Julia Pabafikos
Mr. Ippolito
AP Biology: Current Event #7
November 5, 2017
Landhuis, Esther. “Could the ‘Alzheimer's Gene’ Finally Become a Drug Target?” Scientific American, 11 Oct. 2017,
The article I decided to read, “Alzheimer's Gene Finally Become a Drug Target?” by Esther Landhuis touches upon Alzheimer’s disease which is a progressive disease that causes memory loss and damages other important mental functions. There are hundreds of genes that are believed to cause Alzheimer's disease, however Apolipoprotein E (APOE) has been proven to be the gene with the strongest effect. Scientists discovered a quarter century ago that people with the APOE ε4 version of this gene are four to fifteen times more likely to develop Alzheimer’s disease which affects more than five million Americans. However, how gene APOE actually sets off Alzheimer's has been a mystery amongst scientists. Throughout modern research there has been yet another gene that has caught the eye of many scientists called amyloid beta (Aβ). Amyloid Beta is a protein that can unwittingly live in the brain for years, disrupting nerve connections which are essential for thinking and memory. Nevertheless, finding a way to undermine this protein has proved to be challenging. Anti-amyloid drugs have been introduced to pharmacies but the amyloid-lowering therapies have failed. Yang Shi and her PhD advisor, neurologist David Holtzman at Washington University eventually looked at a set of brain slices from mice which were engineered to produce the harmful protein. The slides showed tangle production had nothing to do with amyloid and everything to do with APOE. “Based on the new findings, it’s conceivable an ApoE-lowering drug could provide a triple punch. If you lower ApoE early in life, it could prevent or slow amyloid deposition, Holtzman says” ApoE4-producing mice had so many tangles in their brains that neurons died constantly. However, it is mentioned in the article that it must be noted that the mice don’t quite model Alzheimer’s therefore causing the research to move much slower.
The effect made on society by Alzheimer’s is tremendous. The APOE ε4 is found in 25 to 30 percent of the population and in about 40 percent of the vast majority of Alzheimer’s cases. “Potential therapies could take several forms. Some approaches could work at the protein level—by stimulating ApoE turnover or clearing ApoE with antibodies. Other therapies might slow gene transcription so cells make less ApoE protein to begin with. With newer gene-editing tools, researchers can now make these kinds of DNA modifications with greater speed and precision.” The techniques used to study and manipulate DNA can also be helpful and have an affect on later experiments, making them extremely helpful to humans and especially helpful to science. However, a problem the author mentions is that ApoE helps carry cholesterol and other fats through the bloodstream. People who lack the APOE gene can develop dangerously high cholesterol levels and have an increased risk of heart attack and stroke. These risks are obviously something that can affect our society and therefore is questionable whether or not Alzheimer patients would want to take such a risk.
This article was both informative and was fairly easy to understand. Esther Landhuis did an amazing job stating the experiments being performed and the problems/ side effects that can arise when trying to cure Alzheimer’s Disease. By doing so, Landhuis was able to make her article more reliable and informative, giving the reader the opportunity to formulate their own opinion. However, I believe that Landhuis could have benefited from adding more background knowledge on the topic and explanations of these proteins, neurons and enzymes that are believed to be a cause for Alzheimer's in order to reach a larger audience and convey her message even more clearly.
AP Bio
ReplyDeleteOlivia Scotti
10/29/17
Current Event # 7
Landhuis, Esther. “Could the ‘Alzheimer's Gene’ Finally Become a Drug Target?” Scientific
American, 11 Oct. 2017,
www.scientificamerican.com/article/could-the-ldquo-alzheimer-rsquo-s-gene-rdquo-finall
y-become-a-drug-target/.
There were many aspects of Julia’s review written well. One part of her review that I felt she did particularly well was her description of about what causes Alzheimer’s disease is and the effects it has on people. For instance she states how “ There are hundreds of genes that are believed to cause Alzheimer's disease, however Apolipoprotein E (APOE) has been proven to be the gene with the strongest effect. Scientists discovered a quarter century ago that people with the APOE ε4 version of this gene are four to fifteen times more likely to develop Alzheimer’s disease which affects more than five million Americans.” Through this summary the reader is able to understand the main point of the article that is being reviewed. Also the reader understands details about what is causing Alzheimer and the vast number of people it affects. Another part of the review which was done well was the addition of quotes from scientists who have researched this topic. For example, “Based on the new findings, it’s conceivable an ApoE-lowering drug could provide a triple punch. If you lower ApoE early in life, it could prevent or slow amyloid deposition, Holtzman says.”Through this the reader understands what research has been done to understand what is causing Alzheimer's disease. This is also allows the reader to understand the tone of the article through direct quotes from the passage. Another part of the review that was done well was her ability to describe how this discovery is beneficial to the rest of the world. For instance she states, “The APOE ε4 is found in 25 to 30 percent of the population and in about 40 percent of the vast majority of Alzheimer’s cases. “Potential therapies could take several forms. Some approaches could work at the protein level—by stimulating ApoE turnover or clearing ApoE with antibodies.” This strengthened her review because the reader was able to see how research is useful for a lot of the population.
