That syndrome became prominent when it was discovered that warring cannibals in New Guinea often became prematurely psychotic and died at an early age after eating the brains of their victims. Named Kuru, the disease was traced to a slow growing virus (PROBABLY PRION NOW) that took years to manifest itself. It burst on the medical world as a new constellation and reports started to appear in the literature about people who developed “slow viral disease” after having eaten animal brains that had been cooked, or those who had received corneal transplants from donors who had the disease. In other words from donors who were senile when they died.

 

Initially the medical profession treated this as something brand new, but for most of this century doctors had been well aware that certain types of mental deterioration secondary to infection required long latent periods before the disease became clinically apparent. Syphilis for one. Pareses, the psychosis of syphilis hides mysteriously in the body for about 20 years before making itself known. Parkinson’s disease, another example, was thought to be the result of encephalitis contracted during the epidemics of 1918-1920. An entire generation harbored the virus and most of its victims died between 1940 and 1960, twenty to forty years after the primary illness.

 

Syphilis and Parkinson’s dementia secondary to infection are abnormal events. Senility, however, is consonant with the ageing process, albeit a variant. I am not sure that grouping it with true Alzheimer’s disease is appropriate. It certainly scares people. It is more comfortable to consider aging and its deficits as natural events, otherwise ageing itself must be considered a disease. On the other hand if the pathology is the same one might say that the older person is simply more resistant to the ravages of the slow virus than the younger person.

 

Anyway, whatever you call it, Alzheimer’s is a loss of recent memory – and let’s see – what was I saying?