muflax65ngodyewp.onion/content_daily/log/115.mkd

175 lines
8.2 KiB
Markdown
Raw Normal View History

---
title: Walpurgiskater
date: 2013-05-01
techne: :done
episteme: :log
---
> but its too late, my friend\
> too late\
> but never mind
>
> all my trials, lord\
> will soon be over
>
> all my trials (excerpt)
As a simple safety precaution, and even though I dont have a history of
escalating addictions[^addict], Im set up a [Beeminder
goal](https://www.beeminder.com/muflax/goals/smoking) to limit my
cigarette use. I mean, the financial budget already keeps it at a
manageable level, but thats what they all say, isnt it?
Nonetheless, I did a simple cost comparisons[^patch] for a
certain (fairly representative) Rich European Nation with its
enlightened “heavily tax those who cost you less and who need the stuff
to self-regulate” drug policy:
- decent cigarettes: \~0.25 Euro / 1mg nicotine
- roll your own cigarettes: \~0.10 Euro / 1mg nicotine (all other
tobacco products are somewhere between those two)
- lozenges: \~0.06 Euro / 1mg nicotine (thats for 4mg lozenges, which
are easy to split in half, but if you want to actually dose 1mg,
youll probably have to pay double)
- e-cigarette: well… ok, Im confused by how much usable nicotine they
really contain, and what realistic costs are (including hardware),
but my best estimate is something like \~0.10 Euro /
1mg[^source] (especially as prices are expected to go up
thanks to upcoming regulations), which surprises me as I thought
they were a lot cheaper. Am I missing something?
I currently dont have any reasonable way to circumvent those taxes
(Eastern European border, I miss ya), so it seems like Im not actually
spending a whole lot of premium on cigarettes. Assuming a 4mg/day
maximum (which is a pretty hig upper bound of my current use), Id have
to pay up to \~7 Eurons/month for the cognitive benefits through
lozenges (which also ignores that I skip days irregularly because I
forget about the stuff, which at least helps keep tolerance down).
If I add, say, 10 cigarettes/week (which is a similarly high long-term
estimate of my current use) and use lozenges otherwise for the same
4mg/day, Id pay \~9 Eurons/months, not a lot more. (And I love tobacco
smoke and discolorations anyway, so this is a reasonable cost just for
the pleasant experience, but Im weird that way. Always loved having
smoker friends for their smell, even though I only got interested in the
stuff itself a few years ago.) So once my current supplies run out,
thats exactly what I intend to switch to.
But why stick with 4mg? Maybe thats too much, maybe not enough? I need
a better way to quantify what benefits I get from nicotine (in terms of
cognitive enhancement, reduction of *ugh*, regulation of schizotypal
symptoms). So I thought about existing options to get data from:
- I cant use sleep data because my sleep patterns are very irregular
and my Zeo data is basically worthless. Back when I tracked it
regularly for a few months, I virtually *never* dropped below a ZQ
of 90 and saw many anomalies (catastrophic night with a ZQ \> 120
etc.), and now Zeos dead anyway (pbut).
- Comparing “time spent on useful projects” is tricky because theres
a lot of noise, but it might be workable if I do it for a
sufficiently long period of time and Im tracking this anyway.
- Anki seems too noisy to evaluate. What would I even measure? Answer
time? Correctness percentage is (on average) held constant by the
scheduling algorithm and its tricky to control for difficulty.
None of those sound too promising, so Ive looked into useful short
tests I can run once every day. I want the total test suite to be short
(\<10min) so I dont get bored, so Ill stick with these 3 tests for 2
minutes each:
1. [n-back](http://www.gwern.net/DNB%20FAQ) accuracy score
I remember vaguely from gwern-senseis FAQ that its currently
unknown if theres a significant difference between single and dual
n-back, and because Im lazy Ill start with single n-back. Ill add
sound when I get a [round tuit](http://blog.beeminder.com/tuit/).
2. Answer time on simple arithmetic problems (“3+2=?”)
This is [Seth Roberts](http://blog.sethroberts.net/) favorite. Many
data points per day, plausible mechanism, useful skill. Whats not
to like?
3. [Stroop task](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroop_effect) answer
time
There have been several studies that have shown that schizophrenics
have significantly increased Stroop latencies, so it seems like a
useful proxy test for schizotypy. The traditional positive/negative
symptom tests (besides applying to most people in a philosophy
department) are way too imprecise, so this will have to do.
Ive [hacked together a quick
script](https://github.com/muflax/cogatrice) that takes care of the
assignments and tests, added a [simple Beeminder
goal](https://www.beeminder.com/muflax/goals/cogtest) to ensure daily
measurements and Ill figure out how to analyze the data once I have
some. (Itll take a bit for them to plateau anyway, so I can still work
out problems in the protocol as they come up.)
Theres of course still the issue of randomization and blinding.
E-cigarettes are relatively easy to blind, but everything else seems
hard (use herbal / low-nicotine tobacco that tastes similar?) to
impossible (find similar mint lozenges?). So I cant properly control
for placebo, but I can still learn some information about dosage. Next
time I buy new lozenges, Ill also buy weaker ones because they all look
and taste the same and so I can blind *strength*. Until then and in
addition, I can randomize *scheduling* - I simply randomly do the tests
first and then take the nicotine or the other way around. That still
provides a baseline to compare the intervention with. Lastly, Ive also
re-instituted my detailed drug log (which I only needed to avoid some
nasty interactions, mostly with MAOIs, which I havent taken in some
time) so I can spot potential patterns.
Empiricism!
---
So it seems Im getting back into statistics and how to read scientific
papers, and hey, I have some old notes but how much can Ive really
forgotten? Lets review some simple stuff. What was a p-value again,
Wiki-sama?
> In statistical significance testing the p-value is the probability of
> obtaining a test statistic at least as extreme as the one that was
> actually observed, assuming that the null hypothesis is true. One
> often “rejects the null hypothesis” when the p-value is less than the
> predetermined significance level which is often 0.05 or 0.01,
> indicating that the observed result would be highly unlikely under the
> null hypothesis. Many common statistical tests, such as chi-squared
> tests or Students t-test, produce test statistics which can be
> interpreted using p-values.
Oh for fucks sake.
[^addict]:
I mean, look at that graph. If being very inconsistent in everything
I do is a superpower, drug use is probably the only area where it
pays off.
[^patch]:
Ignoring patches, which I found really hard to dose, and gum, which
everyone I know who tried to use it had issues with. I also find it
difficult to take absorption rates into account, but the “1mg”
number is my best guess of effective nicotine, taking the numbers on
cigarette boxes at face-value.
Its also funny how the nicotine content for each product does *not*
generally affect its price much (if at all).
[^source]:
Raw nicotine content in the liquid isnt informative as such because
it ignores the absorption rate (for which I couldnt find a good
source), other components besides nicotine, and so on. I ultimately
went with the quantity of liquid former smokers typically end up
using, which seems like a more useful proxy. However, even there
good correlations are rarely present and estimates vary a lot. My
(not particularly informed) best guess, based on that one study with
self-medicating schizophrenics and various forums with smokers, is
that one medium-to-high-strength cartridge equals \~6-10 cigarettes.
I did find decent estimates for lozenges (and they fit my personal
experience), so those costs are more reliable.