The New York Times featured an extensive interview today with columnist Ross Douthat and Peter Thiel, the venture capitalist and PayPal co-founder. This conversation took place in the opinion section for a reason. Thiel, a supporter of Trump who has connections throughout the White House, was allowed to share his views on various issues through a series of lenient questions. He touched on several curious topics: Does he believe Greta Thunberg is the literal antichrist? Are the leading ideological forces in Europe really environmentalism, “Islamic Shariah law,” and “Chinese Communist totalitarianism”? Does he think AI is “woke” and could follow Elon Musk to Mars? According to Thiel, the answer to these questions seems to be a resounding yes! One might wonder if the “just asking questions” approach in journalism could use a little more skepticism.
A lot of what Thiel said felt more like his personal musings than objective truths, although he did make one striking claim early in the interview. He stated that in terms of biotech, particularly regarding dementia and Alzheimer’s, “we’ve made zero progress in 40 to 50 years.” He criticized the focus on beta amyloids, calling it a “stupid racket” with professionals merely reinforcing each other. This statement is quite bold — and frankly, incorrect.
Sterling Johnson, a Geriatrics and Gerontology professor at the University of Wisconsin, responded to Thiel’s assertion. He pointed out that, “There was no treatment 40 or 50 years ago for Alzheimer’s disease… what we’ve managed to achieve in the last 20 years has been pretty incredible.” Johnson explained that advancements have allowed scientists to recognize when the disease begins, which is often two decades before symptoms appear. This knowledge is crucial for potential prevention.
While Alzheimer’s is still without a cure, the strides made in detection and prevention are significant. Johnson elaborated on past treatments, describing them as temporary fixes, akin to treating cold symptoms. He noted that current research is focusing on potentially modifying the disease’s biology through both amyloid and tau pathways, with clinical trials ongoing.
Thiel, known for advocating radical life extension — and even having an interest in using young people’s blood — sees scientific advancements as stagnant and overly cautious. However, groundbreaking research is happening right now, as highlighted by Johnson, who mentioned a monoclonal antibody called gantenerumab, which has shown promising results in early tests. There are also ongoing phase-three trials using other treatments that are reportedly more effective than gantenerumab in clearing amyloid proteins.
Interestingly, Thiel’s opinions echo those of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the head of the FDA in the current Trump administration, who recently criticized Alzheimer’s research. Kennedy claimed that the National Institute of Health (NIH) has narrowly focused on amyloid plaques, stifling other research possibilities. The Alzheimer’s Association has called this view “demonstrably false,” asserting that less than 14% of new NIH projects aimed at Alzheimer’s have targeted amyloid beta in the past decade.
If I were someone interested in bolstering medical research — which I’m not — undermining an administration that is reducing funding for science wouldn’t make much sense. Yet, this kind of inconsistency seems typical among tech billionaires; they promote their viewpoints, even if they contradict established facts. It’s troubling that a respected publication provides a platform for these misleading claims.
This update includes additional clinical trial data as of June 27, 2025.
