4.6 Review

Nutrition and prevention of Alzheimer's dementia

Journal

FRONTIERS IN AGING NEUROSCIENCE
Volume 6, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fnagi.2014.00282

Keywords

nutrition; Alzheimer; treatment; clinical trial; prevention

Funding

  1. NIH [R01 AG042419, R01 NR014189, U01 AG010483, P30 AG028383, R01 AG019241, R01 HD064993, R01 AG038651, UL1 TR000117]
  2. Eli Lilly
  3. Esai
  4. Pfizer
  5. Toyama

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A nutritional approach to prevent, slow, or halt the progression of disease is a promising strategy that has been widely investigated. Much epidemiologic data suggests that nutritional intake may influence the development and progression of Alzheimer's dementia (AD). Modifiable, environmental causes of AD include potential metabolic derangements caused by dietary insufficiency and or excess that may be corrected by nutritional supplementation and ordietary modification. Many nutritional supplements contain a myriad of health promoting constituents (anti-oxidants, vitamins, traceminerals, flavonoids, lipids,... etc.) that may have novel mechanisms of action affecting cellular health and regeneration, the aging process itself, or may specifically disrupt pathogenic pathways in the development of AD. Nutritional modifications have the advantage of being costeffective, easy to implement, socially acceptable and generally safe and devoid of significant adverse events in mostcases. Many nutritional interventions have been studied and continue to be evaluated in hopes of finding a successful agent, combination of agents, ordietary modifications that can be used for the prevention and or treatment of AD. The current review focuses on several key nutritional compounds and dietary modifications that have been studied in humans, and further discusses the rationale underlying their potential utility for the prevention and treatment of AD.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available