Although there were many parts of Julia’s review written well there were areas for improvement. One part of the review that could've been improved was her transition between the second paragraph and the third paragraph. This part needs improvement because she switches from discussion about the research of Alzheimer to how it will affect society. If she had just added a word or two to connect these paragraphs the review would be better off as a whole and would have flowed more smoothly. Another part of her review which could have been improved was her critique paragraph. Although she did mention the negatives and positives of the article I wish she had been less general when stating her positives and gone into more detail. Through adding more specific details about the positives of the article the reader would have had a better understanding of the article.
Overall, I felt Julia wrote a strong review of this article which the reader could easily understand. Her review was written clearly and smoothly which allowed the reader to learn about the topic more easily and understand the research conducted. I enjoyed reading this review because I learned more about what Alzheimer disease is and how Alzheimer it affects so many people. Also through adding so many details about this disease the reader was able to clearly understand the benefits of people researching this topic. Overall, I liked how she described the research that was done and the effects on the present world. Through her discussion of this article the reader got a better grasp on the topic and the importance of this new research.
Julia Pabafikos wrote a fascinating review on the article “Could the ‘Alzheimer’s Gene’ Finally Become a Drug Target?” by Esther Landhuis. In her review, Pabafikos exudes a skilled writing style while discussing the topic of her article, it’s connection to society, and some flaws as well as achievements made by the author. One aspect of her review that she succeeded in was in her explanation of multiple key terms of which the article frequently mentioned. For example, in this sentence Amyloid Beta is explained as ‘a protein that can unwittingly live in the brain for years, disrupting nerve connections which are essential for thinking and memory”(Pabafikos, 1). Alzheimer’s disease, APOE, and Amyloid Beta were all defined in simple sentences so the readers could completely understand the information she was explaining. Another part of her review that was exceptional is located in her summary. Here, in tandem with the definitions explained earlier, Pabafikos very clearly analyzes the article and walks her readers through a short paragraph packed with only important information. The article Pabafikos reviewed is very long and dense, so the fact that she had the ability to cut out information her readers didn’t need while including data essential to the article allowed her to write a paragraph summary and focus directly on the topic- the Alzheimer's gene becoming a solution for its own treatment. Lastly, Pabafikos clearly makes strong connections from the article she reviewed to society in her relevance paragraph. She not only makes connections by stating that APOE is found in 30 percent of the population, but includes the effects of Alzheimer's on its patients. Pabafikos mentions the questions people with the disease must face if they want to be treated. They can either take a medicine that reduces APOE proteins in their body and face the consequences of high cholesterol levels as a result, or refuse to take the treatment and allow their Alzheimers to worsen. This deep connection causes readers to pause and think of the decision they would make.
ReplyDeleteAlthough her review was promising in some areas, there were aspects of the review that could have been improved. For example, in her connection to society, one third of the paragraph is a quote from the article that is four sentences long. In addition, some of the information in the quote, such as the fact that therapies could vary in multiple forms, is not needed to connect the issue to society. To fix this issue, Pabafikos could break down the quote into smaller sections, take out the information not needed, and elaborate on each section with her own words. Another part of her review which had room for improvement was her critique of the article. She only wrote one sentence critiquing the article, and in this sentence she was vague about what she meant by “background knowledge.” A solution would be to separate her sentence in two so it is not five lines long, and elaborate on what type of background information she wants to be included. Types of background information could include the history of the study of Alzheimer’s genes to the experiments used to find APOE and understand that it was responsible for the disease in some people.
From this article, I learned how scientists are targeting Alzheimer’s disease. Although I do not know anyone in my family who had Alzheimer's, it is an issue that must be addressed by both those who are and aren’t affected to be solved. I chose this article because of the simplicity of Pabafikos writing and because of my interest in Alzheimer’s disease. Because I haven’t meet someone with Alzheimer’s, I want to understand what it is like. As it is a growing problem in the United States, it is important to stay informed of what is happening towards its cure. This review has changed my perception of the disease in that I now understand what is responsible for causing it. Now that scientists are specifically targeting the gene APOE, hopefully successful treatments will be made.
