UnkleRinkus
UnkleRinkus t1_j9ojv3n wrote
Reply to comment by Jewrachnid in Starbucks’ new drinks have a spoonful of olive oil in every cup by SelectiveSanity
But the link between high dietary cholesterol and high blood cholesterol has been found to be weak. See these papers.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14017430801983082
UnkleRinkus t1_j9lja79 wrote
Reply to comment by Matthew_C1314 in Starbucks’ new drinks have a spoonful of olive oil in every cup by SelectiveSanity
It's been pretty well documented that the original doctor behind all of us fearing fat and cholesterol faked his data in his studies. Then the USDA (or FDA, I can't remember) started pushing grain based foods into the food pyramid' to pacify agricultural interests.
UnkleRinkus t1_j9l6ny0 wrote
Reply to comment by creamonbretonbussy in A study found that "people with cannabis purchases after legalization reduced significantly and persistently their cash spending and electronic transfers, indicating a shift from the black to the legal cannabis market." by OregonTripleBeam
Cash only in Oregon and Washington.
UnkleRinkus t1_j9kqxuh wrote
Reply to A study found that "people with cannabis purchases after legalization reduced significantly and persistently their cash spending and electronic transfers, indicating a shift from the black to the legal cannabis market." by OregonTripleBeam
In US legal stores, you still have to use cash to purchase, as cannabis businesses are locked out of banking. Assuming consumption is unchanged, this is likely mostly due to decreasing prices. As legalization proceeds, the risk premium is coming out of cannabis prices, even for black market providers, who have to compete with the legal sources. Ounces that you might have paid $200 for ten years ago on the black market are now $60-100 in the stores.
UnkleRinkus t1_j2f34wd wrote
Reply to comment by Publius82 in Intensity of psychedelic experiences after taking psilocybin does not depend on body mass index, study suggests by nikan69
No argument at all. The Johns Hopkins studies on psilocybin, among others underway, are showing very promising results for treatment resistant depression patients, of whom I am one. About 70 percent of patients experience relief for several weeks after a 20 mg dose. Microdosing is not showing results better than placebo at this time
The war on drugs rhetoric impeded progress for a long time, but seems to be relaxing.
UnkleRinkus t1_j2eb874 wrote
Reply to Intensity of psychedelic experiences after taking psilocybin does not depend on body mass index, study suggests by nikan69
This is accepted understanding in the mushroom community. Science is confirming common experience.
UnkleRinkus t1_j1n4g2f wrote
Reply to comment by AldoLagana in Machine learning model reliably predicts risk of opioid use disorder for individual patients, that could aid in prevention by marketrent
Until the US passed the Harrison tax act of 1914, we did exactly that. Opiates were perfectly legal to sell in over the counter medications, and there were many morphine addicts in the US. However, they could satisfy their addiction cheaply and legally, and so it was simply tolerated reasonably. They held jobs, they lived their lives, they just had to have their patent medicine every day.
The single biggest law that reduced addiction in the US was the 1906 pure food and drugs act. This required labeling the contents, and people started avoiding the ones with morphine.
In 1970, Britain did an experiment, they resisted the pressure from the United States and made heroin legal to addicts. Marginalized people who had been living on the streets, went back to their families, started working, because they didn't need to steal $100 a day to maintain their addiction. Then the US pressured Britain to stop the experiment, which they did, and the positive effects disappeared.
You made the glib statement above, but there is strong rationale to do exactly that. If we provided legal opiates, of a regulated strength, in a regulated manner to addicts, my belief is that we would see a dramatic drop in crime, and a serious reduction in the life problems of addicts.
UnkleRinkus t1_j1n3uet wrote
Reply to comment by naenouk in Machine learning model reliably predicts risk of opioid use disorder for individual patients, that could aid in prevention by marketrent
I work adjacent to sales and support for an AI company. We exactly have a model to identify , ahem, less skilled customers. Except we call it " low maturity in the technology".
UnkleRinkus t1_j1n3903 wrote
Reply to comment by DogGetDownFromThere in Machine learning model reliably predicts risk of opioid use disorder for individual patients, that could aid in prevention by marketrent
You didn't mention the other side which is false negatives. Who gets sued if the model misses one cancer? Which it inevitably will.
UnkleRinkus t1_j1n2xsy wrote
Reply to comment by poo2thegeek in Machine learning model reliably predicts risk of opioid use disorder for individual patients, that could aid in prevention by marketrent
If you think Congress's attempts at regulating social media were disastrous, wait until they try to regulate applied statistics and model fitting. You can't usefully regulate something you don't understand.
UnkleRinkus t1_iw3js6b wrote
Yep
UnkleRinkus t1_ivy7nen wrote
Reply to best towns to live in Washington? by micimouse
Woodland, Ridgefield, Kalama are nice, close to Portland.
UnkleRinkus t1_ivtlgql wrote
Reply to How conservative is coastal southwest Washington compared to Eastern Washington? by PinkSwallowLove
It's pretty similar. You have small towns with historic economic bases of logging and fishing - extractive industries that have been hit hard by automation and regulation, resulting in job loss and young people moving out of the area. The people moving into the area are retirees, and the lower end of the economic strata. Hence the area is pretty right leaning.
UnkleRinkus t1_iv1ssbn wrote
Have an early dinner at Snoqualmie Lodge, and revel in the falls. The river is gonna be ripping tomorrow.
UnkleRinkus t1_jc2hwiy wrote
Reply to comment by mecha_flake in Twitter’s $42,000-per-Month API Prices Out Nearly Everyone | Tiers will start at $500,000 a year for access to 0.3 percent of the company’s tweets. Researchers say that’s too much for too little data by Hrmbee
They will rate limit the number of queries coming from a given IP address. Then someone will develop an agent that will support crowd sourcing this across thousands of users, and then either Twitter's servers will hopefully crumble under the load or their AWS bills will skyrocket, either of which will accelerate the fall.
Elon is about to discover the Streisand effect.