The protein that cried wolf

Before we begin: a warning that changes everything

Imagine you are the security system of a vast, breathtakingly complex factory. Your entire job is to ensure that every single product rolling off the assembly line is perfectly shaped, correctly folded, labelled accurately, and either put to work or, when broken, safely disposed of. Now imagine that one day, a rogue product starts coming out crumpled. It cannot do its job. It clogs the disposal system. It triggers every alarm in the building simultaneously. And in the chaos of sirens and sprinkler systems, the factory itself begins to burn.

That is, in essence, what happens in neurodegenerative diseases like Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS, also called Motor Neurone Disease or MND in the UK), Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, and Huntington's disease. The 'crumpled product' is a misfolded protein. The factory is your neurone. The burning building is the self-amplifying inflammatory response that can follow. And the alarm system, now stuck on permanent 'emergency', is a process called proteostasis.

But here is where the story gets more interesting, and more contested, than most of us have been led to believe. We have spent decades treating the misfolded protein as the villain. What I am investigating here is: what if that framing is incomplete? What if the misfolded protein is, at least sometimes, a desperate signal, a last resort, perhaps even a bodyguard? And what if a significant share of the neuronal damage is done not by the protein itself, but by the immune response it triggers?

"The protein is not always the villain. Sometimes it is the evidence of a crime scene - and the full story of how that crime happened is still being written."

This blog is an investigation. I will trace the science from the molecular machinery inside your neurones all the way out to your gut, your environment, and your immune system. I will look at the controversies, the paradigm shifts, and the implications for how we think about, and ultimately support, people living with neurodegenerative disease.

Whether you are living with ALS, caring for someone who is, a clinician navigating the latest research, or simply a curious mind trying to make sense of a deeply complex subject, welcome. The science here is real, the uncertainties are acknowledged, and we will follow the evidence wherever it leads.

---

The factory that never sleeps - what is proteostasis, and why does it break?

Your cells are running a 24/7 quality control operation, and it is more fragile than you think

The word 'proteostasis' combines 'protein' and 'homeostasis', the biological principle of maintaining balance. Proteostasis, then, is the continuous, dynamic process by which cells ensure that every protein inside them is correctly made, correctly shaped, correctly deployed, and, when it has served its purpose or become damaged, correctly dismantled (Klaips et al., 2018).

Think of it as the cellular equivalent of a highly organised warehouse operation. Proteins are the workers and tools of the cell. Some build structures, some carry signals, some switch processes on and off. For a protein to function, it must fold into a precise three-dimensional shape, a shape dictated by its sequence of amino acids, the building blocks from which all proteins are made. Even a minor deviation from that shape can render a protein not just useless, but actively dangerous (Jayaraj et al., 2020).

The proteostasis network (PN) is the entire ensemble of cellular machinery responsible for this quality control. It comprises four interlocking systems:

Molecular chaperones - proteins (particularly the heat shock protein family, including Hsp70 and Hsp90) whose job is to guide newly synthesised proteins into the correct three-dimensional fold, and to catch and re-fold those that have slipped into the wrong shape. Think of them as the experienced quality-control inspectors on the factory floor (Hartl et al., 2011).

The Ubiquitin-Proteasome System (UPS) - a molecular 'shredder' that tags damaged or misfolded proteins with a chemical label called ubiquitin and feeds them to the proteasome, a barrel-shaped complex that dismantles them into their component parts for recycling. It is the factory's waste disposal system (Fhu & Ali, 2021).

Autophagy - a broader 'self-eating' pathway by which the cell engulfs whole clumps of damaged proteins or even dysfunctional organelles (the cell's internal organs) in a membrane sac called an autophagosome, delivering them to a specialised disposal chamber, the lysosome, for breakdown. Where the UPS handles individual misfolded proteins, autophagy deals with bulk waste and larger aggregates (Klaips et al., 2018).

The Unfolded Protein Response (UPR) - an emergency alarm system within the endoplasmic reticulum (ER, the cell's main protein-folding factory), that activates when misfolded proteins accumulate faster than the cell can process them. The UPR attempts to restore order, but when it cannot, it can trigger cell death (Hetz & Saxena, 2017).

Together, these systems represent a genuinely extraordinary feat of biological engineering, and they run continuously, in every one of your neurones, every moment of your life. Yet they do break. They break with age. They break under oxidative stress, damage from unstable molecules called reactive oxygen species (ROS) that are a by-product of normal cellular metabolism. They break when genes mutate. They break when the cell is chronically overwhelmed. And when they break, misfolded proteins accumulate. What happens next defines neurodegenerative disease.

"Proteostasis is not background noise. It is the most important conversation happening inside every neurone you have - right now."

---

ALS: The most revealing case study in proteostasis failure

ALS affects the motor neurones, the nerve cells that carry signals from the brain and spinal cord to the muscles that control movement, speech, swallowing, and breathing. As these neurones are progressively affected, voluntary muscle function gradually changes over time. Every person's experience of ALS is different, and the disease trajectory varies considerably between individuals.

What makes ALS particularly valuable from a scientific standpoint is how clearly it illustrates proteostasis failure. Unlike some conditions where the key proteins remain debated, in ALS the proteins involved have been characterised with unusual precision:

TDP-43 (TAR DNA-binding protein 43) - found mislocalised from the nucleus to the cytoplasm (the cell's main body, outside the nucleus) and aggregated into visible clumps in over 97% of all ALS cases. This figure alone tells us something profound: whatever the upstream trigger, this protein's behaviour is a near-universal feature of the disease (Neumann et al., 2006; Ling et al., 2013).

