LogFAQs > #966777996

Blightzkrieg posted...

The article refers to that as being a hypothesis prior to the study in question, with the only actual supporting evidence being the fraudulent study.

That's a bit sloppy in both writing and interpretation. People had been working in both human and animal studies looking at amyloid long before that.

This is just one study out of many. Like, amyloid plaques are highly present in patients, and it even correlates with disease severity. And if you create mouse lines that produce a lot of these plaques you get things that look like similar behavioral deficits. This is one mouse line, out of like dozens, and one study of that mouse line out of hundreds.