Did the World Just Gain Hundreds of Millions of Alzheimer's Patients? A new definition of Alzheimer's includes people without symptoms. Experts are fiercely divided over whether that makes sense--and whether the new drugs really help. Many have heralded a golden age of Alzheimer's research, excited by the promise of new amyloid-targeting antibodies. Yet a large meta-study of such antibodies concluded that they probably result in "little to no difference" in the decline of memory and of cognitive ability. This July, some ten thousand people descended on London for the Alzheimer's Association International Conference. Another three thousand of us joined virtually. I'm an anthropologist, accustomed to conferences where croissants at coffee breaks count as a luxury. This one opened with six trumpeters dressed as Buckingham Palace guards, followed by dancers who discoed, vogued, and high-kicked through the history of British pop. After the first day's sessions, participants dispersed to parties; at one, singers in sequins belted out covers while someone played an illuminated, transparent violin. One night, the London Eye was lit purple to honor the people in attendance. The mood matched the spectacle. Joanne Pike, the Alzheimer's Association's president and C.E.O., announced that recent advances had brought the campaign against the disease to a "pivotal moment." Maria Carrillo, its chief science officer, hailed a groundswell of progress. That optimism followed decades of disappointment. Between 1974 and 2020, the U.S. government spent roughly twenty billion dollars on Alzheimer's research without seeing the approval of a single treatment designed to act on the disease's underlying biology, let alone stop or reverse its course. Today, Alzheimer's afflicts roughly one in nine Americans over sixty-five and, along with related dementias, has been estimated to cost the economy about three-quarters of a trillion dollars a year. In surveys, it ranks with cancer as the disease people fear most. It typically starts by robbing patients of recent memories--conversations they just had, where they put important objects--before corroding the basic functions of adult independence, from paying bills to managing medications. Eventually, it leaves patients unable to speak, move, swallow, or recognize close relatives.

The vaccine is personalized to a patient's tumor, and results from the Phase 3 trial are yet another example of the promise of mRNA vaccines in treating cancer. The new mRNA vaccine is waiting on FDA approval but has shown great promise in Phase 3 clinical trials. An experimental vaccine offers new hope to patients with melanoma, one of the most aggressive forms of skin cancer . The pharmaceutical companies Merck and Moderna released the results of a Phase 3 clinical trial that evaluated the efficacy of a personalized mRNA-based vaccine that, when combined with immunotherapy, reduced the risk of disease recurrence or death by 42 percent compared to treatment with the immunotherapy drug alone. Georgina Long, medical director of the Australian Melanoma Institute and the study's principal investigator, said in a statement that these results are "transformative" and "have the potential to make a foundational shift in how we treat patients with earlier-stage melanoma."

Follow this section to personalize your feed and get instant alerts. Follow Go to your personalized feed WHY FOLLOW? Smart Alerts: Get notified about major news as it happens. Follow this tag to personalize your feed and get instant alerts. Follow Go to your personalized feed WHY FOLLOW?

After four weeks of using the cream, participants lowered the biological age of their skin by about two years on average. A wave of biotech companies is looking to prove that it's possible to slow down the aging process. Mountain View, California-based Rubedo Life Sciences is starting with the most outwardly visible sign: the skin. The company's experimental treatment is showing early promise that it may be able to reduce the appearance of aging, according to data the company presented at the Aging Research and Drug Discovery meeting in Boston earlier this month. In a small clinical trial, Rubedo tested its topical cream on 11 people with atopic dermatitis, an inflammatory skin condition and the most common type of eczema.

'This is an apartheid regime' Does Trump have real leverage over Netanyahu? Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has called for an investigation into the anonymous sources featured in a documentary alleging that Israel's military killed civilians in Gaza using AI-powered targeting systems. The award-winning film, NAZA, draws on testimony from 24 unnamed Israeli military whistleblowers accusing the army of using the systems to kill numerous civilians in the besieged territory. "The film presents a false, misleading, and biased narrative that defames the State of Israel and the [Israeli military] internationally, severely damaging Israel's standing," he added. In a statement last month, the Israeli military said it "categorically" rejected the whistleblowers' allegations, calling some of their assertions "absurd' and contradictory.

Follow this section to personalize your feed and get instant alerts. Follow Go to your personalized feed WHY FOLLOW? Smart Alerts: Get notified about major news as it happens. Follow this tag to personalize your feed and get instant alerts. Follow Go to your personalized feed WHY FOLLOW?

Mashable's Best: E-readers, robovacs, laptops, earbuds, smart home and more Trending Now Look Up Mashable Selects Say More Top creators, ranked Gift Ideas For Everyone On Your List Creator Playbook In My Bag AI at School Safety Net Versus All Series Inside'Camp Looksmax,' Clavicular's $7,500 camp for looks and dating lessons Olivia Tauber is the deputy editor of digital culture, covering creators, media, movies, beauty, and more. Based in New York, her work has appeared in The New York Times, Vanity Fair, The Cut, Teen Vogue, Complex, and Interview Magazine. She holds a Master's degree in Journalism from NYU and a Bachelor's from the University of Michigan. She also runs Fan Mail, a weekly pop-culture newsletter. Hosted by streamer Braden Peters, AKA Clavicular (who was charged with rape in Massachusetts on Sept. 8; Peters' attorneys have denied the allegations in a related civil lawsuit), and fellow creator Hexumlite, the seven-day residential program promises coaching on appearance, confidence, and dating skills.

As prediction markets surge in popularity, a new platform called Verifact Markets is pushing the concept even further, letting users trade on "disputed facts." Would you put money on whether Covid-19 originated from a lab? How about whether some of the footage from the Apollo 11 moon landing was actually filmed on Earth? Verifact Markets, a new startup that bills itself as a "prediction market for disputed facts," is betting that people will be eager to weigh in on questions like these. The company's premise is so quirky it sounds like something a couple of philosophy and economics majors dreamed after too many bong rips in their dorm room: Instead of wagering on the future, why not trade on stuff that already happened?

Mashable's Best: E-readers, robovacs, laptops, earbuds, smart home and more Mashable Selects In My Bag Look Up Creator Playbook Say More AI at School Safety Net Versus Trending Now Back to School Good Connection: Uplifting stories for a digital age All Series'The Swan: Behind the Mirror': Let's talk about the most WTF reveals The 2004 reality competition series was shocking then. But wait until you hear the truth from the Swans. Kristy Puchko is the Entertainment Editor at Mashable. Based in New York City, she's an established film critic and entertainment reporter who has traveled the world on assignment, covered a variety of film festivals, co-hosted movie-focused podcasts, and interviewed a wide array of performers and filmmakers. The Swan: Behind The Mirror dives into the dark side of this demented reality TV show.

More information Adding us as a Preferred Source in Google by using this link indicates that you would like to see more of our content in Google News results. We do look different in photos versus a mirror. If you're anything like me, you've had this experience: You see a photo of yourself--maybe on a day you actually felt relatively put-together before leaving the house--and you suddenly feel betrayed by your own face. For me, it's usually some combination of the following: one eye squinting against the sun, a smile that somehow always turns into a tortured rictus, my chin multiplying despite my best "strategic selfie " angle. So, if the relatively inoffensive face I saw in the mirror is me, and the deeply unfortunate JPEG is also me, which do I believe?