FUS (Fused in Sarcoma) - another RNA-binding protein (one that processes the genetic instructions inside cells) prone to the same cytoplasmic mislocalisation and aggregation, particularly in younger-onset ALS cases (Song, 2024).

SOD1 (Superoxide Dismutase 1) - the first ALS gene identified, responsible for familial (inherited) ALS in roughly 20% of inherited cases. Its mutant forms misfold and aggregate under oxidative stress (Ajmal, 2023).

C9orf72 repeat expansions - the most common genetic cause of both ALS and frontotemporal dementia (a form of cognitive decline affecting the frontal and temporal lobes of the brain), producing abnormal RNA and toxic dipeptide repeat proteins that burden and ultimately overload the proteostasis machinery (Maharjan & Bhattarai, 2021).

These proteins share a structural feature that will become central to the story ahead: they all contain intrinsically disordered regions (IDRs), stretches of sequence with no fixed three-dimensional structure. These disordered regions make them unusually sensitive to the cellular environment, to stress, and to ageing. They do not simply break randomly. They live on a molecular razor's edge between function and catastrophe (Song, 2024).

---

The fire alarm and the fire - how misfolded proteins trigger a war inside the brain

Meet the Microglia: the brain's resident immune force

For much of the twentieth century, the brain was considered 'immunologically privileged', largely protected from the inflammatory responses that occur elsewhere in the body, kept separate by the blood-brain barrier (BBB), the tight wall of specialised cells lining the brain's blood vessels. We now know this picture was far too simple.

The brain has its own resident immune cell population: microglia. These are not passive caretakers. They are the brain's macrophages, mobile, reactive, and capable of mounting powerful inflammatory responses. Under healthy conditions, microglia perform critical maintenance: surveying their environment, engulfing cellular debris, pruning synapses (the connections between neurones), and promoting neuronal survival. In this state, they are essential. But they can also become, under conditions of chronic activation, the brain's most destructive inhabitants (Gao et al., 2023).

What activates microglia in neurodegenerative disease? Increasingly, evidence suggests that misfolded proteins can act as one important trigger of the immune response.

The DAMP Signal: when the neurone screams for help

Misfolded proteins, whether TDP-43, alpha-synuclein, amyloid-beta, tau, or SOD1, act as DAMPs: Damage-Associated Molecular Patterns. These are molecular distress signals that the immune system has evolved to recognise as markers of cellular injury or danger (Deng et al., 2026).

When a neurone releases or leaks misfolded proteins into the extracellular space (the fluid between cells), nearby microglia detect them via pattern-recognition receptors, including Toll-like receptors (TLRs) and receptors that activate the NLRP3 inflammasome. Think of the NLRP3 inflammasome as a molecular detonator inside the microglial cell. When triggered, it initiates an explosion of inflammatory signalling (Cihankaya et al., 2024; Guan & Han, 2020; Role of neuroinflammation, 2023).

The result: microglia activate, shift into an inflammatory state, and release a cascade of pro-inflammatory signalling molecules, including interleukin-1β (IL-1β), tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α), and interleukin-6 (IL-6). Astrocytes, another type of brain support cell, undergo a parallel shift, moving from their normal neuroprotective role toward one that actively damages neurones. This dual activation of microglia and astrocytes is documented across ALS, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and Huntington's disease (Deng et al., 2026; Gao et al., 2023).

"In some experimental models, misfolded alpha-synuclein appeared to become significantly more damaging to neurones when microglia were present - suggesting that, in certain contexts, neuroinflammation may amplify the toxicity of misfolded proteins beyond what the protein alone could achieve." (Role of neuroinflammation, 2023)

This finding, and it remains an area of active investigation rather than settled consensus, has shifted the thinking of many researchers. The protein alone may not always be sufficient to destroy a neurone. The immune response it triggers may be an important part of the damage equation. How large a part varies by disease, disease stage, and cellular context.

The self-amplifying loop that refuses to stop

What makes this picture so troubling is the feedback loop it creates. Activated microglia release reactive oxygen species (ROS), unstable, highly reactive molecules that directly damage cellular proteins, including causing them to misfold. This oxidative stress generates more misfolded proteins. More misfolded proteins leak from stressed neurones. These are recognised as more DAMPs. More microglia activate. More ROS are produced. The loop tightens (Malek et al., 2024; Shaikh et al., 2024).

Simultaneously, the inflammatory molecules released by microglia drive processes linked to tau hyperphosphorylation (the chemical modification that causes tau protein to form the neurofibrillary tangles characteristic of Alzheimer's disease), impair mitochondrial function, the cell's energy generation, and disrupt synaptic communication, the electrical conversations between neurones that underlie all thought, movement, and sensation (Misfolded proteins and cognitive decline, 2026).

In ALS specifically, neuroinflammation is not a late-stage complication. Evidence from post-mortem studies and neuroimaging suggests microglial activation begins early in the disease course, possibly before significant motor neurone loss. Neuroinflammatory markers in cerebrospinal fluid, the fluid surrounding the brain and spinal cord, have emerged as candidate biomarkers for disease progression (Gao et al., 2023).

