David Schneider-Joseph
Article
David Schneider-Joseph is a recurring person in the Astral Codex Ten archive, appearing 3 times across 3 issues between August 14, 2025 and February 23, 2026. The archive places it in contexts such as “I am David Schneider-Joseph , an engineer formerly with SpaceX and Google, now working in AI safety”; “David Schneider-Joseph’s piece on amyloid that I republished last month”; “commenter David Schneider-Joseph makes a point”. It most often appears alongside ACX, Alzheimer’s, Scott.
Metadata
- Category: People
- Mention count: 3
- Issue count: 3
- First seen: August 14, 2025
- Last seen: February 23, 2026
Appears In
Related Pages
-
- ACX (2 shared issues)
-
- Alzheimer’s (2 shared issues)
-
- Scott (2 shared issues)
-
- X (2 shared issues)
-
- 767 AD (1 shared issues)
-
- @Scientific_Bird (1 shared issues)
-
- A. Bejanin (1 shared issues)
-
- A. de Calignon (1 shared issues)
-
- A. Elobeid (1 shared issues)
-
- A. J. Aschenbrenner (1 shared issues)
-
- A. L. Woerman (1 shared issues)
-
- A. M. Pooler (1 shared issues)
External Links
Source Context
Recovered passages from the original issue text. When the raw archive preserved outbound links inside the source passage, they are listed directly under the quote.
Anti-amyloid drugs (like Aduhelm) don't reverse the disease, and only slow progression a relatively small amount. Opponents call the amyloid hypothesis zombie science, propped up only by pharmaceutical companies hoping to sell off a few more anti-amyloid me-too drugs before it collapses. Meanwhile, mainstream scientists . . . continue to believe it without really offering any public defense. Scott was so surprised by the size of the gap between official and unofficial opinion that he asked if someone from the orthodox camp would speak out in its favor. I am David Schneider-Joseph, an engineer formerly with SpaceX and Google, now working in AI safety. Alzheimer’s isn’t my field, but I got very interested in it, spent six months studying the literature, and came away believing the amyloid hypothesis was basically completely solid. I thought I’d share that understanding with current skeptics. The ATN model The most plausible variant of the amyloid hypothesis is the A → T → N model: amyloid causes tau causes neurodegeneration. 1: Amyloid The common entrypoint, typically at least 15 years before clinically detectable symptoms [1], is accumulation of amyloid-β deposits (especially Aβ42, one of several variants). Amyloid-β is a peptide produced in healthy human beings and many other animals, probably for antimicrobial purposes [2, 3]. Factors which cause overproduction of amyloid also cause Alzheimer’s. Factors that cause decreased clearance of amyloid also cause Alzheimer’s. The clearest relationship is various genes which massively increase amyloid production (while doing nothing else); these genes are Alzheimer’s risk factors, with some of the rarer and more severe ones causing extreme versions of the disease that manifest at otherwise almost-never-seen ages. One of the clearest examples is Down syndrome, which is caused by three (rather than the usual two) copies of chromosome 21. People with Down syndrome are at much higher risk of Alzheimer’s than the general population: two-thirds will have the condition by age sixty, and 15% have it by age forty. APP, the gene for the amyloid precursor protein, is on chromosome 21. This means that people with Down syndrome will have an extra copy. This extra copy has been observed to lead to higher-than-normal amyloid levels. But there are many genes on chromosome 21; do we have additional evidence that it’s the amyloid one that’s involved? Yes. Dozens of other mutations on APP cause the same sort of extremely young and severe Alzheimer’s. So do mutations on PSEN1 and 2, the genes for the enzyme that processes amyloid precursor protein into amyloid. So do mutations on several other amyloid-related genes. [6, 91 - 96] Researchers call these autosomal-dominant Alzheimer’s, meaning Alzheimer’s cases that get inherited from a single parent in a simple fashion typical of single-gene disorders. They make up about 1% of all cases, and are our strongest evidence for the causal role of amyloid in the disorder. To my knowledge, there is no serious claim that these genes could be working through any pathway other than their shared role in the amyloid system. But these autosomal-dominant cases only make up about 1% of all Alzheimer’s patients. Might they be a different disease than the usual sporadic Alzheimer’s that strikes people without strong family histories at normal ages? Probably not: the presentation and trajectory of autosomal-dominant and sporadic Alzheimer’s cases are strikingly similar. Both show an initial appearance of amyloid pathology starting in intrinsic connectivity networks in both autosomal-dominant [14] and sporadic [15–18] types, cortical tau appearing first in the medial temporal lobe and with the exact same fold in both disease types [97] (despite human tauopathies having at least seven other possible characteristic folds [36]), that tau pathology worsening and spreading outside this region only once amyloid pathology reaches sufficient severity [65], neurodegeneration progressing closely in step with the tau pathology, and the same usual approximate trajectory of cognitive symptoms due to the sequence of affected regions. So it’s as if two bank robberies occurred hours apart, in the same town, and in a highly similar and idiosyncratic manner, and we can positively identify the culprit of one on security camera footage. It’s a good bet the culprit of the other is the same. Increased amyloid production → Alzheimer’s is an especially clear and simple pathway, but any other change in amyloid can also cause the disease. For example Overproduction or reduced clearance of amyloid due to impaired slow wave sleep. Aβ production is neuronal activity-dependent, and toxins (perhaps including Aβ) are cleared from the brain during sleep via the glymphatic system. Thus Aβ can accumulate if the brain is more active and/or has less opportunity for clearance. [7, 8, 9, 10, 11]
Inline links: Aduhelm, David Schneider-Joseph
42: NYT profile of a person with a genetic condition that invariably causes Alzheimers, who mysteriously nevertheless has not gotten Alzheimers, and what we can learn from him. I was happy to see that everything in here makes sense in the context of David Schneider-Joseph’s piece on amyloid that I republished last month. But also, it mentioned that his resistance might be caused by “an excess of heat shock proteins, which help keep other proteins from folding incorrectly”. This made me wonder - you get heat shock proteins by being shocked by heat. Could deliberate heat shocks reduce Alzheimer’s risk? I was able to find an observational study showing that daily sauna use reduces dementia risk 66% (mere weekly use doesn’t cut it, sorry). Can we trust these observations? I also looked to see if Finland - where people use saunas much more than in any other country - had a lower dementia rate; unfortunately, it’s actually the highest in the world. Nobody really knows why, with theories ranging from levels of toxic mold (implausible) to coding differences (it’s always this one). Absent any other idea for how to confirm the sauna findings, I consider them suggestive only.
5: In What Happened With Bio Anchors, commenter David Schneider-Joseph makes a point I hadn’t heard before:
Inline links: What Happened With Bio Anchors, makes a point