Boston ? The words in the announcement made it sound as if it were a fair fight. Television anchors and reporters said the same thing: Ronald Reagan died after a long “battle” with Alzheimer’s disease.

But Reagan and Alzheimer’s were never equal adversaries. If this was a battle, there was no defense against an illness that attacks the brain’s hard drive as if it were a computer virus, erasing the ability to remember and think, byte by byte. Nor was there any arsenal to protect even a former president of the United States from the devastation that leaves family and friends bereaved for the living.

Those who have suffered the terrible disappearing act of their loved ones call Alzheimer’s disease “the long goodbye.” And so in many ways, we had already waved goodbye to this sunniest of presidents before his final farewell.

From time to time when former presidents gathered, Reagan’s absence was a public reminder of his shadowy presence. At his 85th birthday, friends and colleagues tripped over their tenses, unsure whether to talk about him as a man who “is” or “was.” In documentaries and retrospectives, people analyzing a president who could no longer be a source for his own history or a footnote to his own biography would slip in and out of gear saying, “he was … he is.”

We didn’t know how to describe a man who was no longer himself. His children would talk about a father who was no longer there. And even Nancy, as honest as she was protective, would describe the hollow loneliness of a 52-year marriage without memories.

Finally, pneumonia took the robust body to the place where his mind had already wandered. This week, the photos show the Californian riding a horse and the president thundering at the Berlin Wall. The eulogies speak of the great communicator and the cold warrior, the actor and the president.

But I hope that in honoring his prime, we do not forget the last 10 years. This awful disease made Ronald Reagan one of the people too. One of 4 million Americans with Alzheimer’s.

Yes, I know, many saw more Teflon than Great Communicator in Reagan. Many remember the folly of “Star Wars” as well as the end of the Cold War. They remember the man who covered harsh policies with genial personality. But no one can deny the abiding grace with which he announced “the journey that will lead me into the sunset of my life.”

There were as well many who mocked Nancy as the archetype of an adoring political wife and socialite first lady. But who doesn’t honor and admire the constancy of a love acted out in a decade of daily care?

So if there are to be more monuments to Reagan — and there will be — surely they should be dedicated to creating a self-defense against the disease that kills the self.

Less than a month before her husband’s death, Nancy Reagan spoke to a fund-raiser for stem cell research with words of soft and honest eloquence, “Ronnie’s long journey has finally taken him to a distant place where I can no longer reach him.” But science, she said, “has presented us with a hope called stem cell research which may provide our scientists with many answers that for so long been beyond our grasp.”

Stem cells, the building blocks of the body, are indeed the great hope of scientists who think these can be coaxed into cell types that repair organs or treat diseases such as Alzheimer’s. They are also controversial because they come from human embryos, the “leftovers” of fertility clinics that would otherwise be destroyed or remain frozen.

Three years ago, in a compromise, President Bush limited federal funding to a small number of stem cell lines already created. Under such limits, cutting-edge research — along with some researchers — has moved overseas, stalled or gone to the private sector.

But this spring majorities in both the House and the Senate have written letters to the president asking him to lift the government’s funding restrictions. The supporters include conservative senators such as Orrin Hatch, who understands that “people who are pro-life are also pro-life for existing life.” And in November, Californians will face a ballot question on whether the state should fund the research.

Stem cells may not be an instant “cure” for Alzheimer’s or Parkinson’s or diabetes. But as Nancy Reagan said, “I just don’t see how we can turn our backs on this. … We have lost so much time already and I just really can’t bear to lose any more.”

This is the final one to win for the Gipper. And his widow.

Ellen Goodman is a columnist for Washington Post Writers Group.