TV Review: The Jennings v Alzheimer's

Imagine facing a life-changing coin toss—a 50/50 chance of developing Alzheimer's disease at the age of 50. Would you take the test to know your fate or live in uncertainty? This is the impossible dilemma confronting John and Emily Jennings in Niam Kennedy's poignant and captivating BBC documentary.

While their story is a thought-provoking thread, the true focus of the documentary lies with their mother, Carol, whose fight for a future free from Alzheimer's paved the way for the very test they now face. The film skilfully weaves a captivating scientific narrative with a deeply moving human story, connecting the scientific advancements to the personal stories of those affected.

Carol Jenning's story begins in the 1980s with a letter she sent to Professor John Hardy, enclosed was a family tree. We see her letter on-screen, carefully hand-drawn in blue biro and corrected in some places with small dots of neat Tipp-Ex, she signs off 'Please contact me if you think we could be of help'. Beside their names, Carol noted each member of her family who had been diagnosed with Alzheimer's. Six of Carol's relatives were living with the disease at the time, including her father, aunt, and uncle, who had all been diagnosed with Alzheimer's in their mid-50s within three consecutive years. 'It seems that this is more than a coincidence,' Carol later explains in an interview 'there must be something more to this'. Her hunch turned out to be right.

At the time, Alzheimer's disease was widely viewed as an inevitable consequence of ageing, making Professor Hardy's pursuit of a genetic link a relatively radical idea. When Carol's letter landed on his desk, Professor Hardy explains, 'It was immediately obvious this was an important family'. Blood samples from Carol and 43 other family members would ultimately lead his team to a landmark discovery – a mutation in the amyloid precursor protein responsible for heritable early-onset Alzheimer's. This breakthrough provided a crucial piece of the puzzle in understanding the disease's biology and established amyloid as a key target for future treatments.

Professor Hardy admits that, at the time, he hoped for a treatment within five years. Over three decades on, we are only just now starting to see treatments being approved, too late for Carol, who was diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease at just 50 years old.

The documentary was fortunate to have access to a wealth of archival footage, photographs, and written pieces from Carol, brought to life in her voice by AI. Her charisma, curiosity, determination, and eloquence stand in jarring and stark contrast to the later footage, which portrays her tragically stricken by the disease, rendered nearly unresponsive and paralysed. This juxtaposition powerfully underscores the immense generational loss suffered by the Jennings family and others like them.

While this documentary will undoubtedly resonate with families grappling with Alzheimer’s disease, thanks to its message of hope and empathetic portrayal of the disease's emotional toll, 'The Jennings v Alzheimer's' is not confined to a niche audience. Anyone with a curiosity for medical documentaries or fascination with the power of individuals to propel scientific progress will find themselves drawn in by this film. Ultimately, the film's blend of personal narrative and scientific achievement makes it a must-watch for anyone touched by Alzheimer's or invested in the fight against this devastating disease.

The film concludes on an optimistic note, with Dr Mummery declaring a new 'treatment era' for Alzheimer's research. In 2012, Carol became the first patient in a clinical trial for a new antibody treatment, lecanemab, designed to target and mop-up amyloid. Although it was too late to help Carol, it has since become the first commercially available treatment that addresses the underlying biology of Alzheimer's disease, a significant milestone.

However, the approval of lecanemab by the FDA in the USA was not without controversy, a point that the documentary downplays. Besides the high cost and considerable side effects, the drug cannot stop or reverse Alzheimer’s disease progression. Researchers believe that the drug might only improve symptoms if administered in the early stages of the disease—a significant challenge given there are few tools available to detect Alzheimer's before symptoms appear. Symptoms of the disease typically manifest only in the later stages, after significant brain deterioration has already occurred. Therefore, administering the drug early enough to test its effectiveness in its supposed prime window remains a significant hurdle.

By overlooking these significant limitations, the documentary leaves the viewer with an overly optimistic impression of the current state of Alzheimer's treatment. However, this was not the main focus of the film. This was the story of Carol, who, in the face of bleak odds, fought tirelessly to advance Alzheimer's research. The direct throughline between Carol sending her letter in the 80s and the approval of the first drug that tackles the biology of Alzheimer's – a discovery Carol helped to facilitate – is a touching and important story to tell. The documentary successfully portrays the triumph of an incredible woman who has left an indelible legacy in medical research.

As the film draws to a close, the screen darkens, and we learn that Carol died earlier this year. In her final act, befitting her legacy, she chose to donate her brain to Alzheimer's research. Of course she did.