[leorocky]

I guess the major benefit is for people who do not actually have alzheimers being falsely diagnosed, but early detection doesn't help in any way for people who do have it, right? I'm not sure I'd want to know until it was unavoidable.

[drcode]

I have a hard time understanding why people wouldn't want to know what's in store for the future. Even if it's unavoidable, there's still lots you can do in terms of making best use of the time remaining to you.

[drcross]

Protip- We are all going to die so make the best of it in any case.

[drcode]

Certainly can't argue with that

[jobu]

The hope is that early detection will allow for prevention. Right now it's difficult to diagnose Alzheimer's until the brain is too damaged to function normally, but some treatments may be able to prevent it from getting worse at an early stage.

There's also a theory (not sure how scientifically valid) that Alzheimer's might be a form of Diabetes (http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/25/bittman-is-a...). If that's the case, then it might be possible to prevent the disease by diet alone.

[jmcgough]

The need for early diagnosis is important for research purposes - by the time we can see the affects of alzheimers, the damage has already been done. If we can develop an earlier diagnostic test, we can do earlier intervention in clinical trials of treatments.

Yes, there's no treatment now, but progress like this will lead to an actual treatment.

[aganders3]

At the very least, earlier diagnosis will help the ongoing research into the disease. Even if it doesn't directly benefit this generation of patients, their study may lead to new treatments for the next generation.