Get Early Access on Patreon: www.patreon.com/user?u=82207370 Substack: sgcarney.substack.com/ Dr. Andrea Love's article in SLATE: slate.com/technology/2024/03/andrew-huberman-huberman-lab-health-advice-podcast-debunk.html
@@madra000 which is crazy because the way he talks a lot about unproven research with complete confidence makes me cringe. He makes it sound like they are proven science backed up by research when they're just theories that need to be tested. Comes off as just a grift honestly. I feel like people just care so much about the fact that he's a doctor, because they never really talk to doctors in their normal life. And andrew huberman just uses his degree to promote and oversell and make money (unlike my dad who just cares about treating people and doesn't lie about all the unproven theories, and can say that he doesn't know) to get rich off it and truth be damned.
Huberman should be sponsored by VPNs and Web Design companies, not "Health" products. This is pure and simple conflict of interest and basically removes any shred of credibility he might have. He is basically the Dr. Oz of Internet podcasting.
Might *HAVE* had.... That ship sailed ages ago, I could smell the grift from the start with that guy. Nobody gets successfull on YT like that without being owned by the beast
AG1 is a nutritional supplement, Huberman isn’t pushing crack cocaine. AG1 contains wide variety of vitamins, minerals, and antioxidants that are generally considered essential nutrients. Nutritional supplementation is a personal choice and depending on your lifestyle choices filling you nutritional gaps with supplements maybe wise. The worst thing about AG1 (compared to any other supplement) is the price but whenever you pay someone to do something you could conceivably do yourself (research and gather a bunch of nutrients, combine and package them) you’re going to pay a premium. Yes it’s preferable to get every single essential nutrient from our diet; do most folks…? 😑
As someone who suffers from tinnitus, i had been quite curious about Haberman's take on the research. When it came up in an episode, i was quite surprised that it only focussed on which supplements to take, rather than e.g. retraining of the auditory system (after all, he's a neuroscientist). I've followed a bit of the research on tinnitus over the years, so i was surprised, how shallow the discussion was. While enjoying the first episodes, it i stopped following when it became more about lifestyle than science.
That's probably a good proxy for many of the episodes. Americans love their magic pill, in which there's much more money than in laborious retraining...
as it tuns out, optic nerves and the auditory system are kind of different sructures LOOOL (btw, tinnitus is not from the ears, but created by the brain, and pointing to an issue with energy supply / production for/in the respetive neuronal assemblies. such I would go keto, and supplementing B1, B3, rALA, O3, quercetin, and citrulline)
Tinnitus is, well, complicated. It is created in the brain, but it can be caused by external influences, like acoustic trauma damaging the inner ear (e.g. the form that many musicians suffer from). There are some studies regarding retraining of the auditory system, very interesting from a neuroscience point of view (neuroplasticity). It's something I would have liked to learn more of (hearing a research overview from a reputable neuroscientist), as opposed to diet/supplement recommendations.
@@timblechmann2429 also look at your circadian patterns and the build up/ prevent destruction of neuromelanine. Light is key there. The right light at the right time. There is influence of hormones too on tyrosinase activity and alpha MSH production so contraceptives can be detrimental too. Ginko biloba is one of the supplements that could help because inhibits peroxide production by mitochondria and this Melanine destruction. As a Biochemist I can tell you the science is there , it is a matter of digging deeper and connecting the dots
I tried with Huberman after Saagar Enjeti claimed Huberman had really helped him. But as soon as I heard him shilling Athletic Greens, I was out. Doesn’t mean he’s all B.S. But it does mean he cares more about money than science IMO.
Exactly. He pedals snake oil therefore it puts all he says in doubt. It's too bad. I started listening to him during COVID and it was very good. He still has some good ones depending on guest but he always rehashes the same thing, very similar to Rogan. In the end I feel I'm listening to a smarter version of Rogan (no offense to Joe 😅) and that doesn't sit right. it's all glorified bro science except here those bros are millionaires and pedal snake oil for their own benefit only, with no regulations.
Thank you both for having a conversation where the other person listens fully and doesn't talk over or interrupt the other person. It is so much easier to discern information from this sort of conversation.
AG1 is the adult version of Flintstone vitamins riding off a tiktok chlorophyll drink trend. Its the same thing with Factor meals trying to pretend its not another microwave dinner company. I stopped listening to Huberman because I was like "If you did all the the protocols suggested, your pee would look like radiator fluid and there would be no time for real life". I felt the same way about Rhonda Patrick.
Wouldn’t the benefit of factor meals be that they are healthier alternatives to other cheap food options?
5 місяців тому+86
Sorry, as an almost scientist (I only have a MS, not a PhD), I'm fully interested in debunking Huberman's (pseudo?) science with science. But, I got a feeling that mixing that with "the article" or with his "charisma" is not very scientific but a fallacy. Additionally, this sounds like "everything Huberman has said is not scientific/true/tested" and that's absolutist, hence not very scientific, instead of trying to educate the viewer.
My point is about mixing the topics. You can note how the doctor tries to keep the discussion about the scientific method on what Huberman presents (I liked that about the doctor). It was the podcaster the one trying to lead the conversation about that around the middle of the video ("he ghosted me") into what is more subjective that refuting a bad paper.
@@sgcarney they're two different things, and you've asked an obvious bullshit deflection question, lmao. you've done more to harm your own credibility than Huberman's with this catty nonsense video.
I've had severe vitamin D deficiency with osteomalacia (adult rickets), which caused severe bone pain. I was initially diagnosed by my rheumatologist and was referred to an immunologist for extensive testing and then treatment. I discovered from this that it's a really complicated problem which requires specialist doctors to treat. Severe vitamin D deficiency isn't a medical issue you want to be treating yourself or via the advice from an influencer!
The worst part of Huberman’s advice on vitamin D to just get sunlight is that he never talked about that this relies on UV-B rays and that a lot of times you’re only getting UV-A rays. So, a person could actually get a sunburn and not get any UVB rays and think that they’re synthesizing vitamin D. He’s so dumb. That was just one episode that really annoyed me and completely shocked me how irresponsible he was.
Right on! I'm glad your docs sussed it out & helped you! My mom was born in 1930 and had Ricketts as a child from malnourishment that left her with a big dent in her lower leg. Her dirt poor parents took her to hospital, and the docs said her leg needed amputation, but the parents said they couldn't afford it or care for an amputee with 7 other kids, so they got some meds and went back to the farm. She recovered fully but had myriad health problems all her life.
Ya'll should actually listen to what he says about getting sunlight in the eyes. It has nothing to do with vitamin D, Huberman mentions several times that sunlight activates the photoreceptors in the eyes to reset the circadian rhythm and help with your sleep cycle, nothing about Vitamin D.
@@tnijoo5109 Did anyone actually listen to Huberman? He doesn't mention vitamin D as the reason for getting sunlight in the eyes, he clearly states that once the photoreceptors are activated it resets the circadian rhythm and promotes optimal wakefulness/sleep schedule.
So many health and psychological benefits. Just make sure to avoid the knock-off Pakistan fake-salt that will give you cancer and only buy from websites that say they get their salt from the Nepal and Bhutan mines in the Himalayas.
I started 8 months ago to try to open peoples eyes about his misconduct and betrayal scheme. You can only be a "fan" (which is derived from "fanatic") if you put belief above critical thinking. So many of his propositions have been debunked. Remember his cold plunge story? The brown fat story? all completely made up. Basically, as there are lots of examples as the one given here a min @13.00, he is a liar. Constructing stories from deliberately tweaking facts. You are vulnerable to godfather apperances, i think
I completely reject the notion of "these protocols don't hurt so what's the big deal?" because what's happening is the building of trust within the audience over time, which is compounded when the audience gets as big as his (because people just assume because he's popular he must be trustworthy). Therefore there is a ongoing fostering of mistrust in medicine coupled with giving a platform to absolute charlatans. There's a lot to be said for charisma. Ultimately people enjoy the experience of his show and they might even make some good health choices but the cost of spreading misinformation is a price not worth paying, considering most best practices in regards to health are very simple and readily available.
One SHOULD distrust MEDICINE the INDUSTRY. Their efforts are to monopolize our access to health and healing and to interpose themselves between our innate ability to heal with their PATENTED and CORPORATE CONTROLLED symptom alleviation methods.
I wish people in general had a better understanding of science vs pseudoscience and news vs commentary. It would certainly benefit society as a whole. Thanks as always for covering these important topics.
@@dr.andrealove Thank you for your service. I am a retired high school language & literacy educator, and I saw the shift in US education from critical literacy, problem-solving, and project-based education to standardized testing, conformity of thought, and threat of punishment in my career from 1994-2019. Science education gets short shrift, because curiosity and exploration do not produce standardized results. We now have a whole generation of over-tested and under-taught folks who need to learn these skills as adults. Add in the anti-science movement from recent years, and in counties like mine, where religious folks become science teachers to NOT teach evolution....The struggle is REAL. Be well.
