“hot science babes,” LOL!
[quote]andersons wrote:
That is not true. There are lots of statistically rigorous studies (neuroscience, mathematical behavioral sciences) with very few subjects.
n=1 studies are what you want to determine an effect something has on an individual. For this one, he just needs to repeat it multiple times, with placebo controls mixed in.
And statistical tests are not necessary. It’s clear that the variability between trials is tiny compared to the effect. Distributions don’t overlap at all. [/quote]
While OP’s work and imagination is cool, this really doesn’t tell us much at all.
Just because studies can be performed with fewer subjects doesn’t mean that they should be. Performing all tests on the same individual pretty much obliterates any external validity because the study results are only applicable to the population or sampling of the population on which the study is performed. The only population to which we can generalize results coming from the OP is the OP himself.
We also can’t say anything about the variability between trials because really this was only one trial. He obtained multiple results by repeating the test, but these results were all in quick succession and so don’t pertain much to the overall variability–simply put, we have no idea what the results would look like if he did them again at a different time. This is not even getting into the obvious placebo effect here.
Pretty basic statistics/epidemiology/study design issues.
Either way, props to OP for the initiative.
OP how about next time (once you have finished with the hot science babes), you take a reading, then a dose of GPC, then take 2-4 readings every 15 minutes, post ingestion for 3 hours. Or something like that.
Plot the results to see if there is a curve of effect over time or more of a ‘switch on, switch off’ result.
Yes yes I know this isn’t ‘real’ science to most of you, but IMO, good science is good observation and this type of thig does allow for some observation.
After all, the OP bought the supp and is using the supp, so how it works on other people is largely irrelevant - to him at this stage.
And when it comes to you then placebo be damned. Results count for all.
I don’t buy aniracetam because some RCT somewhere showed me that there was a statistically insignificant result in a group of 35 students, etc. I buy it because in me, it works as both an anxiolytic and nootropic. Whether that is due to placebo or not, I couldn’t care less. I’m a pragmatist at the core, theorist second. Study be damned 
Just my opinion.
BBB
[quote]bushidobadboy2 wrote:
OP how about next time (once you have finished with the hot science babes), you take a reading, then a dose of GPC, then take 2-4 readings every 15 minutes, post ingestion for 3 hours. Or something like that.
Plot the results to see if there is a curve of effect over time or more of a ‘switch on, switch off’ result.
[/quote]
Thats a good idea. I’ll have to speak to my professor about using the equipment 1 last time before the semester ends. Unfortunately next week is finals week so I’m not sure if the labs will be open that much since there most likely wont be anyone using them