English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In their commentary, Raynor and Giordano make statements that ignore evidence and content of the case report. They refer to the therapy as a case study, misrepresenting the fact that it clearly describes a husband’s attempt to save the life of his 81-year-old wife. She was admitted to hospice on April 8, 2015, with advanced Alzheimer dementia (AD), with a life expectancy of less than 6 months. Following the computed tomography (CT) scan treatments, starting on July 23, 2015, the patient recovered sufficiently to be discharged from hospice on November 20, 2015, as determined by her qualified and experienced caregivers and as evaluated by her clinical neuropsychology specialist. The patient has been living in an Alzheimer care home, receiving supplementary treatments, as described in a letter-to-the-editor update. More than 2 years after the start of therapy, the patient is alive and continues to age and decline. The retired husband, a PhD in chemical engineering, asked the author for a potential remedy for his wife (of 57 years), after reading about a study that employed ultrasound energy to restore memory in an AD mouse model. The author gave him an article that he had reviewed on the application of low-dose ionizing radiation (LDIR) to upregulate adaptive protection to control neurodegenerative diseases. The husband asked how his wife could receive this. The author explained that wholebody or half-body low-dose X-ray therapy had been used successfully on hundreds of patients with cancer to stimulate their immune system. The husband asked his wife’s physician to prescribe this therapy. The physician replied that he could not because it was not an accepted medical treatment. However, they realized that a standard CT scan of the brain is an accepted procedure that could determine anatomical changes and also stimulate neuroprotective systems. The case report describes the surprising recovery, observed and reported by the patient’s caregiver, only 2 days after the treatment (a double scan) on July 23, 2015. The husband communicated the good news to the author, who advised him to repeat the scans to prolong the stimulation and prevent the patient’s adaptive protection systems (>150 genes) from reverting to their previously sluggish state. To stimulate immunity against cancer, LDIR treatments were given 2 or 3 times per week, for 5 weeks. The husband and physician decided on a much lower frequency to treat AD, 1 CT scan every 2 weeks. Progressive recovery was reported by the caregivers and by the patient’s friends and family who had been visiting the patient. The patient had a major setback after the fourth treatment on October 1, 2015, from which she recovered within weeks. On November 20, 2015, she was discharged from hospice to an Alzheimer care home. The author advised that the recovery would be transitory unless “booster” treatments were provided. The update letter describes the ongoing treatments for AD. It also reports on the partial recovery of the husband from symptoms of his Parkinson disease (PD). More than 2 years after the initial treatment, the patient is in slow decline. Without the CT scans, it is unlikely that she would have survived past 2015.

Response to Commentary: Treating Alzheimer Dementia With CT-Induced Low-Dose Ionizing Radiation: Problematic, Yet Potential for More Precise Inquiry