Genetic tests for Alzheimer's disease: Types and more
Although genetic testing for genes associated with Alzheimer's disease is available, healthcare professionals do not routinely use these tests when diagnosing this condition.
Genetic tests to identify genes associated with Alzheimer's cannot guarantee whether a person will develop the condition. Instead, they may reveal that a person has an increased risk of Alzheimer's.
According to the United Kingdom's Alzheimer's Society, genetic testing may be suitable when it seems likely that the condition is due to a single-gene change. For example, if there is a clear family history of the condition.
However, various factors can contribute to Alzheimer's disease. A negative test result for associated genes does not guarantee that a person will not develop Alzheimer's disease.
A 2023 article highlights the following types of genetic tests for Alzheimer's disease:
Predictive and pharmacogenetic tests are only available in research or clinical settings. However, susceptibility tests may be available directly to consumers. People typically buy these tests and carry them out without medical supervision.
Some people may find direct-to-consumer tests quicker and more convenient than carrying out the tests in a clinical setting. Although some people may feel peace of mind with a home test, the results also risk causing distress.
Additionally, working with a healthcare professional can help a person better understand the results of their test. They can also provide information about lowering the risk of the disease and what treatment options are available if the person starts showing symptoms.
Anyone interested in genetic testing for Alzheimer's disease can speak with a healthcare professional for more information, whether they want to know more about the types available or want help understanding the results of a home test.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BreakingNews.ie
an hour ago
- BreakingNews.ie
28 Years Later review: Another relentless apocalyptic horror from Danny Boyle
Danny Boyle and Alex Garland have produced another horror masterpiece with 28 Years Later , the third instalment in the '28 Days' universe. The director and writer were not heavily involved in the followup, '28 Weeks Later', but they make a triumphant return in the new film. It is partly shot on iPhones, something introduced by Boyle with 28 Days later, and this contributes to the frantic and anxiety-inducing pace of the film as our new protagonisted go up against the infected. Advertisement This includes new additions to the creatures that were produced about the rage virus, including the terrifying 'alphas' who are able to effortlessly rip people's heads off. While the film is full of the action we saw in its two predecessors, Boyle and Garland manage to include a commentary on British society. With the rest of the world operating as normal as the 21st century rages on, Britain is quarantined to keep the infected from reaching the rest of the world, with navies patrolling its waters. In a remote island, survivors life a primitive but peaceful and safe existence, accessible to the foreboding 'mainland' only by a causeway only accessible when the tide recedes. Advertisement With Britain stuck in the past, it's hard to avoid the intended Brexit parable. This is only accentuated by Boyle's use of black and white World War footage, and a haunting score which includes 1903 poem " Boots " by Rudyard Kipling , recited by American actor Taylor Holmes. Jamie (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) brings his 12-year-old son Spike (Alfie Williams) to the mainland to get his first kills in an almost ritualistic expedition, against the advice of the communiy's elders who warn that Spike is far too young. Ralph Fiennes in 28 Years Later. The horrors they encounter leave a mark on father and son, but Spike is determined to return to seek a cure for his seriously ill mother Islan ( Jodie Comer ). This is where we once again enconter Dr Ian Kelson (Ralph Fiennes). A key character in the first film, Dr Kelson steals the show once again. His descent into madness, looking like Colonel Kurtz in Apocalypse now, isn't quite what it seems, despite the temple of skulls he has amassed. The ending sets things up nicely for 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple, which is due for release in January 2026.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Peter Krykant obituary
The drugs policy campaigner Peter Krykant, who has died suddenly aged 48, advanced the cause of the harm reduction movement through a transformative act of civil disobedience. Fitting out a van as a mobile safer drug consumption space and making it available to Glasgow's most vulnerable homeless addicts broke the law. And it also – eventually – broke the stalemate around UK drugs policy, propelled Scotland's drug deaths crisis further up the political agenda and, most importantly, saved lives. Krykant's law-breaking plan coalesced in February 2020 after he attended what he saw as another talking shop – a Scottish government conference focused on drug deaths, which took place 24 hours before a UK government summit on the same subject, at the same Glasgow venue. It seemed to him a ludicrous show of escalating tensions between the two administrations. 'The conferences were the final straw, and the fact that [a drug consumption room pilot] is being used as a political football,' he told the Guardian a week later. 