Recent comments in /f/science

vagueblur901 t1_jeeyz0l wrote

Funny things are changing I have been using psychedelics to treat my bipolar as well as PTSD. The rehab and governments take on it that it's a gateway drug and or you are using it to bridge addiction ( I disagree with them) because it got me to go from drinking every day but just having a few beers on a Holiday.

6

RafiqTheHero t1_jeexu43 wrote

While big walnut does appear to have written this, nuts/seeds do in fact rock. Lots of healthy fats, good amount of protein, good amount of fiber, vitamins and minerals, and possibly some polyphenols. The biggest issue for some people will be the amount of calories or fats, otherwise nuts/seeds are awesome. Kind of like the sibling to fruits and veggies which doesn't get as much attention.

6

SaltZookeepergame691 t1_jeexi7n wrote

Table 1 is all over the place, which is my point.

Running t-tests on the continuous variables gives very highly significant differences for age, cholesterol, TAGs, HDL, LDL, HbA1c, a small significant difference for BMI, and nearly significant for creatine and insulin.

Take age, the very first item in the table, which is reported as p=0.26. But, it's actually p<0.0001!

Yes, I know some could probably usea non-parametric test, but 1) we only have summary data, 2) they don't say what they used for their p value calculations, 3) I get the same as them for two of the variables using t tests.

These extreme p values are not values you expect, at all, in a true randomised trial: either 1) it is not randomised/randomisation failed; 2) it was initially randomised and these massive differences are caused by them excluding n=3 from the placebo group and n=1 from the intervention group for this table, in which case the fact they've done their analysis in the PP analysis in such clearly different populations makes it not worth bothering with nad not randomised; 3) something more nefarious.

By my reckoning, the only p values for continuous variables that are correct in table 1 are HOMA2-IR and fasting glucose!

13

BranWafr t1_jeewivy wrote

I'd just like one less thing I have to plug in. It sucks that the first thing I have to do when checking in to a hotel is see where the plugs are so I can figure out which side of the bed I have to sleep on and/or if the plug is on the same side as the night stand so I don't have to put it on the ground.

15

joxeloj t1_jeewatt wrote

I actually work in neuroscience/psychiatry research and I do not see this "weed-fixes-all" research. I am very open to the idea of cannabis being effective for many medical indications but the evidence isn't there, and plenty of it is negative. Are you sure you're not mistaking overstated in vitro work and medical hypotheses-level reviews posted on this subreddit by mouth breathers, with actual evidence for efficacy in medical illness is humans?

This is a phase I double-blind, randomized controlled trial. This is fairly strong in-human evidence. As it stands there is evidence from observational studies that obesity is less common among chronic, frequent cannabis users so a metabolic effect like this would not be unprecedented per se.

−1

BranWafr t1_jeew5ib wrote

My preferred mask is a nasal pillow, which I use 95% of the time. But when I get allergies or colds that cause stuffy noses, I use the full face mask that covers my mouth, too.

But, if I could take a medication to handle my apnea, I'd be down for that.

18