Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by tomq 2554 days ago
It’s important to note: the study only had 20 participants, so it wouldn’t have enough statistical power to detect a moderately large effect. Failure to find an effect is different from evidence there is no effect.
2 comments

> It’s important to note: the study only had 20 participants, so it wouldn’t have enough statistical power to detect a moderately large effect.

This is a within-subject experiment: each participant got all 4 possible doses. The paper (https://www.gwern.net/docs/nootropics/2019-bershad.pdf) doesn't discuss power that I can see, but the power of a within-subject design will be a lot higher than the between-subject you're probably thinking of, where n=20 is generally way too little. So, might be decently powered after all.

So the article did not do a good job of explaining the study.

Also, why did they not go for a dose every 3-5 days like the anecdotes, but instead of went for every 7 days. And then say it might be different when done every few days. Were they trying to avoid testing on the weekends or something?

Washout. If you went more frequently, then the excuse would be that the LSD microdosing might still be having effects on the low-dose or placebo days.
The significant outcome is that microdosing is harmless.
If done only ~3 times, and only considering outcomes that manifest within a day or so. On possible harms beyond that the study is silent.
...appears harmless.

That said: I know firsthand that people who are borderline schizophrenic can have a very bad, long-lasting outcome from a regular dose of LSD. I doubt a microdose would do them any good. I hope that in studies like this, they screen the participants carefully.