'As a person who went through my own trauma – drug use and street homelessness issues many years ago – I cannot stand back.' Within days of announcing his plan to purchase a vehicle and customise it as a mobile safer-injecting suite, Krykant had raised more than £2,000. He was immediately sacked from his job as an HIV outreach worker at the charity Waverley Care. Undeterred by the looming global Covid pandemic, Krykant recognised that, as services contracted, the homeless drug users who congregated around Trongate in Glasgow were even more in need. So he struck out in the midst of lockdown, first in a minibus nicknamed 'the Tank' and later in a converted ambulance, providing clean water, needles and swabs, as well as supplies of naloxone, the potentially life-saving drug that reverses the effects of opioid overdose. Rules included using your own drugs, and agreeing to an overdose intervention if needed. Writing in the Guardian, Krykant later explained: 'Overdose prevention services are an internationally recognised way of reducing drug-related harms. It benefits everyone by supporting the most vulnerable and saving taxpayers' money on ambulance callouts, hospital admissions and council clean-up teams.' The local police largely tolerated his activity, although he was charged in October 2020 for obstructing officers attempting to search his van – the charges were later dropped. He continued operating until May 2021. More than 1,000 injections were supervised, and nine overdoses reversed. 'It was the trust people had in Peter, the cup of tea and the Mars bar, that really helped them and is hard to quantify,' said the MSP Paul Sweeney, who became a close friend when the pair volunteered together at the van. 'He proved all the naysayers and the procrastinators wrong. He never said it was a silver bullet but Peter knew firsthand the particular risks for people who inject on the street and saw that this intervention could directly save lives.' Krykant was always insistent that addiction should be understood in the wider context of poverty and inequality, a message he took around the doorsteps of his local Holyrood constituency of Falkirk East when he stood for the Scottish parliament elections in May 2021. A Guardian film, which followed his campaign, captures his younger son, aglow with pride, explaining to the producers: 'I've got three reasons you should vote for my dad: because he's honest, reliable and he listens to people's suggestions.' But the responsibility he evidently carried for every individual he helped, the memories they stirred of his own trauma as well as escalating public scrutiny, took their toll and Krykant relapsed. He had talked openly about darker currents in his childhood in the village of Maddiston, near Falkirk; trauma and sexual abuse that would lead him to start taking drugs when he was 11. He left school with no formal qualifications, and by his late teens he was sleeping rough and injecting heroin. But eventually he found support to live drug-free, and worked successfully in sales for over a decade, first in Brighton, and later returning north of the border, where he subsequently trained as an addiction support worker. During this time he married and started a family, taking market research work to fit around caring for his two young sons. Krykant had continued his advocacy work in recent years, passing the van on to the Transform Drug Policy Foundation and embarking on a tour across the UK. Lately he worked at the harm reduction charity Cranstoun, where he developed an overdose response app called BuddyUp and represented the organisation at events around the world. When the UK's first legal drug consumption room, the Thistle, opened its doors in Glasgow this January, there were many who drew a direct line from his minibus to its airy vestibule. Others felt his contribution had been sidelined to make way for more mainstream voices, or that his vulnerabilities had been exploited by those who desired the frisson of his lived experience for their campaigns. This winter, say friends, Krykant found himself at his lowest ebb. His marriage had collapsed, he had lost his job and he was struggling to support himself, worrying about the impact this had on his sons. Martin Powell, who drove the van on its UK tour, said: 'He was the catalyst and without him we might still be waiting. Without question there are people alive today who would not be without Peter Krykant. It's an absolute tragedy that he isn't one of them.' Krykant is survived by his sons. Peter Krykant, campaigner, born 13 November 1976; died 9 June 2025
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Assisted dying Bill not now or never moment, says Cleverly ahead of crucial vote
