"It appears that even an "A+ team of research experts" is motivated by corporate bias and won't be persuaded until they read about it on the front page."
Forget it. The "experts" who deny or denigrate the Anavex technologies are, in fact, profoundly threatened by them. They can't for a brief second or short uttered phrase give any credence to Anavex; that would invalidate their entire research careers, casting doubt on their personal importance in Alzheimer's research.
The entire Alzheimer's research world is frozen and bound to the "clear the waste proteins (A-beta, tau tangles)" as the only plausible remedy.
Of course, two decades of failures after multiple trials of a variety of molecules should cause intelligent, deep-thinking researchers to look elsewhere. But that's not the innate sociology of medical research. For two centuries (well, much longer than that, in fact) medical "experts" have chronically rejected new, transformative medical technologies.
That's the way medicine is: if it wasn't learned in med school, anything "new" must, from the start, be rejected and scorned. Medicine was at its highest level of development when the good doctor was in grad school or med school; anything after that, unless proven with a decade of actual use, must be held in professional contempt — for the safety of the patient, of course.
Do a browser search of Ignaz Semmelweis, how he proved that physicians’ microbially-contaminated hands (from autopsies) infected pregnant women during physician-attended births, killing many mothers. Semmelweis came up with a revolutionary, transformative solution: wash one’s hands thoroughly before assisting in childbirth.
The medical community’s response? Just like the professional Alzheimer’s researchers: “That can’t work. That hasn’t been proven. We know what we are doing. We are the experts.”
And, it took several decades (well, almost half a century) after Lister and Pasteur for medicine to believe that germs cause disease.
For me, because I have biological training and understand, to a useful degree, at least, the molecular mechanisms by which Anavex 2-73 restores neuron homeostasis (the re-connecting of mitochondria and endoplasmic reticula, etc.) the abject refusal of the Alzheimer’s experts to even consider Anavex therapies is plainly criminal. Every single one of those researchers, were they to read, with an open mind (perhaps impossible) the multitude of technical reports on Anavex 2-73 would understand and grasp how the molecule works in the neuron much better than I. There is nothing magical or obscured about Anavex technology. It’s just entirely different from anything the researchers learned about in grad school, med school, in the clinic, or in their labs.
They are not willing or interested in learning anything new. Their careers are thoroughly vested in the always-fails clear-the-wastes treatment motifs.
