Electro Acupuncture [NEWEST]

: The practitioner begins with low voltage and frequency, gradually adjusting the settings to a level where the patient feels a gentle pulsing or "humming" sensation.

: The electrical pulses stimulate sensory nerves, triggering the release of natural painkillers like endorphins, serotonin, and norepinephrine . It also modulates brain connectivity in areas associated with pain perception and emotion. Primary Benefits vs. Traditional Acupuncture Electro Acupuncture

: It can provide much stronger stimulation than manual twirling, which is often necessary for difficult neurological cases like paralysis or severe neuralgia. : The practitioner begins with low voltage and

: Thin, sterile needles are inserted into traditional meridian points. Once placed, small electrodes are clipped to the needles and connected to an EA machine. Primary Benefits vs

Clinical trials and systematic reviews suggest EA is effective for various conditions:

As with birth rates, we use data for 4 categories of countries from 1990 to 2015 (100 observations total). We have two explanatory variables, AGE and Y, where AGE is defined as the percentage of the population aged over 65 and Y is per capita GDP.

After eyeballing the scattergrams, we test the following functional form:

d = (minY^a)/Y^a * (1/AGE^g)

Where minY is the constant equal to the smallest value of Y in the series.

Logarithmic transformation gives:

ln(d) = ln(minY^a) – a*ln(Y) – g*ln(AGE)

which we test on the data using OLS. Here are the results:

Adjusted R square: 75.191

Intercept coefficient: 7.37384
t-Stat: 20.4011

Y coefficient: -1.01444
t-Stat: -13.1059

AGE coefficient: 2.0097
t-Stat: 11.5208

The estimated intercept is a good, but not perfect, approximation of ln(minY^a)

Here are the fitted against actual values of the scattergram for death rate against per capita GDP:

While the results are not as good as with the birth rates calculations, it is nevertheless a good enough fit and the explanatory variables have a strong enough confidence factor to be usable in our estimations.

We begin by examining the scatter of data for 100 observations of per capita GDP and per capita emissions for 4 categories of countries, over 25 years (1990 – 2015).

The scatter suggests a cubic functional form, so we test:

GHG = a + b*Y + c*Y^2 + d*Y^3

where GHG are per capita emissions of GHG, and Y is per capita GDP.

The results from OLS regression are:

Adjusted R square: 0.980438073

coefficient a: 1090
t-stat a: 3.06

coefficient b: 0.709310153
t-Stat b: 8.241453

coefficient c: -0.0000047025
t-Stat c: -1.01233

coefficient d: -0.000000000105314
t-Stat d: -1.47005

While the t-scores on the squared and cubed terms are low, the number of observations are also limited.

Here is the plot of the fitted against actual values: