Alzheimer's research deserves attention

When classes end today, many of us will fly off to exotic locales for spring break. We'll then party and carouse and canoodle, perhaps waking up the next morning remembering none of it.

That's how college students function: First we work hard, and then we party hard to forget work. Indeed, students in Florida and Texas spent $1 billion partying during spring break of 2003, according to a marketing firm geared toward academia.

A good deal of that money went to alcohol. One medical journal says college males consume 18 alcoholic drinks per day during break and females consume 10. That would seem enough to erase students' short-term memory of those last grueling midterms, at the very least.

So there appears to be a twisted little irony inherent in our spring break. We go and we spend $1 billion to drink and forget -- while another segment of the population quietly begs for money to remember.

They're senior citizens, of course, and about 4.5 million of them currently have a form of dementia. One way or another, their brains no longer function as they once did. Some people no longer remember names; others no longer process the images they see. But all 4.5 million have a ravaging disease that desperately demands to be researched.

If only our society would devote funding.

"There should be a public outcry," said John Trojanowski, director of Penn's Institute on Aging. "We are the richest nation, and we spend $2 billion per year on popcorn but only $700 million [on Alzheimer's disease research] from the National Institutes of Health."

The National Institutes of Health is the government organization that devotes money to medical research, and its $700 million is about $200 million short of the most basic research needs, Trojanowski added.

That being said, Trojanowski knows the public doesn't control government purse strings directly. And college students can't be blamed for spending more money on spring break or popcorn than the government does on Alzheimer's research.

But that funding contrast nevertheless illustrates our societal priorities. And if we want to set things in order -- in the right ethical order -- we, the young, should make an issue out of dementia. We should tell the government to remember those whose diseases we've forgotten for so long.

Penn has taken the first step.

This past Wednesday, the Humanities Forum hosted Bruce Miller, a neurology professor from the University of California, San Francisco. Miller discussed his use of patients' artwork to research dementia's effects on the brain.

The event left me stunned at how soon scientists could make major breakthroughs.

"The opportunities are incredible," Trojanowski said. "We're curing Alzheimer's in mice. That's called a proof-of-concept study that the drug companies would then take on to a clinical trial. They are investing. But there are many things that may work in Alzheimer's patients that don't have intellectual property or patentability."

One example is lithium chloride, which "has been effective in animal models in suppressing Alzheimer's pathology," he said. Unfortunately, the use of lithium chloride cannot be patented, so no company is willing to sacrifice its own money to fund studies.

That's where the government should come in. And that's another reason why college students should care about dementia funding instead of lying unaware in the sun: because research today could help our parents tomorrow. Sure, helping the elderly is ethical, but let's be honest: We're always more interested in that which helps our families.

In fact, even if you don't care about your parents, you should push for more funding. That's because Alzheimer's funding would benefit you economically. Just look at Medicare, the government program that spends public money on healthcare for the elderly.

In Pennsylvania, one out of every six residents is on Medicare. And those Medicare beneficiaries with Alzheimer's are a huge drain on public money. Currently, they "account for 34 percent of Medicare spending [about $62 billion], even though they constitute only 12.8 percent of the population age 65 and older."

So says The Lewin Group, a healthcare policy research firm. Their study "Saving Lives, Saving Money" predicts that a short-term investment in Alzheimer's research would yield huge returns through savings in public spending. By 2015, the return could be 10 to one. By 2050, it could 90 to one, or $444 billion.

How?

Because 95 percent of beneficiaries with dementia have other chronic illnesses that dementia worsens. For instance, Medicare costs double for a beneficiary with diabetes if that person gets dementia. By beating back dementia, we'd keep down related healthcare costs.

So enjoy vacation, but please remember this: Without funding now, you won't need 18 drinks to forget later. Happy break.

Gabriel Oppenheim is a College freshman from Scarsdale, N.Y. Opp-Ed appears on Fridays.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.