Abbey Thomas
ReplyDeleteAP Biology
Mr. Ippolito
7 November 2017
Landhuis, Esther. “Could the ‘Alzheimer's Gene’ Finally Become a Drug Target?” Scientific American, 11 Oct. 2017,
www.scientificamerican.com/article/could-the-ldquo-alzheimer-rsquo-s-gene-rdquo-finally-become-a-drug-target/.
For this current event, I reviewed Julia’s response to “Could the ‘Alzheimer’s Gene’ Finally Become a Drug Target” by Esther Landhuis. The first thing I noticed that Julia did very well was recount a portion of the history of Alzheimer's research. She includes information on the APOE gene, and how it increases a person’s chance of having Alzheimer’s, and then she moves into the research from more modern studies. Along with including research on the Amyloid Beta gene, she writes about the success and failures of the gene. It is important that she had this information in her response, since it kept her response unbiased towards the study. Lastly, Julia did well at highlighting the importance of the discovery of Amyloid Beta in her second paragraph. Without this paragraph, the reader would have been unaware of the importance of this discovery.
Julia’s response is very well written, but there was some changes that could be made. First of all, the first sentence is worded strange. She wrote: “The article I decided to read, “Alzheimer's Gene Finally Become a Drug Target?” by Esther Landhuis touches upon Alzheimer’s disease which is a progressive disease that causes memory loss and damages other important mental functions,”. While the sentence is grammatically correct, it is strange formatting that I would recommend rewriting. The second part Julia could have improved upon is her conclusion. She identifies the strengths and the weakness of the article, but leaves the reader on a thought, rather than writing a conclusion sentence.
I decided to read Julia’s feedback on Landhuis’ article because the topic is very interesting. Along with the interestingness of the article, I was very unaware of the different treatments for Alzheimer's. I learned that scientists had been targeting the APOE gene in the past, but are moving on to gene therapies for the Amyloid Beta gene. While there was hope that the AΒ gene therapies would be successful, the first rounds of testing did not show promising results. This topic is important for people to be aware off because 5 million people in the United States have Alzheimer’s, and it is a very harmful disease to people and their families.
Jack Kochansky
ReplyDeleteAP Biology EF Even
Mr. Ippolito
6 November 2017
“Could the ‘Alzheimer's Gene’ Finally Become a Drug Target?”
By Esther Landhuis
Reviewed by Julia Pabafikos
Landhuis, Esther. “Could the ‘Alzheimer's Gene’ Finally Become a Drug Target?” Scientific
American, 11 Oct. 2017,
www.scientificamerican.com/article/could-the-ldquo-alzheimer-rsquo-s-gene-rdquo-finally-become-a-drug-target/.
In her current events review, Julia did a great job analyzing the key ideas of the article and explaining the key discoveries that the researchers made regarding Alzheimer's Syndrome. In particular, she includes a very strong introduction to the issue, understanding that her audience is not likely to know very much about the disease, anatomically. The inclusion of that detail strengthened her review significantly and made it much easier to follow what she was saying. She also makes it clear that the disease currently affects many, many Americans, and it has the potential to affect many more, as well. This highlights the relevance of treatments of the disease for all of us. She also shows a clear understanding of the research and procedures carried out that were referenced in the article, as well. For example, she gives exact statistics and explains how the researchers (who she names) were able to make some headway on learning about Alzheimer’s. Throughout her entire review, Julia makes it very clear that she understands the nature and relevance of prospective treatments for this serious disease.
However, while the review was very strong, there were a couple of things that could have been improved. For example, while she included quotes, they were not very well integrated. In the second paragraph, Julia puts a multi-line quote directly from the article but does not reference exactly where it came from, which would have helped to make it seem a little more professional. In the first paragraph, as well, the quote that she included was a little messy with the punctuation. In addition, she could have added a little more detail and explanation to her critique paragraph. While it did contain some positive reviews, there was only one sentence that encompassed both the weaknesses and suggestions for improvement. It was sufficient, but her review would have been even better if more detail were infused.
By reading Julia’s review on an article detailing some recent discoveries about Alzheimer’s Syndrome, it made me aware of how widespread the disease really is. I did not know, for example, that APOE ε4, a protein known to contribute significantly to the development of Alzheimer’s, is present in 25 to 30 percent of the population. We often consider long-term genetic degenerative diseases to be rare and distant, but the reality is that they are fairly prevalent, and taking action early could help limit their effects. It helped me to realize just how relevant research is on genetic disorders that affect us when we are older. If we do more research now, it could help to tackle the problem once and for all.
Nina Veru
ReplyDeleteAP Biology, C-odd
Current Event 7
November 6, 2017
Landhuis, Esther. “Could the ‘Alzheimer's Gene’ Finally Become a Drug Target?” Scientific American, 11 Oct. 2017,
www.scientificamerican.com/article/could-the-ldquo-alzheimer-rsquo-s-gene-rdquo-finally-become-a-drug-target/.