The Immunoproteasome: when the clean-up crew B becomes part of the problem

Here is a mechanistic detail that rarely reaches general discussion. In the ageing and chronically inflamed brain, the normal proteasome is progressively replaced by a variant called the immunoproteasome. This shift is itself driven by neuroinflammation, specifically, the cytokines that activated microglia release (particularly interferon-gamma) induce its upregulation (Malek et al., 2024).

The immunoproteasome was originally understood as an immune-specialised degradation system. But in the chronically inflamed conditions of ALS, Alzheimer's, and Parkinson's, its sustained activation may paradoxically worsen proteostasis, disrupting the precise balance of normal protein degradation and potentially feeding the same cycle it was intended to resolve (Malek et al., 2024). It is one of several examples in this story where a cellular system designed for protection becomes, under the conditions of chronic disease, a contributor to it.

---

The evidence complicating the old villain model

Not all aggregates are equal, and some may be less dangerous than we thought

For decades, the dominant narrative in neurodegenerative disease research was reassuringly simple: misfolded proteins accumulate → misfolded proteins are toxic → eliminate the misfolded proteins → treat the disease. This logic drove hundreds of clinical trials. Most of them failed.

The most widely analysed failure involved Alzheimer's disease. Between 2002 and 2012, an analysis of the drug development pipeline found that 99.6% of Alzheimer's drug trials did not achieve their primary endpoint (Cummings et al., 2014). Many of these targeted amyloid-beta, the protein whose aggregated forms (plaques) had been cast as the primary driver of Alzheimer's pathology. Some drugs successfully cleared amyloid plaques from the brain. Some produced no cognitive benefit. A few appeared to worsen outcomes. How could removing the central suspect leave the crime scene intact?

The science has slowly, and sometimes painfully, converged on a more nuanced answer: the full story involves more than one actor, and the visible aggregates may not be the most dangerous form of the protein.

Oligomers vs. Fibrils: the aggregation spectrum

One of the most important paradigm shifts of the past two decades is the recognition that protein aggregation is not a single event but a cascade, a spectrum of states, each with different structural properties and different levels of biological toxicity.

When a protein misfolds and begins to aggregate, it first forms small, loosely organised clusters called oligomers. These soluble oligomers, present early in the aggregation process, are structurally diverse, capable of directly inserting into cell membranes, disrupting ion channels, and overwhelming the proteasome. A substantial body of evidence identifies them as highly toxic (Vassallo et al., 2023; Zhang et al., 2023b).

Over time, oligomers can consolidate into larger, more ordered, insoluble structures: amyloid fibrils and plaques. These mature aggregates are far less dynamically toxic than oligomers. And here lies the critical scientific controversy: some research suggests that these mature fibrils may actually represent a partially protective cellular response - a way of packaging dangerous oligomers into more inert, insoluble deposits that are less able to disrupt cellular machinery (Vassallo et al., 2023; Carulla et al., 2005).

"The presence of inclusions is considered a cardinal pathological hallmark, but their abundance does not directly correlate with disease severity or phenotype - a finding that has forced the field to reconsider what is actually causing the damage." (Misfolded proteins and cognitive decline, 2026)

This does not make amyloid plaques harmless. It means we need to be much more precise about which forms of misfolded proteins we target therapeutically, and at what stage of the aggregation cascade. It also means that some anti-aggregation strategies could, in theory, increase the pool of dangerous oligomers if they disrupt the process by which the cell sequesters them into fibrillar deposits, a concern that remains actively debated in the field (Vassallo et al., 2023).

Stress Granules: the emergency shelter that became a prison

To understand TDP-43 pathology in ALS, arguably the most important single finding in the disease, we need to introduce one of the most exciting concepts in contemporary cell biology: liquid-liquid phase separation (LLPS).

Cells are not simply bags of proteins floating in liquid. Proteins can spontaneously organise themselves into temporary, membrane-less compartments, liquid-like droplets, through a process called phase separation. Think of it like oil droplets forming in water: they organise without any membrane separating them from their surroundings.

Stress granules are one such compartment. When a neurone is under acute stress, oxidative damage, heat, viral challenge, proteins including TDP-43 and FUS rapidly condense, along with messenger RNA (mRNA, the molecular template for making proteins), into these liquid droplets. The purpose is protective: to temporarily pause protein production while the cell deals with the immediate crisis (Wolozin & Ivanov, 2019; Song, 2024).

Under normal conditions, stress granules dissolve when the stress is resolved. TDP-43 returns to the nucleus and resumes its essential functions in RNA regulation. But in ALS, particularly in ageing neurones facing chronic, unresolved stress, stress granules do not dissolve. They transition from liquid-like to gel-like and ultimately to solid, amyloid-like aggregates. The emergency shelter becomes a permanent prison (Song, 2024).

A 2025 study demonstrated that TDP-43 aggregation inside stress granules requires two simultaneous events: concentration above a threshold level and oxidative stress. This is not the behaviour of uncontrolled collapse. It looks more like a regulated, if ultimately self-defeating, cellular response to crisis, the cell attempting to contain the damage, and failing (Yan et al., 2025).

Protein disulfide isomerase (PDI), an enzyme involved in protein folding inside the ER, is normally recruited to TDP-43 condensates and acts to prevent their solidification. In ALS patient brain tissue, PDI is found colocalised with TDP-43 aggregates, overwhelmed and eventually sequestered in the very deposits it was tasked with preventing. This illustrates how the proteostasis network's own rescue systems can be captured and inactivated by the pathology they are fighting (Medinas et al., 2024).

