There is of course also alagebrium, it failed in the second human study, though achieved results in the first. I'm wondering if there was something different in the preparation or if it just comes down to genetics. Perhaps we can find something that would enable the mechanism that occurred where alagebrium worked?
If you're looking to reverse arterial plaques, then the question is - Are AGEs a significant component of arterial plaques?
There is less information on this question than you might hope. I found one journal article that said that AGEs are a component of plaques, but the impression I got is that they weren't a significant component. But, that was some reading between the lines of a study who's primary focus wasn't this question.
Now, alagebrium will improve arterial elasticity which can improve blood pressure, which is a risk factor for the formation of new plaques, so there is that.
I have a bottle of alagebrium on deck ready to experiment with. I've just got other things in line first.
I'm going to modify my statement. It looked like there is decent evidence that AGEs play a role in the formation of arterial plaques, particularly in patients suffering from diabetes mellitus. Whether that extrapolates to the wider population, who knows? Maybe .... probably?
I'm going to keep reading and post some of the better studies later on. I might be more interested in testing out my alagebrium.
BTW - what those of us interested in trying out various plaque reversal schemes need is a decent way to check the status of our plaques. Cardiac calcium scores give us part of the picture, at a radiation does of 2 ~ 3 mSv, about a years worth of background radiation. I wouldn't feel too bad having one of those a year for a couple of years. Unfortunately, you're only looking at calcified plaques, soft plaques don't show up.
A CT Angiogram will show soft plaques, but you're looking at about 12 mSv of radiation, about 4x the normal background radiation you receive in year. I would not want to repeat those very often. Not to mention that your insurance isn't going to pay to repeat them and they are relatively expensive.
It seems to me like a cardiac MRI would be the ticket, except they are relatively expensive and I'm not sure if their resolution is sufficient to show the sort of detail we would need. Anyone with any knowledge in this area?
Without some method of assessing plaque status, we're just trying things while groping in the dark.
Edited by Daniel Cooper, 18 April 2016 - 07:36 PM.