Well, if you’re interested, I recently ordered a package of 00 gel caps and 1lb of potassium citrate powder. If it works for me as it seemed to work for Kevin, I can then do one of my double-blind experiments with dual n-back or something.
The company’s website seems to indicate that it is actually potassium iodide (under nutritional facts). Are you aware of this? Do you know if it’s accurate?
The product I received matches the Wikipedia article; the labeling on the bag is ‘potassium citrate’, and the nutritional breakdown per 100 grams matches what the Wikipedia article claims (eg. the bag claims 36.2g of potassium per 100g of powder while WP says “Pure potassium citrate contains 38.28% potassium.”, which makes sense if the formula is C6H5K3O7 - as compared to KI). I haven’t noticed any of the side-effects which are listed for potassium iodide despite taking what would by now have been a serious dose of potassium iodide. Finally, that description is identical to their informational page for potassium iodide crystals. So my guess is that it’s some sort of copy and paste error, but definitely worth me emailing them to ask...
We recently hired a copy editor to update our website and shortly thereafter let her go. We have been catching misinformation. I am going to check with the owner of the company to clear up this discrepancy and I’ll get back to you as soon as I hear from him. Thank you so much for bringing this to my attention. I will get back to you on Monday. Please let me know if there is anything else I can help you with in the meantime. It would be my pleasure.
A sample size of one is more than enough for internal validity, assuming I take enough data points to detect an effect. (I typically do 20+ pairs; the stronger the effect, the less you need.)
What n=1 threatens is any kind of external validity, that is, whether one would observe the effect or lack of effect in someone other than me. I may find that potassium is fantastic for me, but that tells me very little about whether potassium would help you or anyone else on this page.
Well, if you’re interested, I recently ordered a package of 00 gel caps and 1lb of potassium citrate powder. If it works for me as it seemed to work for Kevin, I can then do one of my double-blind experiments with dual n-back or something.
The company’s website seems to indicate that it is actually potassium iodide (under nutritional facts). Are you aware of this? Do you know if it’s accurate?
The product I received matches the Wikipedia article; the labeling on the bag is ‘potassium citrate’, and the nutritional breakdown per 100 grams matches what the Wikipedia article claims (eg. the bag claims 36.2g of potassium per 100g of powder while WP says “Pure potassium citrate contains 38.28% potassium.”, which makes sense if the formula is C6H5K3O7 - as compared to KI). I haven’t noticed any of the side-effects which are listed for potassium iodide despite taking what would by now have been a serious dose of potassium iodide. Finally, that description is identical to their informational page for potassium iodide crystals. So my guess is that it’s some sort of copy and paste error, but definitely worth me emailing them to ask...
Oh, that’s good then. Thanks.
Their rep Jessica Arman replied:
Sounds interesting.
A sample size of one would be too small for scientific significance, but it still seems worth trying.
A sample size of one is more than enough for internal validity, assuming I take enough data points to detect an effect. (I typically do 20+ pairs; the stronger the effect, the less you need.)
What n=1 threatens is any kind of external validity, that is, whether one would observe the effect or lack of effect in someone other than me. I may find that potassium is fantastic for me, but that tells me very little about whether potassium would help you or anyone else on this page.
Agree.