the problem is that ... there's currently no better theory that matches the data than the amyloid cascade one - as far as I understand (and of course I'm extremely far from an expert on this)
still, I think it's correct to state that it's very hard to falsify the hypothesis, because it says that AD (Alzheimer's disease) goes through the following stages: unknown proximate cause leads to appearance of amyloid plaques which then irreversibility lead to Tau bundles (tangles) which inevitably lead to neurodegeneration which then show up as AD
the model states that by the time the plaques are there it's "too late"
of course there are drugs being tested to try to "solve" this from multiple angles, for example make the progression slow enough to "not matter", prevent the tau bundles, etc.
still, I think it's correct to state that it's very hard to falsify the hypothesis, because it says that AD (Alzheimer's disease) goes through the following stages: unknown proximate cause leads to appearance of amyloid plaques which then irreversibility lead to Tau bundles (tangles) which inevitably lead to neurodegeneration which then show up as AD
the model states that by the time the plaques are there it's "too late"
of course there are drugs being tested to try to "solve" this from multiple angles, for example make the progression slow enough to "not matter", prevent the tau bundles, etc.
...
https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/in-defense-of-the-amyloid-h...
see also "In 2024, the amyloid-cascade-hypothesis still remains a working hypothesis, no less but certainly no more": https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/aging-neuroscience/arti...
in particular I recommend looking at this diagram that shows how the model has evolved over the decades: https://www.frontiersin.org/files/Articles/1459224/fnagi-16-...