What you're wishing people had here is called critical thinking skills. This skill is where you ask critical questions, rather than just swallowing information wholesale. This skill is something anyone can develop, and, honestly, once the skill is well developed, it can be used in many, many different situations, this one included. And yes, it would benefit our society immensely. However, it would NOT benefit people with actual power in the world. There is a reason why critical thinking skills, the ability to discern fact from fiction, these things are not taught in schools, even though it's so sorely needed. This is because the education system in the US is based off of a model called the Prussian education model. It is specifically designed to churn out obedient workers, it's designed to squash creativity and imagination, and critical thinking. Masses of people are much easier to control being ignorant and uneducated, with no ability to discern what is true. This is a real thing. Run a search on the Prussian education model. You can read about everything I just wrote here
@48:48 - "“Huberman talks a lot about vitamin D that's his whole thing for why you have to go put your eyeballs in the sun and the whole vitamin D industry is wild” Did they even listen to his podcasts? Huberman mentions several times that sunlight activates the photoreceptors in the eyes to reset the circadian rhythm, nothing about Vitamin D.
@48:48 She says Huberman claimed getting sunlight in the eyes is for vitamin D but he clearly states it resets the circadian rhythm to optimize wakefulness and sleep. Doesn't take a genius to see what's going on here, it's a hit piece.
@@davidoh8745 I had never heard of this dude before today, but suddenly i was hit with all his side piece juggling capacity. I guess the dude is a hit at hitting multiple side pieces at the same time. Seems to me he should have a podcast advising incels.
Indigenous elders and many cultures have spoken about sun gazing for a very long time. Modern day Westerners aren't the discoverers of everything. People all over the world have been living healthfully for generations. What these American biohackers are trying to do is figure out a way to live in ways disharmonious with those old ways but still feel good, It can't be done. There's also a huge monetary drive to create a career based on this stuff, it's a sort of pyramid scheme, like Rich Dad Poor Dad, selling information that few people can ever prove or disprove. By the time people figure it out, the snake oil salesman has made their fortune.
@@LenkaSaratoga I experimented with the morning and evening sunlight because I was getting terrible sleep for years and had tried lots of things from melatonin and other supplements to blue light glasses and even changing my diet. The only thing that made a significant improvement was morning and evening sunlight. My deep light tripled and my REM sleep when up too! 😌 So Huberman was right about that. At least in my experience. Maybe he has other things right also. 🤷🏽♂️ … I’ve also tried AG1 greens and I didn’t have any adverse effects and I’m super sensitive to supplements. It reduced my stress and gave me a good balanced feeling. But stopped taking it cause it’s just too darn expensive
I thoroughly enjoyed this, though at minute 34 you start speculating quite a bit about how Huberman thinks and his psychology when it comes to relationships. This is “mind-reading,” and in most cases when we speculate about the inner workings of another, we’re wrong. Best to stick with your observations and not speculate about his inner life.
@MichaelHplus I actually found it interesting and insightful. I was baffled by the behavior which seems to go past "adhd screwups", and this contextualizes it. Yes, it's a story, but one that's based on the objective, observable facts. I have delved a lot into the psychology of other gurus (some of them have written a lot about their own inner thoughts so there is no need to speculate) and I find that it is very clarifying and helpful and you will see the same patterns elsewhere.
I have listened to a fair amount of Huberman content, but haven't much lately because it's become redundant in my opinion. I don't recall ever feeling any pressure to buy anything or subscribe to any of his health protocols. I don't recall him ever making any absolute statements regarding health or science either. In my memory, he always seemed to present his and other's content as objectively as possible. He does talk about his own experiences with protocols and supplementation, including the ones he promotes, but I wouldn't ever confuse his personal experiences with the actual scientific method. Anyone who follows anyone's advice with blind faith is not a victim. Let's keep most the blame here where it belongs...on naive consumers.
I heard him even correct some things he said. If he has something wrong and he is criticized he corrects it in the next episode. I think the mistakes that are mentioned happening to everyone.
I think the view count on his videos proves people think he's thorough. The problem is, if you read the studies he cites you realise he isn't at all.
@@therabbithat Well that was the same problem with Covid. A lot of politicians were wrong worldwide. And because a lot of politicians have no clue about science they did not even realize it, that some of the studies did not say what they were claiming. I dont understand why he is criticized so much but others are not who are worse. Ok he is a professor but there professor who are far worse. For example the ones that promote Nazis ideology like critical race theory and they do not even know that they are promoting that, becasue they lack intelligence that qualifies them to speak on scientific topics.
I mean, Dr. Andrea Love misrepresented Huberman's claims in obvious ways. @48:48 she says Huberman claimed getting sunlight in the eyes is for vitamin D but he clearly states it resets the circadian rhythm to optimize wakefulness and sleep. Also to criticize anyone for advising to lower your sugar/alcohol intake is a clear sign you should take her word with a grain of salt.
Most Phds start to really learn the board picture and basics of their field when they start to teach introduction courses to undergraduates. Unfortunately, the general public does not realize how narrow the knowledge of PhDs is. This tunnel vision also often leads to ill judgement in many things as well, sometimes even in their own little area. Mentioning his own professorship every time and selling suppliments is unethical, period. Giving platform to dubious figures, regardless of their credentials and academic employments, is harming the public. Thanking audience for interest in science is self-gradiolizing since you are not the representative/spokesperson of science. No, 2-3 hours rambling with big words doesn't mean depth but, unfortunately, many academics are trained that way or think they should talk and write that way to sound profound and intelligent. Plus, protocols are not solutions for individual situations
His science is linked to affiliate payments. That is specifically the FIRST core problem with his science. Also, he takes paper thin knowledge briefed to him by others who have flimsy medical overlap with a topic, and then presents it with absolute confidence. How do I know this? I know it because I am a Dr and my area of mastery fell under his discussion one day where he (as he routinely does) was pushing the research of a colleague on a topic his colleague was clearly of limited expertise. He presented factually incorrect remarks with full confidence as though they were his experienced view, NOT "stuff way off his reservation". The more I listen to his podcast, the more holes I find in much of his content. Like too many before he may have begun as a means of democratising knowledge but he has clearly become his own brand and business and the goal is money.
@@nickmagrick7702 listen to the interview with the cannabis expert. Everything Huberman said about cannabis turned out to be wrong in some respect, often fundamentally wrong. And keeping his exchange with the cannabis expert in mind, recall that the most respected ketamine expert had some nasty views on Huberman's takes on ketamine. So we've gotten better information on cannabis from a researcher who had to waste his time on an airplane flight and stay in another city - time out if his personal and research commitments correcting Huberman - (Huberman made money on the bad information and the correction, he has no incentive to put out good information) but the other researcher who didn't want to put more money in Huberman's pocket and waste their time when Huberman could have done better research himself - didn't want to be Huberman's unpaid proofreader and researcher, we've yet to be corrected on Ketamine.
I enjoyed this. I would push back on the assertion that regulated pharmaceutical companies are necessarily always safe-Purdue Pharma comes to mind…seems like the core of the problem is more about greed and power. Just saying.
Johnson and Johnson also knew that they were causing cancer with the talcum powder they were selling, but never provided a disclaimer and kept it from the public…until they got sued.
The point is that because of oversight and accountability we can identify when big pharma fits wrong and adjust the regulations, but big supplement is a giant black box, and we rarely know it's gone wrong except when they run afoul of government agencies outside of public health, such as DEA or SEC. And that should be terrifying, but the public is getting seduced by "no news is good news."
And this very real corruption is what gives con artists a niche to make a lot of money pointing at how bad the fraud is in some places. So cleaning up the corruption just uplifts us all and leaves less room for more corruption. But if we do nothing this can always get worse.
I will happily sit in the middle in this one. In one hand, I agree that Huberman sometimes brings up scientific "facts" that are far from solid and should marinade a little bit more in the scientific community before being so widely broadcasted. Also, he goes a long way from his area of expertise and arrives at places where he no longer punches with the same intensity and precision, occasionally generating mistakes. On the other hand, I find his content very useful and, considering the academic level of the average UA-camr, much more robust than 90% of the available options in the platform. Also, he always remind us to form our own opinion, do our own research and figure out for ourselves what work for us. He also has publicly corrected himself several times, and is very transparent when showing any type of evidence (I.e. article of origin, scientific magazine that published it, year, name of researchers, whether it's peer reviewed, etc). So in conclusion, I do not think his content is bulletproof. But I do think is useful, way above average and very transparent, and I am happy with that. After all, lets remind ourselves: it's FREE.
@@jrodartec I think that saying his content is more robust than 90% of UA-cam is not a great reason to believe him. Maybe getting your health advice from UA-cam and not from experts in the field of health is not a good idea?