The loss-of-function dimension: the protein was doing a crucial job

There is a further dimension rarely communicated to non-specialist audiences. TDP-43 is not simply a protein that causes trouble when it aggregates. It is a critical regulator of RNA metabolism in neurones, involved in the processing of thousands of genes, the stabilisation of mRNAs, and the transport of RNA to distant synapses. When TDP-43 mislocalises from the nucleus to the cytoplasm and forms aggregates, the nucleus loses its functional TDP-43, and the vast array of RNA-processing events that depend on it are disrupted (Ling et al., 2013).

The same principle applies to FUS. So in ALS, the molecular assault is twofold: toxic gain-of-function from the aggregates themselves (overwhelming the proteostasis machinery, triggering inflammation) AND toxic loss-of-function from the depletion of nuclear TDP-43 from where it is needed (Ajmal, 2023; Song, 2024). Therapeutic strategies that only target aggregation without restoring nuclear function may be addressing only one half of the disease mechanism.

---

What is actually breaking the factory? Upstream causes of proteostasis failure

The misfolded protein is a symptom. What is the disease?

If we accept that misfolded proteins are, at least in part, symptomatic, distress signals, emergency responses gone wrong, then the more clinically important question becomes: what is causing the proteostasis network to fail in the first place? Here the evidence is broad, converging, and, for those who believe in the power of modifiable factors, genuinely significant.

Ageing: the universal weakening of the factory floor

Ageing is the single greatest risk factor for every major neurodegenerative disease, and its effects on the proteostasis network are now well characterised. With age, molecular chaperone activity declines. The heat shock response, the cell's acute stress-response system that rapidly upregulates chaperones, becomes impaired. The proteasome becomes less efficient. Autophagy slows. The ER's protein quality control capacity diminishes (Morimoto, 2020; Klaips et al., 2018).

Ageing also induces a state of chronic low-grade systemic inflammation, sometimes called 'inflammaging', that primes microglia toward a more reactive baseline state (Shaikh et al., 2024). The ageing brain is, in a real biological sense, pre-armed for the inflammatory cascade that misfolded proteins will eventually trigger. Understanding this is critical, because it means that the disease process may begin, quietly, subclinically, years before any symptom appears.

ER stress and the unfolded protein response: when the rescue system becomes the hazard

The endoplasmic reticulum (ER) is the cell's primary protein manufacturing and quality control centre. When misfolded proteins accumulate inside it, the ER activates the Unfolded Protein Response (UPR), a three-branched emergency programme mediated by sensor proteins called PERK, IRE1α, and ATF6. The UPR attempts to resolve the problem by halting new protein synthesis, upregulating chaperones, and activating ERAD (ER-associated protein degradation, which removes misfolded proteins from the ER for proteasomal disposal) (Hetz & Saxena, 2017; Ghemrawi & Khair, 2020).

When acute ER stress is resolved, this UPR response is adaptive and protective. When ER stress is chronic, as it is in ALS, Alzheimer's, and Parkinson's disease, the UPR becomes maladaptive. Prolonged activation of the PERK pathway in particular leads to persistent inhibition of protein synthesis, depriving neurones of proteins they critically need, driving loss of synaptic connections, and ultimately activating apoptotic (cell death) programmes via a protein called CHOP (Scheper & Hoozemans, 2015; Hetz & Saxena, 2017).

In ALS, ER stress and UPR activation are documented in both sporadic (non-inherited) and familial (inherited) disease. TDP-43 pathology and C9orf72-related disease both converge on ER stress, suggesting that, regardless of the specific upstream trigger, the ER may represent a critical shared pathway in motor neurone degeneration (Maharjan & Bhattarai, 2021).

Mitochondrial dysfunction: when the power goes out

Neurones are extraordinarily energy-demanding cells. They rely almost exclusively on mitochondria, the cell's power generators, because they have very limited capacity for the alternative metabolic pathways that other cell types can use. When mitochondria are damaged or dysfunctional, neurons cannot sustain the energy-intensive processes of protein synthesis, folding, and degradation that proteostasis requires (Maharjan & Bhattarai, 2021).

In ALS, mitochondrial abnormalities, including disrupted morphology, impaired transport along motor neuron axons (which can exceed a metre in length in humans), and defective oxidative phosphorylation (the main cellular energy-generation process), are documented in patient tissue and experimental models. The ER and mitochondria are in constant functional dialogue, particularly in the regulation of calcium, a critical signalling molecule. Disruption of this ER-mitochondria calcium axis is emerging as a potential convergence point for multiple upstream ALS triggers (Maharjan & Bhattarai, 2021). Damaged mitochondria also produce excess ROS, which directly drives protein misfolding, completing yet another self-reinforcing loop.

The gut-brain axis: the most surprising door in the building

Of all the developments in neurodegenerative disease research over the past decade, perhaps none has surprised the mainstream more than the mounting evidence for the role of the gut microbiome.

The gut microbiome, the approximately 38 trillion microbial organisms in your gastrointestinal tract, communicates with the brain through multiple channels: direct neural connections via the vagus nerve, immune-mediated pathways, and the production of neuroactive metabolites (Park & Gao, 2024). This communication network is called the gut-brain axis.

Several human cohort studies have documented gut microbiome dysbiosis (an altered, less diverse microbial community) in ALS patients compared to healthy controls. Health-promoting bacteria, including Akkermansia muciniphila, Bifidobacterium, and Lactobacillus species, are reduced, while potentially pro-inflammatory bacteria are relatively elevated (Mudda et al., 2026). It is important to note that this evidence base remains observational and largely preclinical in the ALS context, causal direction has not been firmly established.

The mechanistic rationale for why this matters is well-grounded, however. Healthy gut bacteria produce short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs), particularly butyrate, propionate, and acetate, that perform multiple protective functions: reducing intestinal permeability ('leaky gut'), supporting blood-brain barrier integrity, modulating microglial activation toward anti-inflammatory states, and supporting autophagy (Dandamudi et al., 2024; Park & Gao, 2024).

When dysbiosis reduces SCFA production, intestinal permeability can increase, allowing lipopolysaccharide (LPS), a pro-inflammatory component of gram-negative bacterial cell walls, to enter systemic circulation. LPS is a potent activator of toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4) on microglia, driving neuroinflammation. Additionally, bacterial amyloid proteins, bacteria also produce amyloid-like structures, may potentially act as molecular seeds that accelerate the aggregation of host proteins, though this mechanism has primarily been studied in Parkinson's disease and requires further research in ALS (Mudda et al., 2026; Dandamudi et al., 2024).

"The gut-brain-immune axis is a genuinely important and underexplored territory in neurodegenerative disease. The evidence for it is strongest in Parkinson's disease, promising but still emerging in ALS. It represents one of the most tractable targets for supportive intervention." (Mudda et al., 2026)

For people with ALS, there is a particularly significant practical dimension: the disease progressively impairs swallowing and gastrointestinal motility, which alters the microbiome, which may amplify gut permeability and systemic inflammation, which worsens neuroinflammation. Managing gut health, nutritional intake, and microbiome diversity throughout the disease trajectory is therefore not peripheral, it is mechanistically relevant.

---

Five questions the field has not settled - and why they change the conversation

The controversies worth sitting with

1. Is neuroinflammation cause, consequence - or both?

The most fundamental unresolved question is whether neuroinflammation is primarily a driver of neurodegeneration or primarily a response to it. The honest evidence suggests it is both, and that the role it plays shifts with disease stage. In early disease, microglial activation appears genuinely protective: clearing damaged proteins, supporting surviving neurons, attempting to contain the damage. In advanced, chronic disease, it becomes a destructive amplifier. The critical transition between these phases - the point at which protection becomes injury, is not yet identified with the kind of clinical precision needed to guide treatment timing (Gao et al., 2023; Role of neuroinflammation, 2023). This matters enormously for any anti-inflammatory therapeutic strategy.

2. Are we still targeting the wrong species?

The field has largely moved toward viewing small, soluble oligomers as the primary toxic forms of aggregating proteins, more dangerous than the large fibrils and plaques that were historically the main targets. But oligomers are transient, structurally diverse, and extraordinarily difficult to isolate and characterise in living tissue (Vassallo et al., 2023). Drugs that successfully reduce visible plaques may be leaving the most dynamically toxic species untouched. This is one of several reasons the research community has become increasingly cautious about treating any single endpoint as definitive proof of therapeutic efficacy.

3. Why do specific neurones die while others survive?

One of the most striking and unexplained features of neurodegenerative diseases is their cellular selectivity. In ALS, motor neurons die while sensory neurons are largely spared. In Parkinson's disease, dopaminergic neurones of the substantia nigra are preferentially targeted. In Alzheimer's, the hippocampus and entorhinal cortex bear the earliest burden. If proteostasis failure is a general cellular problem, why does it manifest so selectively? Proposed explanations include the extreme length of motor neurone axons (creating extraordinary demands on protein transport and energy), unique metabolic profiles, and differential expression of disease-associated proteins in specific neuronal populations. No single explanation is fully satisfying, and this selectivity problem remains one of the field's most important open questions (Barmaki et al., 2024).

4. What comes first - the protein or the inflammation?

The central chicken-and-egg problem: does proteostasis failure drive neuroinflammation, or does neuroinflammation, triggered by upstream factors such as gut dysbiosis, systemic metabolic stress, environmental toxins, or chronic infection, impair the proteostasis network first, causing proteins to misfold?

There is provocative evidence for the latter direction. Chronic systemic inflammation is associated with reduced autophagy efficiency, impaired UPS function, and microglial priming in multiple experimental systems (Malek et al., 2024; Shaikh et al., 2024). In this framing, the misfolded protein is not the origin of the disease but a downstream manifestation of a cellular infrastructure already weakened by years of inflammatory insult. If this framing has merit, and it remains contested, then the therapeutic window for meaningful intervention extends much earlier than we have historically assumed, and much of the upstream terrain is modifiable.

5. Is TDP-43 pathology always the same disease?

TDP-43 cytoplasmic inclusions are found not only in ALS and frontotemporal dementia, but in many elderly individuals without significant neurological disease. A condition called LATE (Limbic-predominant Age-related TDP-43 Encephalopathy) has been identified in post-mortem studies as a common but frequently unrecognised cause of cognitive decline in those over 80, distinct from Alzheimer's disease (Nelson et al., 2019).

This raises an uncomfortable question: at what point does TDP-43 mislocalisation become pathological, and what determines whether an individual with TDP-43 aggregation develops rapidly progressive motor neurone disease, slowly progressive cognitive decline, or no clinical symptoms at all? The answer likely involves the cumulative burden of proteostasis network impairment, neuroinflammatory tone, cellular energy reserves, and genetic background, and it has not yet been characterised with enough precision to be clinically actionable. It does suggest, however, that TDP-43 pathology exists on a continuum rather than as a binary, with disease expression reflecting a complex interplay of vulnerability and resilience factors.

---

What can be done? The therapeutic and nutritional landscape

Where science and supportive care currently meet

Research into therapeutic modulation of proteostasis is advancing rapidly across multiple fronts. What follows is an overview of the most evidenced directions - not a prescription, and not a promise. For any intervention, discussion with your neurological and clinical team is essential.

Pharmacological directions

Pharmacological chaperones and heat shock protein inducers are under development to support the cellular machinery for correct protein folding. Overexpression of Hsp70 has shown neuroprotective effects in cell and animal models of neurodegenerative disease, though the challenge of achieving selective nervous system effects without off-target consequences, including increased cancer risk in some contexts, remains (Hartl et al., 2011).

UPR modulation is another active area. Because the PERK pathway shifts from adaptive to maladaptive in chronic neurodegeneration, inhibitors including ISRIB (integrated stress response inhibitor) have shown promise in experimental models by restoring translational activity in stressed neurones. The critical challenge is therapeutic timing, the same signalling pathway that may need inhibiting in advanced disease may need supporting in early disease (Scheper & Hoozemans, 2015).

In Alzheimer's disease, two anti-amyloid antibodies, lecanemab (Leqembi) and donanemab, received regulatory approval in 2023, marking the first disease-modifying treatments for early Alzheimer's. A subsequent combination trial was designed to evaluate these agents alongside tau-targeting therapies simultaneously. Whether this combination approach produces clinically meaningful outcomes in broader patient populations is still being determined (Koszła & Sołek, 2024). For ALS, no disease-modifying treatment yet achieves the clinical efficacy seen in some other neurological conditions, though multiple therapeutic approaches are in active trials.

Nutrition, autophagy, and the case for a systems approach

Several nutritional and lifestyle approaches have a well-grounded mechanistic rationale for supporting proteostasis, specifically through upregulating autophagy, reducing systemic inflammatory burden, supporting mitochondrial function, and promoting gut microbiome diversity. These should be understood as supportive and adjunctive: they may help create a biological environment that is more resilient to proteostasis failure, not one that eliminates or reverses established neurodegenerative disease.

Caloric restriction and intermittent fasting have been shown to upregulate autophagy in multiple experimental systems. Specific dietary compounds, including polyphenols such as resveratrol and quercetin, omega-3 fatty acids, and spermidine, have demonstrated autophagy-enhancing properties in research models (Labbadia & Morimoto, 2015). Short-chain fatty acid support through dietary fibre diversity, fermented foods, and prebiotic substrates addresses the gut-brain axis directly (Park & Gao, 2024).

An important clinical caveat: while caloric restriction and fasting have mechanistic relevance in experimental models, they are generally not appropriate strategies in ALS and many other neurodegenerative conditions where unintentional weight loss is itself associated with poorer outcomes. In ALS especially, maintaining adequate energy intake, protein adequacy, and swallowing safety are clinical priorities that must never be compromised in pursuit of theoretical metabolic benefits. Any autophagy-supporting nutritional approach must be carefully calibrated within the context of individual clinical status, and always in collaboration with a practicioner, such as those from You Nutrition Clinic.

It is critical to note that in ALS specifically, nutritional management is complicated by progressive dysphagia (difficulty swallowing) and altered gut motility. Maintaining adequate caloric and protein intake, supporting gut microbiome health in the face of swallowing and digestive challenges, and addressing nutritional deficiencies all require clinically informed, individualised support, not generic dietary advice.

"Combination strategies, rather than single-target approaches, are now the favoured direction. The evidence increasingly suggests that the interaction of proteostasis failure, neuroinflammation, mitochondrial stress, and gut-immune signalling creates a system of mutually reinforcing loops. Targeting multiple nodes simultaneously is more likely to achieve meaningful effect than targeting any one." (Koszła & Sołek, 2024).

---

Conclusion: the protein was never the whole story

We began with a factory on fire. We have traced the fire back through cascading alarms, a misunderstood security response, a power outage in the basement, a break in the perimeter from outside the building, and decades of deferred maintenance.

The misfolded protein, whether TDP-43 in ALS, amyloid-beta in Alzheimer's, or alpha-synuclein in Parkinson's, is real, and it matters. But it is increasingly understood as one node in a deeply interconnected network of failure, not an isolated cause. In several proteinopathies, soluble oligomeric species appear to be more dynamically toxic than mature fibrillar deposits. Neuroinflammation amplifies and in some contexts may precede protein toxicity. ER stress, mitochondrial failure, gut dysbiosis, and ageing-related proteostasis decline all feed into the same converging crisis, with different weights at different disease stages, in different patients.

For those living with ALS, this is a story of complexity, but also of possibility. The more precisely we understand the multi-factorial nature of this disease, the more clearly the potential targets come into view. And some of those targets, gut microbiome health, mitochondrial support, nutritional support for autophagy and anti-inflammatory resilience, are accessible, modifiable, and worthy of serious clinical attention alongside disease-modifying pharmacotherapy.

For carers, practitioners, and researchers: the systems-level view this science demands is one that refuses to reduce a devastatingly complex disease to a single protein, a single gene, or a single mechanism. The most promising science is happening at the intersections, between proteostasis and immunity, between the gut and the brain, between molecular biology and clinical nutrition.

The protein was crying wolf. The wolf was already inside. But understanding that means we now have more doors to open.

"The answers to neurodegenerative disease will not come from one laboratory, one discipline, or one drug. They will come from the willingness to zoom out."

---

Working with You Nutrition Clinic, evidence-based nutrition support for neurodegenerative conditions

The science reviewed here is complex, but its implications for nutritional practice are increasingly clear. Proteostasis, neuroinflammation, gut-brain signalling, and mitochondrial health are all profoundly influenced by what you eat, how your gut microbiome is supported, and how your body manages systemic inflammatory load. These are not peripheral concerns. They sit within the mechanistic landscape now being actively investigated in neurodegenerative disease.

At You Nutrition Clinic, we translate the most current peer-reviewed science into personalised, evidence-based nutrition support for individuals living with ALS, Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, Huntington's disease, and other neurodegenerative conditions, as well as for carers, family members, and those seeking to optimise their brain health proactively.

Our approach addresses the full landscape of modifiable factors: gut microbiome diversity and integrity, mitochondrial and anti-inflammatory nutrition, autophagy support, blood-brain barrier health, and the management of nutritional challenges specific to motor neurone diseases, including dysphagia (difficulty swallowing) and the maintenance of adequate nutrition through disease progression.

The science is moving. So are we.

Book a consultation or learn more at younutritionclinic.com

🧩 Connect with us

For research updates, practical tips, and ongoing inspiration, follow us on Instagram:

👉 @nutritionandthebrain

👉 @younutritionkids

Stay curious. Stay hopeful. Support your brain. 🧠

Disclaimer: This article is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult with a qualified, registered medical doctor (MD) for diagnosis and treatment decisions.

---

References

Ajmal, M. R. (2023). Protein misfolding and aggregation in proteinopathies: Causes, mechanism and cellular response. Diseases, 11(1), 30. https://doi.org/10.3390/diseases11010030

Barmaki, H., Nourazarian, A., & Khaki-Khatibi, F. (2024). Proteostasis imbalance: Unraveling protein aggregation in neurodegenerative diseases and emerging therapeutic strategies. Ageing Research Reviews, 101, Article 102511. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arr.2024.102511

Carulla, N., Caddy, G. L., Hall, D. R., Zurdo, J., Gairi, M., Feliz, M., Giralt, E., Dobson, C. M., & Bhatt, D. K. (2005). Molecular recycling within amyloid fibrils. Nature, 436(7053), 554–558. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature03986

Cummings, J. L., Morstorf, T., & Zhong, K. (2014). Alzheimer's disease drug-development pipeline: Few candidates, frequent failures. Alzheimer's Research & Therapy, 6(4), 37. https://doi.org/10.1186/alzrt269

Dandamudi, B. J., Dimaano, K. A. M., Shah, N., AlQassab, O., Al-Sulaitti, Z., Nelakuditi, B., & Mohammed, L. (2024). Neurodegenerative disorders and the gut-microbiome-brain axis: A literature review. Cureus, 16(10), e72427. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.72427

Deng, H. X., Cao, J. L., Wu, Y., Jiang, S. J., Fang, Q. Q., & Zhu, B. Y. (2026). AI-driven insights into protein misfolding and innate immunity in neurodegenerative diseases. Frontiers in Immunology, 17, 1814357. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2026.1814357

Fhu, C. W., & Ali, A. (2021). Dysregulation of the ubiquitin-proteasome system in human malignancies: A window for therapeutic intervention. Cancers, 13(7), 1513. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13071513

Gao, C., Jiang, J., Tan, Y., & Chen, S. (2023). Microglia in neurodegenerative diseases: Mechanism and potential therapeutic targets. Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy, 8, 359. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41392-023-01588-0

Ghemrawi, R., & Khair, M. (2020). Endoplasmic reticulum stress and unfolded protein response in neurodegenerative diseases. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 21(17), 6127. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms21176127

Hartl, F. U., Bracher, A., & Hayer-Hartl, M. (2011). Molecular chaperones in protein folding and proteostasis. Nature, 475(7356), 324–332. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature10317

Hetz, C., & Saxena, S. (2017). ER stress and the unfolded protein response in neurodegeneration. Nature Reviews Neurology, 13(8), 477–491. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrneurol.2017.99

Jayaraj, G. G., Hipp, M. S., & Hartl, F. U. (2020). Functional modules of the proteostasis network. Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology, 12(1), a033951. https://doi.org/10.1101/cshperspect.a033951

Klaips, C. L., Jayaraj, G. G., & Hartl, F. U. (2018). Pathways of cellular proteostasis in aging and disease. Journal of Cell Biology, 217(1), 51–63. https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.201709072

Labbadia, J., & Morimoto, R. I. (2015). The biology of proteostasis in aging and disease. Annual Review of Biochemistry, 84, 435–464. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-biochem-060614-033955

Ling, S. C., Polymenidou, M., & Cleveland, D. W. (2013). Converging mechanisms in ALS and FTD: Disrupted RNA and protein homeostasis. Neuron, 79(3), 416–438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2013.07.033

Maharjan, N., & Bhattarai, A. (2021). The role of mitochondrial dysfunction and ER stress in TDP-43 and C9orf72 ALS. Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience, 15, Article 648749. https://doi.org/10.3389/fncel.2021.648749