After reading the review of Could the Alzheimer’s Gene Finally Become a Drug Target by Julia Pabafikos, I noticed several great points she made throughout the article. For instance, Pabafikos did a great job of explaining the scientific concepts such as the disease itself. The author claims that Alzheimer’s is a “progressive disease that causes memory loss and damages other important mental functions.” This claim can help a reader unfamiliar with Alzheimer’s get a better understanding of the disease. In addition, she did a great job of explaining the gene’s associated with Alzheimer’s disease. For example, the author mentions the Apolipoprotein gene (APOE), and states that scientists have discovered a certain version of this gene has showed up in many patients. In addition, Pabafikos mentions another gene, Amyloid Beta, which can live in the brain for many years and disrupt nerve connections. I enjoyed how the author mentioned the benefits of the APOE gene, despite its devastating effects in regards to Alzheimer's. For example, the gene is beneficial for carrying fats and cholesterol through the bloodstream.
Although this review was excellent, there is always room for improvement. In order to be more successful in her review, Pabafikos should have further edited her writing. For instance quotations were used incorrectly: “Based on the new findings, it’s conceivable an ApoE-lowering drug could provide a triple punch. If you lower ApoE early in life, it could prevent or slow amyloid deposition, Holtzman says”. The closing quotation should be after the phrase “amyloid deposition”. In addition, the author could've made better word choices. For instance, Pabafikos states, “However, how gene APOE actually sets off Alzheimer's has been a mystery amongst scientists.” Using “however” and “how” sounds a bit repetitive. To make the writing more clear, the author could simply eliminate “however”.
After reading this review, I felt very interested in the disease, and felt encouraged to read the original article. For example, I learned of the several new drug therapies being considered for Alzheimer’s disease. Some new therapies include slowing down APOE gene transcription, overall limiting the amount of APOE made.
Ava Austi
ReplyDeleteAP Biology
Current Event #8
11/13/17
Landhuis, Esther. “Could the ‘Alzheimer's Gene’ Finally Become a Drug Target?” Scientific American, 11 Oct. 2017,
www.scientificamerican.com/article/could-the-ldquo-alzheimer-rsquo-s-gene-rdquo-finally-become-a-drug-target/.
Julia wrote a great review based off the article “Could the ‘Alzheimer's Gene’ Finally Become a Drug Target?” by Esther Landhuis from Scientific American. This article discusses Alzheimer’s disease, which is a disease that causes memory loss and damages other important mental functions. Throughout the review of the article, there were many aspects that Julia did well in order to write a great review. Firstly, Julia did an excellent job of providing a detailed summary for the reader; she explained what causes the disease and the effects it has on people. Through the summary she provided, the reader is able to understand the main point of the article without any confusion. Also, Julia did a great job with adding quotes from scientists who researched this topic. For example, “Based on the new findings, it’s conceivable an ApoE-lowering drug could provide a triple punch. If you lower ApoE early in life, it could prevent or slow amyloid deposition, Holtzman says.” Adding quotes allows the reader to have an understanding of the exact research going on, while giving them a sense of tone presented throughout the writing. Lastly, Julia did a very nice job in the second paragraph where she discusses the effects that Alzheimer’s has on the society. Almost 5.5 million Americans struggle with Alzheimer’s disease and Julia made sure to touch on each base of how this affects our world today. The disease clearly has a large impact. Julia successfully wrote a clear and interesting review of the article she read.
Although Julia presented a great review of the article, there were some aspects where she could have improved. First, Julia would have benefited from writing a stronger third paragraph where she discusses her critique of the article. She was quite vague in the strengths and weaknesses and I wish she went into more detail. The second part Julia could have improved on was also in the third paragraph. She identifies the strengths and weaknesses but leaves the reader on a thought. If she included a conclusion sentence to wrap up her points, this would leave the audience on a better note. These issues are both easy to fix in order to make Julia’s review even better. Even though there were some parts of the review that Julia could have improved, I think she wrote a great review of the article.
I thought Julia did a great job in writing her review and I really enjoyed reading it. From reading it, I learned how scientists are targeting Alzheimer’s disease. Fortunately, I do not have any family members or close friends that struggle with the disease but I chose this article because I was curious about the effects of people who do struggle with it. I did not know a lot about the disease and I was very unaware of the different treatments. It is important for the world to be aware of this topic because 5.5 million Americans have Alzheimer’s. After reading Julia’s review, I want to learn more about Alzheimer’s disease.. Overall, I think Julia successfully wrote a clear and detailed review of her article.