100%. This conversation honestly falls into the same cringe-worthy category as most other social media content. I absolutely respect discernment and disagreement on any subject. It's not scientific without it. But these experts were doing the exact same thing as those promoting pseudoscience. The cringe is that they don't recognize it in their own rhetoric. The fact is, and this isn't a figure I'm just making up: but fact is that 75% of all published, peer-reviewed, clinical research results in findings that are favorable to the sponsorship; 20% results in neither favorable nor unfavorable and only 5% ever results in findings unfavorable to the sponsorship funding the research. Now, what should be gleaned from that statistic? Does that mean that all scientific research is a scam? No, absolutely not. Does that mean we should be more skeptical and less trusting to what we're told is scientific fact? Yeah, probably so. Definitely, in my personal opinion. Fact of the matter is, we have no idea how the world actually works. None whatsoever and anyone that believes they do, is only fooling themselves.
What about his content is useful to you, exactly? His advice is not practical at all, making it worthless. All he does is ramble on in thick technical jargon. Not sure how that benefits anyone. I know I couldn't get anything practically useful out of any of his content. It all SOUNDS real cool. But, nothing practical about his "advice"
@choosetolivefree Huberman helped me improve my sleep quality, my caffeine regime, my relationship to alcohol, and my exercise routine. I see doctors regularly now I beat (by far) all benchmarks in my yearly check-up. So yeah, he helped me quite a bit. Sorry if he didn't have the same effect on you.
No scientist or clinician has a monopoly on being correct 100% of the time. All experts will bring their own biases to the table. Their outlook, experience and interpretations will influence their analysis and the message they communicate. One fact is true, Huberman has tapped into a global interest in seeking knowledge, specifically scientific knowledge, this absolutely must be welcomed. He's also a worldclass communicator. He may not get everything he talks about correct as far as some people are concerned but he's at least willing to have the conversation. He features experts to help him introduce subjects to an audience of millions. For this he should be applauded and I say this as someone who does a similar job to Huberman, albeit nowhere near as well. As far as his private life is concerned, it's utterly irrelevant.
An interesting discussion. I followed the autophagy principal by fasting for quite long periods of time for (18 hours a day for nearly two years) which cured my afib. I also noticed a growth hormone release, which even though I was fasting kept my muscle size and increased it. The problem I have found is fringe science is rarely looked at in depth and the usual problem is there is no money for companies to make. I find nearly all videos on UA-cam are either sponsored, selling something, or has a patreon link. You could argue the point that why any health care professional earning a good wage already needs to do this?
She brings up fluoride but Huberman agrees with her, he did an episode on fluoride and it agrees with what she says… so far the examples of him misinforming are weak
@@lyinbobbycottonseed I actually did read the article, and I hold to it that Huberman and her both agree Fluoride is important for your dental health. But lets not pretend fluoride in high dosage is not toxic, there is a reason your dentist recommends to spit it out after brushing. So because Huberman said its toxic in high dosage thats suddenly not science? Come on now.... I did a full response to a comment by Scott carney himself while there are sure to be valid criticisms about Huberman if you try to be the champion of science at least make sure you are accurate in your criticism. I also think the double standard is hillarious where we posit that none of the Huberman listeners do any follow up on anything he says but we expect people here to read the article before responding to the substance of the video
She did a four-piece on his terrible flu and cold prevention episode. That one was full of misinformation and generally very poorly researched.
Місяць тому+1
Tap water fluoridation is mostly an American thing (just like non-therapeutic male circumcisions, tonsillectomies, prophylactic appendectomies, elective C-sections, etc.). There isn’t a worldwide scientific consensus about its real health benefits and absence of detrimental effects. In addition, unlike other medical treatments, it implies that there’s no patient’s consent or dose control.
It was a pleasure listening to Dr Andrea Love. Thank goodness there are scientists out there who are measured in how they talk about science publicly. She was so clear and precise in how she refuted the claims made by AH and others. We need more people like her in the public arena.
When the powers that be across all platforms ( cnn, abc, nbc, cbs, Fox News) use propaganda and try and character assassinate people like RFK instead of debating Best seller. RFK has spent 40 years in science and law. The book that RFK wrote " The real Anthony Fauci" was a best seller. Not one lawsuit because of his accuracy. His knowledge is vast. You should listen to a few long format interviews with him.
RFK is a rare genuine gem. It's always difficult to speak truth to people that don't want to hear it. Takes courage to do what RFK does. Clearly his truth telling doesn't benefit him in any way
A protocol can be speculative as long as it is not actively harmful. The cost - benefit analysis with Huberman is pretty clear. Nonetheless, calling on him to be more clear about the confidence in the underlying science is good.
Huberman's intended audience (in terms of rhetorical analysis) for his podcast was highly educated university students and grad students. Unsurprising since this reflected his professional work environment. Any consumer of Huberman's (early?) podcast should already have a working knowledge of the scientific hierarchy of evidence, the genre of literature review, and maybe even some basics of study design. A huge bonus if you know the difference between Type I error (Huberman's weakness) and Type II error. This protected me from every (?) problem Andrea Love describes. I think the problem was a combination of the listening audience not understanding how critical these frameworks are for consuming Huberman's content, and Huberman's improper assessment that he really was speaking to the "every man."
Dr. Love is smart. Her message should be understood by everyone. My wife is also in immunology and says the same things about science. She also always rolls her eyes when I mention something I heard on the Huberman Lab podcast, which I do listen to sometimes, but definitely take everything with a grain of salt. I'm weary of any science influencer, because while they do know their niche, everything outside of their niche they only know as much as I do.
This woman seems to have chosen Hubermann as her nemesis. She is biased by her own unsympathy towards Andrew on such a level that her criticism of him loses credibility. I'm not a wacko anti-vaxxer but it really pissed me off when she suggested that he doesn't care about general public health because he dares to suggest that vaccination is unnecessary for a simple cold or flu. Me or my whole family including my kids never got a single flu vaccination and we are just fine. In my country, we give the obligatory vaccinations for the kids and that's it but imo most normal people wouldn't opt for a flu vaccine. Honestly, I also find it an utter waste of time running to a doctor even for testing with simple cold symptoms. It's pointless when your body heals itself anyway.
It's also interesting how she selectively fearmongers about the risk of flu yet completely downplays the risk of experiencing disabling, long-term symptoms from Lyme disease.
I couldn’t agree more. These two come across to me as two very angry “mean girls” jealous of the popular and prettier girl in the class. I would not give either any credibility. Scott is piggybacking on those who have actually achieved some degree of success and the woman seems completely indoctrinated and needing some help in presenting her beliefs more professionally. I no longer follow Huberman due to the interview with Zuckerberg and the association with AG1. I am not a fan but I find his POVs to be much more healthy than those of these two. Also, I find it amusing how they both seem very puffed up and important by the fact the girls who were mentioned in the NY Magazine article “reached out” to them. Scott actually said “I know their REAL NAMES!” Well whoopity do! How blessed and brilliant that made him feel. Look at the excitement in his body language. I am sorry but this looks like a thinly veiled attempt to pull someone down.
This was so good!!! Please do another segment with her. I really want to know more about her opinions on Huberman, especially on his lab and what’s going on there.
So glad I tuned in. I'm blown away by your deep dives into all these issues with other so-called experts, I was even running around telling people, "Have you heard of Huberman? You have to listen to him." he comes across as very genuine; I certainly bit, WoW!!! Thank you!
She is wrong about not seeing a correlation between diet and hormones. Period! I can agree about the pseudoscience being pushed within the online health and wellness community, but to say what you eat does not affect your health at a micro level is just plain biased and wrong.
@@nickys6656 um she didn’t say that :). If you would like to assert that diet can substantially affect a delta in hormone measure site the study sweetie
@@victoriaboster1177 There you go. When I want to start an objective and unemotional debate with someone, I call them "sweetie" right at the end of my first sentence. Works like a charm.
Two things: 1- Huberman has many guests, that are reputable and serious people. 2- how good are the sponsored products is not the same as the validity of the tools and the information he presents
Two things: 1- many of his guests also talk about things outside their area of study and misconstrue things 2- the fact that he will hawk non-scientific products says a lot about either his integrity or his ability to scrutinize the science behind those products. Either way it’s bad. End of story.
@@lyinbobbycottonseedI don’t find the product advertisements to be memorable at all, much less pushy, so it’s a moot point. Science is not about being an “expert” in only one area. Generalists are necessary for understanding anything at all. You’re probably not smart enough to read a scientific paper.
@@bryanutility9609 1. You lack of ability to memorize his product endorsements has no bearing on their integrity. You don’t seem capable of being objective, so it being a “moot point” to you is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things and simply indicates your lack of critical thinking skills. 2. Actually, that’s exactly what science is about. That’s why scientists, including Huberman, pick one area of study to become an expert in and spend many years focusing on that one area. No Ph.D goes to school to study ophthalmology, and exercise science, and sleep. The subjects are simply too complex and there’s too much to learn. Even scientists who study one subject for 30 years understand their own weak areas on that very subject. 3. That’s an ad hominem attack, a logical fallacy, and it shows your inability to control your emotions and exercise maturity. I suggest you research Dunning-Kruger effect, spend some time learning how to self-analyze, gain self-awareness, and then come back to the table to try having discussions with other adults. Case closed.