Malek, N., Gladysz, R., Stelmach, N., & Drag, M. (2024). Targeting microglial immunoproteasome: A novel approach in neuroinflammatory-related disorders. ACS Chemical Neuroscience, 15(14), 2529–2550. https://doi.org/10.1021/acschemneuro.4c00099

Medinas, D. B., Valenzuela, V., & Hetz, C. (2024). Protein disulfide isomerase disassembles stress granules and blocks cytoplasmic aggregation of TDP-43 in ALS [Preprint]. bioRxiv. https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.03.16.585334 [Note: preprint, not peer-reviewed at time of writing]

Misfolded proteins and cognitive decline: Mechanistic insights into neurodegenerative disorders. (2026). Neurology International, 18(3), 48. https://doi.org/10.3390/neurolint18030048

Koszła, O., & Sołek, P. (2024). Misfolding and aggregation in neurodegenerative diseases: Protein quality control machinery as potential therapeutic clearance pathways. Cell Communication and Signaling, 22, 421. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12964-024-01791-8

Morimoto, R. I. (2020). Cell-nonautonomous regulation of proteostasis in aging and disease. Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology, 12(8), a034074. https://doi.org/10.1101/cshperspect.a034074

Mudda, N. S., Zhang, L., & Sampelli, P. (2026). Targeting gut-brain-immune axis in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Frontiers in Immunology, 16, 1637976. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2025.1637976 [Note: hypothesis and theory article]

Nelson, P. T., Dickson, D. W., Trojanowski, J. Q., Jack, C. R., Boyle, P. A., Arfanakis, K., Rademakers, R., Alafuzoff, I., Attems, J., Brayne, C., Coyle-Gilchrist, I. T. S., Chui, H. C., Fardo, D. W., Flanagan, M. E., Halliday, G., Hokkanen, S. R. K., Hunter, S., Jicha, G. A., Katsumata, Y., … Schneider, J. A. (2019). Limbic-predominant age-related TDP-43 encephalopathy (LATE): Consensus working group report. Brain, 142(6), 1503–1527. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awz099

Neumann, M., Sampathu, D. M., Kwong, L. K., Truax, A. C., Micsenyi, M. C., Chou, T. T., Bruce, J., Schuck, T., Grossman, M., Clark, C. M., McCluskey, L. F., Miller, B. L., Masliah, E.,

Mackenzie, I. R., Feldman, H., Feiden, W., Kretzschmar, H. A., Trojanowski, J. Q., & Lee, V. M. (2006). Ubiquitinated TDP-43 in frontotemporal lobar degeneration and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Science, 314(5796), 130–133. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1134108

Park, S., & Gao, L. (2024). Gut-brain axis and neurodegeneration: Mechanisms and therapeutic potentials. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 18, 1481390. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2024.1481390

Role of neuroinflammation in neurodegeneration development. (2023). Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy, 8, 267. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41392-023-01486-5

Scheper, W., & Hoozemans, J. J. M. (2015). The unfolded protein response in neurodegenerative diseases: A neuropathological perspective. Acta Neuropathologica, 130(3), 315–331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00401-015-1462-8

Shaikh, A., Ahmad, F., Teoh, S. L., Kumar, J., & Yahya, M. F. (2024). Proteostasis disruption and senescence in Alzheimer's disease pathways to neurodegeneration. Brain Research, 1847, Article 149286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2024.149286

Song, J. (2024). Molecular mechanisms of phase separation and amyloidosis of ALS/FTD-linked FUS

Taylor, J. P., Brown, R. H., & Cleveland, D. W. (2016). Decoding ALS: From genes to mechanism. Nature, 539(7628), 197–206. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature20413

Vassallo, N., Ongeri, S., & De Simone, A. (2023). Editorial: Oligomers in amyloid-associated diseases - structural properties and toxicity. Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences, 10, 1215340. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmolb.2023.1215340

Wolozin, B., & Ivanov, P. (2019). Stress granules and neurodegeneration. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 20(11), 649–666. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41583-019-0222-5

Cihankaya, H., Bader, V., Winklhofer, K. F., Vorgerd, M., Matschke, J., Stahlke, S., Theiss, C., & Matschke, V. (2024). Elevated NLRP3 inflammasome activation is associated with motor neuron degeneration in ALS. Cells, 13(12), 995. https://doi.org/10.3390/cells13120995

Guan, Y., & Han, F. (2020). Key mechanisms and potential targets of the NLRP3 inflammasome in neurodegenerative diseases. Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, 14, 37. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnint.2020.00037

Yan, X., Kuster, D., Mohanty, P., Nijssen, J., Pombo-García, K., Garcia Morato, J., Rizuan, A., Franzmann, T. M., Sergeeva, A., Ly, A. M., Liu, F., Passos, P. M., George, L., Wang, S. H., Shenoy, J., Danielson, H. L., Ozguney, B., Honigmann, A., Ayala, Y. M., Fawzi, N. L., Dickson,

D. W., Rossoll, W., Mittal, J., Alberti, S., & Hyman, A. A. (2025). Intra-condensate demixing of TDP-43 inside stress granules generates pathological aggregates. Cell, 188(15), 4123–4140.e18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2025.04.039

Zhang, A., Portugal Barron, D., Chen, E. W., & Guo, Z. (2023b). A protein aggregation platform that distinguishes oligomers from amyloid fibrils. Analyst, 148(10), 2283–2294. https://doi.org/10.1039/d3an00487b