Legalising assisted dying would 'correct the profound injustices of the status quo', parliament has heard, but opposition MPs insisted this is not a 'now or never' moment. The House of Commons is debating a Bill to change the law in England and Wales, ahead of a crunch afternoon vote. The outcome would lead to the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill either clearing the House of Commons and moving to the Lords, or falling completely – with a warning the latter could mean the issue might not return to Westminster for a decade. The relatively narrow majority of 55 from the historic yes vote in November means every vote will count on Friday. Some MPs have already confirmed they will switch sides to oppose a Bill they describe as 'drastically weakened', after a High Court judge safeguard was scrapped and replaced with expert panels. As it stands, the proposed legislation would allow terminally ill adults in England and Wales with fewer than six months to live to apply for an assisted death, subject to approval by two doctors and the three-member panel featuring a social worker, senior legal figure and psychiatrist. Bill sponsor Kim Leadbeater has insisted the multidisciplinary panels represent a strengthening of the legislation, incorporating wider expert knowledge to assess assisted dying applications. Opening her debate, Ms Leadbeater said her Bill is 'cogent' and 'workable', with 'one simple thread running through it – the need to correct the profound injustices of the status quo and to offer a compassionate and safe choice to terminally ill people who want to make it'. She pushed back on concerns raised about the Bill by some doctors and medical bodies, including the Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych), noting: 'We have different views in this House and different people in different professions have different views.' She noted that all the royal colleges have a neutral position on assisted dying. Some members of RCPsych also wrote recently to distance themselves from the college's criticism of the Bill and pledge their support for it. MPs have a free vote on the Bill, meaning they decide according to their conscience rather than along party lines – although voting is not mandatory and others present on Friday could formally abstain. Ms Leadbeater warned that choosing not to support the assisted dying Bill is 'not a neutral act', but rather 'a vote for the status quo'. Repeating her warning that the issue is unlikely to be broached again for a decade if her Bill fails, she told the Commons: 'It fills me with despair to think MPs could be here in another 10 years' time hearing the same stories.' But, leading opposition to the Bill, Conservative former minister Sir James said while this is 'an important moment', there will be 'plenty of opportunities' in future for the issue to be discussed. Sir James said: 'I disagree with her (Ms Leadbeater's) assessment that it is now or never, and it is this Bill or no Bill, and that to vote against this at third reading is a vote to maintain the status quo. 'None of those things are true. There will be plenty of opportunities.' The Bill would fall if 28 MPs switched directly from voting yes to no, but only if all other MPs voted the same way as in November, including those who abstained. Ms Leadbeater this week appeared to remain confident her Bill will pass, acknowledging that while she expected 'some small movement in the middle', she did not 'anticipate that that majority would be heavily eroded'. All eyes will be on whether Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and senior colleagues continue their support for the Bill. Sir Keir indicated earlier this week that he had not changed his mind since voting yes last year, saying his 'position is long-standing and well-known'. Health Secretary Wes Streeting described Ms Leadbeater's work on the proposed legislation as 'extremely helpful', but confirmed in April that he still intended to vote against it. Ahead of the debate, Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch urged her MPs to vote against the legislation, describing it as 'a bad Bill' despite being 'previously supportive of assisted suicide'. A vote must be called before 2.30pm, as per parliamentary procedure. Friday's session began with considerations of outstanding amendments to the Bill, including one to prevent a person meeting the requirements for an assisted death 'solely as a result of voluntarily stopping eating or drinking'. The amendment – accepted without the need for a vote – combined with existing safeguards in the Bill, would rule out people with eating disorders falling into its scope, Ms Leadbeater has said. Another amendment, requiring ministers to report within a year of the Bill passing on how assisted dying could affect palliative care, was also approved by MPs. Marie Curie welcomed the amendment, but warned that 'this will not on its own make the improvements needed to guarantee everyone is able to access the palliative care they need' and urged a palliative care strategy for England 'supported by a sustainable funding settlement – which puts palliative and end of life care at the heart of NHS priorities for the coming years'. Supporters and opponents of a change in the law gathered at Westminster early on Friday, holding placards saying 'Let us choose' and 'Don't make doctors killers'. Among the high-profile supporters were Dame Prue Leith, who said she is 'quietly confident' about the outcome of the vote, and Dame Esther Rantzen's daughter Rebecca Wilcox. Opposition campaigner and disability advocate George Fielding turned out to urge parliamentarians to vote no, saying: 'What MPs are deciding on is whether they want to give people assistance to die before they have assistance to live.' A YouGov poll of 2,003 adults in Great Britain, surveyed last month and published on Thursday, suggested public support for the Bill remains at 73% – unchanged from November. The proportion of people who feel assisted dying should be legal in principle has risen slightly, to 75% from 73% in November.