Before I started reading the studies he cites and realised he misrepresents them, I read a book he recommend by someone he interviewed and it was pure pseudoscience. It was also harmful, for example, it claimed fibromyalgia was caused by engaging in too many enjoyable activities. There is zero evidence of that, zero, and the author didn't claim there was any evidence even though she claimed it was true. I was taken aback. This guy works at Stanford! He doesn't tell you when the guests have fringe views that go against all the evidence and aren't widely held
This lady is clearly bitter and has something personal against Huberman. Not sure she is even correct. Hard to determine but I don’t recall Huberman ever claiming definitive things about taking x.
Exposing yourself to light in the morning and shunting in the night is more common sense than "protocol". Cold showers can temporarily activate your sympathetic nerve system and make you feel awakened (it has been known for centuries). Eating good food and doing exercise is literally what all health experts recommend. There is really nothing special about "Huberman protocol". You don't need AG1 or tinted glasses. That's why he is criticized.
I don’t know about autophagy, but I have been practicing intermittent fasting (as advocated by Dr. William Li, for example) for approximately a year now, and the results have been quite satisfying. I’ve lost around 28 lbs., and my blood pressure and heart rate have decreased significantly. Moreover, my migraines have decreased in frequency. My RN wife also follows this diet and has had similar results. We emphasize lower carb intake but aren’t afraid of fruit/fructose (most days, I consume over a cup of blueberries and a banana in a smoothie). The bottom line is that intermittent fasting is hands down the most effective and easiest method for losing and controlling weight that I’ve ever tried (I’m 63 and have tried a number of different approaches). Yet you indicated (or at least implied) that it isn’t that great. What gives?
Lol. This guest just mischaracterized something Huberman said and got it COMPLETELY wrong. I was already pretty turned off by this interview (see my long comment downthread) but this is just unethical. Huberman tells people to get sunlight in order to reset the circadian rhythm, which is good advice, as humans set our circadian rhythm in large part through our exposure to sunlight. So, if you need support for your circadian rhythm, as people with sleep problems do, it helps to get natural sunlight (or a blue light device--but the sun is cheaper). That has NOTHING to do with vitamin D, as this guest claims. This is pure incompetence and bad faith.
I agree they are oversimplifying some of huberman's things in the same way they are criticizing him of oversimplifying things. I believe hubermann really does care about making people's lives better and using real science and maybe he gets a few things wrong here and there, like they did. On one of his recent shows they talked about how fructose is great and shouldn't be vilified. I also believe he does a lot of preparation for each show. So what we have here is a bunch of people doing their best. It would be super cool if people would leave their biases at home, but we don't live in that world.
With that said, I haven't heard any of huberman's discussion about vaccines, and if they correctly portrayed what he really believes about them, then he deserves every critique. RFK Jr is a nut
@@claudiapasavel7469 very much so. they both seem to have decent credentials in their respective fields, but the childish attitude and apparent bad faith really hurt their credibility.
About Andrew Huberman podcasts, the first video intrigued me, the second video left me confused, and the third video I watched felt uncanny. This was years ago and now I know why. Thank you for the enlightenment.
A few lies I noticed. She says Huberman advises to get sunlight in the eyes for vitamin D although Huberman never even mentions vitamin D. Huberman explains that sunlight activates the photoreceptors in the eyes that triggers the circadian rhythm, to optimize wakefulness and sleep. Also she fails to recognize his nuanced point about deliberately activating short term stress (cortisol) in a way which is beneficial to the body/mind. Also she criticizes Huberman's guidance on lowering sugar/alcohol intake, which is nutrition 101. Doesn't take a scientist to see she's biased.
@@Zeylin17 Sure its a very important vitamin to be aware of if you want to live healthy but the context they discuss vitamin D in, the morning eye sun exposure, is not for vitamin D so they are misrepresenting what AH said while claiming to be on the side of truth, that makes for an untrustworthy argument
@@davidoh8745 She doesn't criticize the claim that you should lower alcohol and sugar intake. But his particular methods lmao. His guidance, not the actual goal.
Pharma companies have done enough to discredit themselves and that’s the reason supplement companies are thriving, as well as science guys such as Huberman.
13:52 Dr. Lustig's "schtick" about fructose and ultra processed foods has been EXTENSIVELY proven. These people are criticizing Huberman and basing it on exactly the kind of thing they criticize.
I think this doctor is just as siloed as Huberman. Everything she hates about him is mirrored in her own approach. Western medicine is her religion and she can't see the problems and holes that the USA's incentivised-science, obscene lobbying and immoral advertising have created. Her appeal to the authority of that system keeps her safe because it's currently the respected norm, but it's hard for me to look past the obvious flaws. And so I must take my health into my own hands. Honestly, her narrow-minded zealousness seems just as dangerous as anything I've heard on Huberman.
@@WilliamRoscoe - it's still based on science, just a more honest application of the method. I like Vinay Prasad for his ability to interpret studies and find flaws, and Suneel Dhand for general common sense health advice. Mike Israetel for science based exercise protocols.
@@ronp4529 So when it comes to atherosclerosis and vaccinations you prefer to believe doctors rather than scientists, and particularly those doctors who are anti-science. I prefer Jeff Nippard to Mike Israetel but that's just a matter of personal taste.
@@WilliamRoscoe - are you familiar with Vinay Prasad? He is a doc, but certainly a scientist as well. His interpretations of the data and the policy implications are spot on. He is not antivax. He would however argue that boosting young healthy males is detrimental, esp the moderna jab, and that is based on data. Whereas the CDC made recommendations before any studies were done, and that caused net harm, not only to many young males but also to the public perception of vaccines. Many people are at such a point with pharma that their abysmal track record of profiteering while harming people is reason enough to be skeptical. We're at a time when there is so much information available and certain experts have carved out niches in fields and they're at the cutting edge and sharing what they are finding and debating it with colleagues. I just think this particular doctor is lazy, and hiding behind the "authority" which has proved itself incompetent. Many, maybe most, doctors are this way because the system is set up to encourage these blanket recommendations as a heuristic, and that makes these so called authorities a shield for lazy docs to hide behind so they can save time and avoid thinking critically about the needs of each individual patient. I like Peter Attia on atherosclerosis btw. And I also enjoy Jeff Nippard's content. But I'll even allow myself to enjoy some entertainment from Ryan Hummiston because laughing is good and practical knowledge is also worth considering.
@@WilliamRoscoe I wrote a long response that seems to have disappeared. Perhaps UA-cam comments aren't the best place for a fair debate. I will say this, Vinay Prasad and Suneel Dhand are medical doctors but they are certainly not anti-science. VP is the best I've seen with regard to reading and interpreting studies. If there are flaws, he will find them; if the conclusions are sound, he will communicate that. SD gives common sense advice with regard to diet and exercise and critiques the myriad flaws he sees from working within the system. I hope you would spend a couple hours watching some Vinay Prasad videos or reading his substack before calling him anti science. If you provide some direction to professionals that you trust I will look at them. My main point is that too many doctors use blanket guidelines from failed agencies as heuristics rather than digging into research themselves and giving nuanced medical advice to individuals. If those agencies functioned properly, then this would be ok. Unfortunately they demonstrated incompetence multiple times in the response and any doctors hiding behind their recommendations are lazy and are using that appeal to authority as a shield. Pharma and the regulators have been compromised and it's more important than ever to be medically literate and advocate for oneself. With regard to atherosclerosis, I look to Peter Attia for guidance. Is he also anti-science? Also a fan of Jeff Nippard's 👍
Firstly, it’s important to remain mindful that it’s important to be circumspect about information they encounter. Everyone should be accountable and kept honest. But this interview got rants. Emotionally so. Ms. Love misrepresents Lustig’s claims by saying that he’s got people afraid of fruit; he repeatedly and clearly states that there is NO concern about eating fruit because of fiber. I’m sure that she didn’t intend to lie or misrepresent. I wonder if that same phenomenon might also apply to Huberman and guests…? 🤔 Also, the vast majority of what we today consider solid science were, once upon a time, “pseudoscience”. I was able to put my prediabetes into remission, fix my sleep, and more. Because I was empowered by people like Huberman (including himself). Anyway. You guys both have passion and are human. I get it. I am too, and have done similar things in my day (and likely will again). I, for one, am heartened that voices like Huberman are shifting people into a more proactive place. We DO have agency. We are NOT just passive victims to every negative health outcome (as started to be acknowledged around the 23 min mark). Net positive, IMO. With due caution also merited. Also: love the 2nd Ed AD&D Monstrous Compendium in the background!
41:20 - scott seriously characterized the shots as having “had oversight”: in their original iteration prevention of transmission wasn’t even tested (a pharma exec, not going to type the company name but you know which one i mean, testified to this in EU Parliament with the laughable excuse of “we were moving at the speed of science”)
I kinda stopped watching Huberman when he started doing life hacks. Seemed gimmicky. He really did help me understand the way the dopamine works and I do credit him for that. The constant need to get more views often ruins the credibility of so many influencers I use to have so much respect for in the beginning of their career.
@@kschulte9847 "Wake up early, open the curtain, and make your bed" is more of Mom's part to teach. There is really no magic about keeping your circadian rhythm by following natural light exposure. It's common sense. Most doctors' don't mention it because it's not as effective as other interventions like meds. If you need a major lifestyle change, like, due to diabetes, then adjusting circadian rhythm will be a part of education. Ask an endocrinologist.
@@korsakoff76 I disagree with you that it is commen sense. That is not the case for many people. Mark my words, medicine is in for a big change over the next decade or our country will collapse. Look at the deficit and look at the line items. I believe strongly that many of our "experts" are flat out wrong and working in an outdated paradigm, that was based on ignorance and or corruption. There are countless examples at this point. Do you need some? Meds for type 2 diabetes are from optimal for many people and at a societal level it is catasrophic. Do you understand why? Please think about it and respond. This country has lost the ability to critically think. Feel free to respond to specific statements I have made in this comment, but be specific...do not just come from a feeling. Map that feeling to rationality. Please see if you can do that.
@@korsakoff76 Your comment is extremely short sighted and you have opened up a host of negative consequences from short sighted thinking. 1). Many doctors for quite some time dont message this because of the conflict of interest between big pharma/insurance companies. and medical training. Are you not aware of this? If you think you this is an exaggeration, you are sorely mistaken 2). Common sense? I radically disagree with you on this. You are absolutely missing the game theoretic consequences of thinking like this. Some people are aware...but a significant amount of people are not. 3) As far as type 2 diabetes??? this one is controversial...do you understand why? Many people with type 2 diabetes can be cured and or treated with an optimal diet. That is where a healthy society should mostly be. Metformin should be the last line. When this is not the case disastrous consequence at a societal level await us. Do you understand why? I have the answer...but I would really appreciate it if you can respond to why it is so important at a societal level, Metoformin is not the predominant way to treat blood sugar issue. I am concerned for America, if most think like you. Can you explain why I am concerned with specific evidence and not just a feeling? If you do answer, level up your logica...there are outliar solutions, but when you please consider responding with the frequency at which a society should impement its response to maladies??? Do you understand that last statement? If not I will clarify. Try to interact with it and level up your critical thinking skills. Feel free to build out scenarios for me so I can level up my critical thinking. But be specific and remember what ever solution and or solutions you provide there will be secondary and tertiary consequences. Do you understand that? Can you give examples?
@@korsakoff76 your response is concerning for multiple reasons. 1). How deeply are you aware that their a radical/extreme conflict of interest along with inefficiencies that naturaly occur due to bureaucracy with regards to big pharma/traditional med/food system and more. It is important you get a grasp on this if our society is going to make out of this. 2). I strongly disagree with you that sunglight in the morning and grounding by much of the population is common sense. 3). Meds for sleep should be a last last resort. A cost benefit analysis needs to be made for each individual. 4) Your take on meds for diabetes type 2 is concerning. Type 2 diabetes at scale in a society is a society that is setting itself for collapse. Do you understand why? Please engage with this and tell me why I state this. If you cannot, your thinking is short sighted. Ask an endroconolgist is the wrong answer. Do you understand why? Think of old the food pyramid that was put out by the US decades ago and has since been radically debunked...by some science and infinite amount of anecdotes. Sit with this for a while, please sit with this and process. I guarantee blood sugar medication has been and will be continued to seen from higher level thinkers for the wrong solution at scale. I hope you understand why. Can you at least make the argument as to why I have come to this conclusion. Please be specific and do not operate from the feeling level.
Yoshinori Ohsumi won the 2016 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for his discoveries about autophagy, a process that helps cells recycle and break down their contents. The term autophagy comes from the Greek words auto- meaning "self" and phagein meaning "to eat".
Ohsumi's discoveries include: Identifying genes that are essential for autophagy Elucidating the molecular machinery that's involved in autophagy Demonstrating that similar machinery is used in human cells Characterizing the proteins encoded by key autophagy genes
@petermccavington8232 That's what a lot of intermittent fasting is based on. The idea that if you don't consume food, the body starts consuming itself starting from the old and damaged cells. I'm a fan of this channel and a subscriber on Substack, and I have to say that this could be the weakest video on the channel. Endless rambling and straw man arguments without even citing where Huberman or any other person mentioned in the video has said it. Also, I don't see what harm is there to say that people should be mindful of how much sugar they consume, whether it's from fruits or coffee. Neither do I understand what harm is there to avoid gmo and consume more organic food, as the expert in this video doesn't give any details.
@@novideostoday I am always skeptical if whatever anyone says or claims. I also do not fall all out just of current science. Has anyone ever question on who funds clinical studies? I heard but have not yet research enough on who sponsors the new pharmaceutical research. Imo, I think it’s the pharma cos. I have no ties or sponsorship from any companiesbut what’s to say AG1 is indeed a sham. You can definitely get the nutrition from buying wholesome and organic foods and spend a whole bunch of money doing it. It could really boils down on what and how to supplement any shortfalls. What is to say that Slant is sponsored by big pharma? I hear alot about “science” in this episode that I lost count. I just saw an ad popup about “nocturnal bacterium” about type 2 diabetes.
You're using could. That's not a strong term for accepting or endorsement in science..She stated that supplements are unregulated ' what this means in general, is they've got to meet thresholds to sell..the supplements makers don't, because of the the non governmental aid. I used to be like you, but the perfect or proof is not a part of science, consensus is.gt used to it.
Disclaimer I love Huberman, I’ve been there since day 1 whilst doing my final year of my degree from home during Covid lockdowns. I needed to get out the house for movement but was gripped with the ‘needing to constantly learn anxiety’ (counter productive I know) so found him on the day he launched and it felt like fate as I was already intuitively researching the areas he was discussing based on my own personal experiences and wanting to ground it in science. Anyway, I think it’s good to confront your own dependencies on people, I very much rely on him out of laziness and low self belief, needing someone to give me the answers and being desperate to change my experience of myself and life. I always felt admiration for him that he seemed to be very down to earth and wise, objective and seemingly wanting to make a change in the scientific world that is so corrupt with ego. But then you have to also remember he is also just human, and therefore flawed and susceptible to the darker side of having so much power and influence. He feels safe and calm and wise, but he is also battling things personally that we don’t see that will influence his decisions. So yeah. A reminder to not idolise.
As a person who got really sick a few years back and didn’t get any real help from any of the doctors I saw (ER doctors, Urgent care doctors, PCP, and 2 different gastro doctors), I finally saw an MD who was a functional medicine doctor. Before the testing came back to substantiate the diagnosis, he accurately diagnosed me with a leaky gut due to high cortisol which then caused a leaky gut, Sebo, and dysbiosis. He put me on a protocol and I recovered. Even the plethora of food sensitivities I had were reversed. My issue with “western doctors” is there arrogance and refusal to confer with naturopathic practitioners. Western doctors often dismiss anything they were not taught in medical school and I see that as limiting and damaging to the profession of the medical field.
This was awesome! Please do another one!! You could had a whole show on any of the topics you skimmed! Really great conversation and really needed information ❤
I really do appreciate the pushback that the host and his guest are giving to Andrew Huberman. We need a diversity of perspectives, especially when it comes to healthcare, nutrition, etc. What I find concerning is the idea (offered by the guest) that social media companies need to be regulating/fact checking social media influencers. As if there is some “official” position that is inherently factual/consensus opinion and anything that deviates from that needs to be publicly challenged by mega corporations and their government backers. This creates a censorship regime and a threat to the 1st amendment. The answer to supposive misinformation is to put your own video out and challenge views you disagree with.
33:20 Glad you included this but you probably shouldn't have. This immediately tanked your credibility for me. All of a sudden it just seems like a character assassination because you personally got ghosted by him. I've stopped listening to Huberman, so I'm not a deluded fan.
Someone is going to put this Scott Carney in his place. He's always saying things about people like Wim hoff, Huberman and others and how he helped them get where they are. Then talks about their personal issues and does nothing to debunk anything that anyone has done. We are all pretty aware the way things were that Huberman was pushing supplements. Pretty obvious he was being compensated. We're all aware that not all things including studies are great references. But that does not mean that cherry picked study has no relevance to what he's saying nor does it mean it is not true what he's saying. But to bash people without facts is terrible taste on any end.
Is this the point the pendulum swings back the other way, ie. back towards science. Or is it going to get more crazy? Great video Scott, definitely more for you to dig into, though please don,t tell me not to listen to rich roll, he,s the only one left now😢
I've had a lot of benefit from listening to Huberman, mainly in my motivation to work out and eat healthy (no AG1, thanks) and yet I must say you are 100% spot on.
I agree. I wondered what Huberman would do his first season of podcasting after he exhausted his own (sub)field of knowledge. One thing he did was interview experts in other fields, great! Another thing he did is what I categorized as literature reviews; this is where he was out of his depth. In hindsight, it didn't bother me because I never thought he was positioning himself as an expert in these fields, just throwing light on research. Curious if you would have a different take, cheers!
Meh she's basically upset about people trying new systems of testing in a world where everything is shared instantly. What do you expect? Perfect propagation? She's almost saying "trying to optimize on some corner case data and being a human trying new things is bad", listening to institutions is 100% never wrong 🤦♂
Karen makes herself very unbelievable with her claims. I.e. fluoride is indeed beneficial for teeth health. But there are MANY studies that show how bad it is for your brain any body health. So I don’t know what she is on about, but she is insanely naive and a bit over confident in her science
...as a German Bio Chemist Ph D several times I asked you already is that ALL you can do... participating in ad hominem smear campaigns??? Is there anything of original Value YOU contribute??? anything???
This person doesn't cite a single study to prove her point. She is doing exactly what she accuses Huberman of. I came for facts and got opinions. Very disappointing
@@MsJVM well if you comprehend what she is saying, you will see she doesn't need to cite studies. She is pointing out that the studies Huberman cites are not good evidence and cherry picking of studies (Mechanistics, rat studies, small studies, in vitro). It would then fall to Huberman to gather relevent studies to support his claim as would be expected of a Standford Professor.
As a journalist he informs the public. What seems to be great about him is that he is not afraid to go against sacred cows. I’m pretty sure that a lot of other people wanted to criticize Wim Hoff and Huberman, but simply didn’t want the problems associated with “attacking” a highly popular public figure. Unfortunately for Huberman, his moral conduct is now in question and that opens the door for other criticism. I think it was about time for people to start questioning the prevalent podcaster/youtuber influencer-guru paradigm, especially in the realm of health, productivity, and science. The western society has had encounters with a kind of guru before - the spiritual guru - and it wasn’t pretty. The same lessons should be applied here.
Dr. Andrea Love is probably good at what she does, but why so aggressive and angry. Trying to flip everything that Huberman says, I'm sure Huberman has made mistakes but it's so hard to reach the average person with such in-depth science that is constantly evolving through learning. Sense a bit of jealousy and a grab for popularity here. Why don't you work together rather than throw 'intellectual bombs' at each other... So much anger and discontent... As a scientist, you don't have to scream to be heard by the right audience.
I appreciate your concern about the visual downside of Andrea's lighting. I spent most of my life making videos, one of the most important things I learned was that audio was more important than video. In early days of TV people always walked away during commercials; but if they made it back at some time they "heard" everything. I am very aware of visuals as a result of my life of image making. The aspect of "just listening" is so important to YT I want good information like this.
Thank god this real scientist has never heard about this and will happily use their 2014 Headphones that came with her Android. Yeah... very professional
The generalizations in this interview are quite concerning. While Western medicine is "good" at addressing symptoms and treating diseases, dismissing the impact of diet and lifestyle as pseudoscience is misleading and wrong. This falls under the field of epigenetics, where we know and have been scientifically proven by multiple studies that diet and lifestyle choices can significantly influence our health outcomes. This lady seems to be heavily biased towards pharmaceutical solutions, disregarding alternative perspectives without consideration. I appreciate your interviews and am open to diverse viewpoints, but the absolutism in her opinions was quite disappointing and quite wrong to be honest.. With the current obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease epidemic in the US, are we really going to pretend that what people eat doesn't matter? Ha ha ha...
I completely agree. I enjoyed this discussion and different viewpoints to my own. To see how they cover this with certain keywords was very helpful for spotting it in the future.
"with the current obesity diabetes and CVD epidemic are we really going to pretend that what people eat doesn't matter" holy straw man dude, horribly bad faith argument that is not at all what she is saying. comments like your ruin my faith in humanity tbh
One, not epigenetics. Two, as of right now, diet and lifestyle are pseudoscience, as they have yet to be proven. Epigenetics is the study of how an environment can effect the expression of genes. And if you think she's is completely wrong about her statements, then show us the published papers that show she's wrong
The first red flag came for me when I was listening to an episode with David Sinclair on longevity. Sinclair was fanatically pushing the benefits of NMN. He was saying that he feels like a superhuman when he is taking it and feels awful if he stops. He was sounding more like a drug addict than a professor, and I've seen so many people develop this kind of dangerous psychological dependency on supplements they think are the magical key to their health. On top of that, I believe he started taking it based on trials done on rats.
@@sgcarney you should feel worse that you platformed something as misleading as what she said at 55:10 given that the last measles death in the united states was in 2015.
Too many snake-oil salesmen whose day jobs are ordinary medical practitioners...My first experience with a dodgy practitioner was when I bumped someone driving a Mercedes Benz in the rain. It turned out to be a doctor who took my details and contacted me later for compensation for the nasty dent on his chromed bumper...When I saw the dented bumper I realized it was too high and my plastic bumper could never have caused the dented shape...I told him as much and never saw him again...and pitied the clientele he serviced..As an architect have had the displeasure of a few more doctor clients lacking morals... Scott keep weeding...wonderful podcast.
thank you for providing a counterpoint to all the "hitpiece" narratives floating around. I'm kind of in that "bro" space of youtube and it is EVERYWHERE and it's like people have just turned off their brains!
The morning light thing is correct in sleep science in regulating the circadian rhythm. As it’s through the retina to the pineal gland to regulate melatonin. So one area he can actually comment on because there is a an optical component. I saw him live and was kinda disappointed because he kinda just talked about himself.
I was invested in the conversation until she started interjecting with her opinions on vaccines, felt like she was doing the same thing she’s accusing him of. SMH.
I'm glad to see other people feeling the same way. She was doing a lot of ranting that was contradictory. "Science moves very slow..."...*proceeds to talk about vaccines, when there is obvious concerns with the COVID vax since it was not properly tested*. She used saunas as one example of being hyped up, dismissing lots of discussions on it. Fasting/autophagy has a lot of research behind it. She's not someone I would want to have as a doctor.
@@Stargirl_-wz8ub it’s not her opinions. She is an actual expert as an Immunologist and what she says about vaccines is backed by scientific evidence and the consensus of other experts from around the world.
Glad I found your channel and reminding me of the most useful advise in all things. ‘If it sounds to good to be true… it’s probably massively exaggerated’… but that is also true for the companies making profit limit the information which is negative to bare minimum as per legal requirement.
The Business of America is Business. So when you look at your supplement bottle and discover that this product "supports" so and so or that it plays an "important role" in ... health you'll discover with your magnifying glass writing that"These statements have not been evaluated by the FDA." But who owns the FDA? This is where cognitive dissonance comes in. When "your" FDA hasn't had the time, apparently, to evaluate these claims you start to wonder about conflicts of interest and you start to question the authority of the FDA which is still better in my opinion than the health department of the state of Florida. Numer TWO: to have any credulence as a health influencer you HAVE to have your own line of products or bare minimum endorse a lot of products. Number three, I really enjoyed this video.
The supplement companies need to run trials if they want FDA evaluations. That’s the way drug approval works. The FDA would be overwhelmed if it has to test every claim some company made.
Even when the supplement companies run those studies, the FDA only takes the information the companies give them. For the FDA to be of any real use at all, it needs to be staffed by people whose pay has no connection to Pharma profits (so government workers), and by enough of those people to do those investigations. There would be so many good, secure, purposeful jobs in it, but the neoliberals (Reagan, Clinton and after) conspired with business to convince everyone that government work is shameful and inefficient, when the truth is the opposite; no entity has the economies of scale and the freedom from the need to make profit that government has, and that true productivity is what corporations really fear.
It's funny, Huberman is the only 'health' podcaster I listen to and learn from, from [time to time] and I appreciate. I still listen to some of his older episodes. I have not listened to any 'newer' episode, created in the past year plus. (life stuff, unrelated to anything else) All the criticisms Scott and Dr. Love discuss in this video I broadly believe in main strokes, and disinformation and bad information is a huge problem in our society. But Huberman is the one health podcaster I can navigate well. I didn't notice it until listening to y'all talk, that I don't listen to episodes with guests (mostly). I think I must've not liked their topic/content and yeah, I did get a whiff of 'influencer' vibe from at least a couple of guests. I think for some weird reason, he is the only podcaster that doesn't creep me out (he could very well be a total creep irl). I don't take supplements and basically ignore anything he says about supplements, although I don't recall him saying anything cringey...to my tastes. I'm not here defending him or against him, I'm just sharing my possibly atypical experience with this podcaster's content. Save for Huberman, I think of and see (on my own, just with my thoughts) a lot of the criticisms and duplicity and bad science or even just bad takes with most other 'health' podcasters. Cringe.
I can't believe she is defending the idea of putting a teaspoon of sugar in your coffee. Yes, you should be afraid of it and you can get used to enjoying it without any sweetener.
@@blaply3421 I agree. There are people out there that are addicted to sugar and carbs thus becoming diabetic. You can't tell a sugar addict a spoonful of sugar is not going to hurt you. Sugar is super addictive like cocaine. But people normalize it, because hey its just sugar! Like you can't tell an alcoholic a shot of tequila is not going to hurt you. I mean there are people out there who can eat fruit and maybe eat the occasional carb, but there are people that really need to cut it out of their lives completely.
Also found this problematic. One teaspoon of sugar every now and then will not do much to healthy people, but if you tell people it's ok, many will put a spoon of sugar in every cup of coffee they have and maybe they have 3 cups a day. Same for what she says about non GMO food, etc. We might have no trials that that kind of food is unhealthy, but we also have no trials that it is heathy and in terms of fertilizers, we do have the science to prrof that fertilizers are toxic. Maybe the amount of fertilizer on e.g. an apple is minimal, but if you eat applezes with fertilzers on it everyday, there's a compound effect.
omg Andrea, thank you for mentioning glucose goddess! She has always rubbed me the wrong way, not just for her blatant miscommunication of physiology, but (I know you didn't mention this) also for the smug delivery - kinda reminds me of Huberman. Almost as if the subtext behind her elaborations is "I am much smarter than you, so believe me". I was an early Huberman subscriber, when he first started posting I watched every video. The slow degradation of quality has been disappointing to say the least. As his star has risen, it seems the ego has as well, to the detriment of content. He's a public figure now, kinda like Bill Nye.
56:30 here’s the answer, Scott: - the shots are mechanistically novel. it’s reasonable to not want to subject yourself something that reprograms your cells to manufacture pathogens - we were lied to very directly about its impact on transmission - people were blackmailed with losing their jobs (with few of those refusing being “made whole”) on the basis of the lie about transmission impact hope that helps
I’m actually hearing a shootdown on self-care industry and an attack on a podcaster’s personna. He might be several millions. I don’t see several hundred million. Please continue to do your debunking blogs and reject all sponsorships and sales. Thank you. Just bec FDA approved does not mean Dr. don’t overprescribed. Some drs never even took the time to educate patients to make lifestyle changes but instead write more Rx.
When Huberman had David Sinclair on, I read Sinclair's book and started researching into the person. His work in the supplement business pointed towards conflicts of interest, some of the science seemed mere quackery and I began doubting Huberman. Why would he invite a quack? The pop lectures before audiences, AG1, that does not check out as a product I unsubscribed the podcast. - Your work here points at something deeper and I appreciate it.
There is a lot of truth in what you are saying - and a lot of envy. PS. I never take supplements apart from Vit D3 during the winter. Twice a year I have a full blood work with top results. (I am a Hungarian woman of 4 days short of 78 y.o.) The secret? Good nutrition, regular training/walking, good books, good friends, and continuous learning.
Get Early Access on Patreon: www.patreon.com/user?u=82207370
Substack: sgcarney.substack.com/
Dr. Andrea Love's article in SLATE: slate.com/technology/2024/03/andrew-huberman-huberman-lab-health-advice-podcast-debunk.html
Zelph on the Shelf (ExMo/humor) just did a reaction to the Huberman article. COLLAB?
Thank you so much! I'm a neuro professor, and can't stand when Huberman talks about areas I know about because a lot of it is BS or inaccurate.
Debate is better than assertion. Because it's certain he's credentialed.
@@madra000 which is crazy because the way he talks a lot about unproven research with complete confidence makes me cringe. He makes it sound like they are proven science backed up by research when they're just theories that need to be tested. Comes off as just a grift honestly. I feel like people just care so much about the fact that he's a doctor, because they never really talk to doctors in their normal life. And andrew huberman just uses his degree to promote and oversell and make money (unlike my dad who just cares about treating people and doesn't lie about all the unproven theories, and can say that he doesn't know) to get rich off it and truth be damned.
Huberman should be sponsored by VPNs and Web Design companies, not "Health" products. This is pure and simple conflict of interest and basically removes any shred of credibility he might have. He is basically the Dr. Oz of Internet podcasting.
@@JeffRevell Exactly
Won't fix everything though, as he's still going to overblow studies to make it exciting to his audience and get more views, sell VPNs.
Might *HAVE* had....
That ship sailed ages ago, I could smell the grift from the start with that guy. Nobody gets successfull on YT like that without being owned by the beast
@@UNcommonSenseAUS yeah same, I could just smell it somehow.
AG1 is a nutritional supplement, Huberman isn’t pushing crack cocaine. AG1 contains wide variety of vitamins, minerals, and antioxidants that are generally considered essential nutrients. Nutritional supplementation is a personal choice and depending on your lifestyle choices filling you nutritional gaps with supplements maybe wise. The worst thing about AG1 (compared to any other supplement) is the price but whenever you pay someone to do something you could conceivably do yourself (research and gather a bunch of nutrients, combine and package them) you’re going to pay a premium. Yes it’s preferable to get every single essential nutrient from our diet; do most folks…? 😑
As someone who suffers from tinnitus, i had been quite curious about Haberman's take on the research. When it came up in an episode, i was quite surprised that it only focussed on which supplements to take, rather than e.g. retraining of the auditory system (after all, he's a neuroscientist). I've followed a bit of the research on tinnitus over the years, so i was surprised, how shallow the discussion was.
While enjoying the first episodes, it i stopped following when it became more about lifestyle than science.
That's probably a good proxy for many of the episodes. Americans love their magic pill, in which there's much more money than in laborious retraining...
@@timblechmann2429 I've had it for a year now.. Have you found anything uplifting in your research? I miss the peace and quiet!
as it tuns out, optic nerves and the auditory system are kind of different sructures LOOOL
(btw, tinnitus is not from the ears, but created by the brain, and pointing to an issue with energy supply / production for/in the respetive neuronal assemblies. such I would go keto, and supplementing B1, B3, rALA, O3, quercetin, and citrulline)
Tinnitus is, well, complicated. It is created in the brain, but it can be caused by external influences, like acoustic trauma damaging the inner ear (e.g. the form that many musicians suffer from). There are some studies regarding retraining of the auditory system, very interesting from a neuroscience point of view (neuroplasticity). It's something I would have liked to learn more of (hearing a research overview from a reputable neuroscientist), as opposed to diet/supplement recommendations.
@@timblechmann2429 also look at your circadian patterns and the build up/ prevent destruction of neuromelanine. Light is key there. The right light at the right time. There is influence of hormones too on tyrosinase activity and alpha MSH production so contraceptives can be detrimental too. Ginko biloba is one of the supplements that could help because inhibits peroxide production by mitochondria and this Melanine destruction. As a Biochemist I can tell you the science is there , it is a matter of digging deeper and connecting the dots
I tried with Huberman after Saagar Enjeti claimed Huberman had really helped him. But as soon as I heard him shilling Athletic Greens, I was out. Doesn’t mean he’s all B.S. But it does mean he cares more about money than science IMO.
Perfectly and succinctly stated.
Your first mistake was listening to Saagar Enjeti
@@bethany603 who?
The recommendation coming from Saagar should've been the first clue.
Exactly. He pedals snake oil therefore it puts all he says in doubt. It's too bad. I started listening to him during COVID and it was very good. He still has some good ones depending on guest but he always rehashes the same thing, very similar to Rogan. In the end I feel I'm listening to a smarter version of Rogan (no offense to Joe 😅) and that doesn't sit right. it's all glorified bro science except here those bros are millionaires and pedal snake oil for their own benefit only, with no regulations.
Thank you both for having a conversation where the other person listens fully and doesn't talk over or interrupt the other person. It is so much easier to discern information from this sort of conversation.
AG1 is the adult version of Flintstone vitamins riding off a tiktok chlorophyll drink trend. Its the same thing with Factor meals trying to pretend its not another microwave dinner company. I stopped listening to Huberman because I was like "If you did all the the protocols suggested, your pee would look like radiator fluid and there would be no time for real life". I felt the same way about Rhonda Patrick.
Rhonda Patrick is another one of those people who like to extrapolate mice studies into proof that something works for humans. Protocols all day long.
Great comment 👌👌👌
Well said. Rhonda Patrick is in the same league as Huberman when it comes to extrapolating insufficient studies to protocols.
wow - I didn't know chlorophyll drinking was a tiktok trend! I've been drinking spirulina for years.
Wouldn’t the benefit of factor meals be that they are healthier alternatives to other cheap food options?
Sorry, as an almost scientist (I only have a MS, not a PhD), I'm fully interested in debunking Huberman's (pseudo?) science with science.
But, I got a feeling that mixing that with "the article" or with his "charisma" is not very scientific but a fallacy.
Additionally, this sounds like "everything Huberman has said is not scientific/true/tested" and that's absolutist, hence not very scientific, instead of trying to educate the viewer.
What is pseudoscience if not charisma?
My point is about mixing the topics.
You can note how the doctor tries to keep the discussion about the scientific method on what Huberman presents (I liked that about the doctor).
It was the podcaster the one trying to lead the conversation about that around the middle of the video ("he ghosted me") into what is more subjective that refuting a bad paper.
well said.
@@sgcarney they're two different things, and you've asked an obvious bullshit deflection question, lmao. you've done more to harm your own credibility than Huberman's with this catty nonsense video.
Couldn’t agree more. We can’t resort to using the very tactics that the scientific method advises against.
I've had severe vitamin D deficiency with osteomalacia (adult rickets), which caused severe bone pain. I was initially diagnosed by my rheumatologist and was referred to an immunologist for extensive testing and then treatment. I discovered from this that it's a really complicated problem which requires specialist doctors to treat. Severe vitamin D deficiency isn't a medical issue you want to be treating yourself or via the advice from an influencer!
Rickets is bad. I'm glad you caught it.
The worst part of Huberman’s advice on vitamin D to just get sunlight is that he never talked about that this relies on UV-B rays and that a lot of times you’re only getting UV-A rays. So, a person could actually get a sunburn and not get any UVB rays and think that they’re synthesizing vitamin D. He’s so dumb. That was just one episode that really annoyed me and completely shocked me how irresponsible he was.
Right on! I'm glad your docs sussed it out & helped you!
My mom was born in 1930 and had Ricketts as a child from malnourishment that left her with a big dent in her lower leg. Her dirt poor parents took her to hospital, and the docs said her leg needed amputation, but the parents said they couldn't afford it or care for an amputee with 7 other kids, so they got some meds and went back to the farm. She recovered fully but had myriad health problems all her life.
Ya'll should actually listen to what he says about getting sunlight in the eyes. It has nothing to do with vitamin D, Huberman mentions several times that sunlight activates the photoreceptors in the eyes to reset the circadian rhythm and help with your sleep cycle, nothing about Vitamin D.
@@tnijoo5109 Did anyone actually listen to Huberman? He doesn't mention vitamin D as the reason for getting sunlight in the eyes, he clearly states that once the photoreceptors are activated it resets the circadian rhythm and promotes optimal wakefulness/sleep schedule.
I'm a Huberman fan, but I take his, and everyone's, advice with a grain of pink salt.
I’d go with the Dead Sea salt🤷♀️😂
So many health and psychological benefits. Just make sure to avoid the knock-off Pakistan fake-salt that will give you cancer and only buy from websites that say they get their salt from the Nepal and Bhutan mines in the Himalayas.
I started 8 months ago to try to open peoples eyes about his misconduct and betrayal scheme.
You can only be a "fan" (which is derived from "fanatic") if you put belief above critical thinking. So many of his propositions have been debunked. Remember his cold plunge story? The brown fat story? all completely made up.
Basically, as there are lots of examples as the one given here a min @13.00, he is a liar. Constructing stories from deliberately tweaking facts.
You are vulnerable to godfather apperances, i think
Not with a grain of LMNT salts? 😉 💸💸💸
😂
I completely reject the notion of "these protocols don't hurt so what's the big deal?" because what's happening is the building of trust within the audience over time, which is compounded when the audience gets as big as his (because people just assume because he's popular he must be trustworthy). Therefore there is a ongoing fostering of mistrust in medicine coupled with giving a platform to absolute charlatans. There's a lot to be said for charisma.
Ultimately people enjoy the experience of his show and they might even make some good health choices but the cost of spreading misinformation is a price not worth paying, considering most best practices in regards to health are very simple and readily available.
One SHOULD distrust MEDICINE the INDUSTRY. Their efforts are to monopolize our access to health and healing and to interpose themselves between our innate ability to heal with their PATENTED and CORPORATE CONTROLLED symptom alleviation methods.
you are spreading misinformation......that's how it works.....
It’s funny that y’all say he’s charismatic but every time I have tried to listen to him I get bored and switch off
I wish people in general had a better understanding of science vs pseudoscience and news vs commentary. It would certainly benefit society as a whole. Thanks as always for covering these important topics.
I write about this a LOT in my newsletter :)
@@dr.andrealove Thank you for your service. I am a retired high school language & literacy educator, and I saw the shift in US education from critical literacy, problem-solving, and project-based education to standardized testing, conformity of thought, and threat of punishment in my career from 1994-2019. Science education gets short shrift, because curiosity and exploration do not produce standardized results. We now have a whole generation of over-tested and under-taught folks who need to learn these skills as adults. Add in the anti-science movement from recent years, and in counties like mine, where religious folks become science teachers to NOT teach evolution....The struggle is REAL. Be well.
@@dr.andrealove I’ll check it out. It’s one of my bugaboos in life ha.
What you're wishing people had here is called critical thinking skills. This skill is where you ask critical questions, rather than just swallowing information wholesale. This skill is something anyone can develop, and, honestly, once the skill is well developed, it can be used in many, many different situations, this one included. And yes, it would benefit our society immensely. However, it would NOT benefit people with actual power in the world. There is a reason why critical thinking skills, the ability to discern fact from fiction, these things are not taught in schools, even though it's so sorely needed. This is because the education system in the US is based off of a model called the Prussian education model. It is specifically designed to churn out obedient workers, it's designed to squash creativity and imagination, and critical thinking. Masses of people are much easier to control being ignorant and uneducated, with no ability to discern what is true. This is a real thing. Run a search on the Prussian education model. You can read about everything I just wrote here
@@mizotter you are way to simple. The removal of standardized testing for mathematics has caused great harm to our society. What happened to you?
34:18 “wake up and look at the sun” is not solely Huberman’s. Dr Panda, the leading circadian rhythm researcher teaches THE SAME.
@48:48 - "“Huberman talks a lot about vitamin D that's his whole thing for why you have to go put your eyeballs in the sun and the whole vitamin D industry is wild” Did they even listen to his podcasts? Huberman mentions several times that sunlight activates the photoreceptors in the eyes to reset the circadian rhythm, nothing about Vitamin D.
@48:48 She says Huberman claimed getting sunlight in the eyes is for vitamin D but he clearly states it resets the circadian rhythm to optimize wakefulness and sleep. Doesn't take a genius to see what's going on here, it's a hit piece.
@@davidoh8745 I had never heard of this dude before today, but suddenly i was hit with all his side piece juggling capacity. I guess the dude is a hit at hitting multiple side pieces at the same time. Seems to me he should have a podcast advising incels.
Indigenous elders and many cultures have spoken about sun gazing for a very long time. Modern day Westerners aren't the discoverers of everything. People all over the world have been living healthfully for generations. What these American biohackers are trying to do is figure out a way to live in ways disharmonious with those old ways but still feel good, It can't be done. There's also a huge monetary drive to create a career based on this stuff, it's a sort of pyramid scheme, like Rich Dad Poor Dad, selling information that few people can ever prove or disprove. By the time people figure it out, the snake oil salesman has made their fortune.
@@LenkaSaratoga I experimented with the morning and evening sunlight because I was getting terrible sleep for years and had tried lots of things from melatonin and other supplements to blue light glasses and even changing my diet. The only thing that made a significant improvement was morning and evening sunlight. My deep light tripled and my REM sleep when up too! 😌 So Huberman was right about that. At least in my experience. Maybe he has other things right also. 🤷🏽♂️ … I’ve also tried AG1 greens and I didn’t have any adverse effects and I’m super sensitive to supplements. It reduced my stress and gave me a good balanced feeling. But stopped taking it cause it’s just too darn expensive
I thoroughly enjoyed this, though at minute 34 you start speculating quite a bit about how Huberman thinks and his psychology when it comes to relationships. This is “mind-reading,” and in most cases when we speculate about the inner workings of another, we’re wrong. Best to stick with your observations and not speculate about his inner life.
@MichaelHplus I actually found it interesting and insightful. I was baffled by the behavior which seems to go past "adhd screwups", and this contextualizes it.
Yes, it's a story, but one that's based on the objective, observable facts.
I have delved a lot into the psychology of other gurus (some of them have written a lot about their own inner thoughts so there is no need to speculate) and I find that it is very clarifying and helpful and you will see the same patterns elsewhere.
I completely agree, that part made me cringe
@@Izaachou Once you’re queued into how often people engage in this mind-reading, you see it everywhere.
@@MichaelHplus for my entire life I have been saying "clued in" like a complete imbecile. This is a shame I cannot bear.
@@mikesanders8621 “Clued in” is correct. I was dictating that comment, so excuse the auto-transcription.
I think it's even illegal when he says this is not a sponsor or anything and he obviously has some relationship with the company
I have listened to a fair amount of Huberman content, but haven't much lately because it's become redundant in my opinion. I don't recall ever feeling any pressure to buy anything or subscribe to any of his health protocols. I don't recall him ever making any absolute statements regarding health or science either. In my memory, he always seemed to present his and other's content as objectively as possible. He does talk about his own experiences with protocols and supplementation, including the ones he promotes, but I wouldn't ever confuse his personal experiences with the actual scientific method. Anyone who follows anyone's advice with blind faith is not a victim. Let's keep most the blame here where it belongs...on naive consumers.
I’ve found him to be totally reasonable & thorough actually.
I heard him even correct some things he said. If he has something wrong and he is criticized he corrects it in the next episode. I think the mistakes that are mentioned happening to everyone.
I think the view count on his videos proves people think he's thorough. The problem is, if you read the studies he cites you realise he isn't at all.
@@therabbithat Well that was the same problem with Covid. A lot of politicians were wrong worldwide. And because a lot of politicians have no clue about science they did not even realize it, that some of the studies did not say what they were claiming.
I dont understand why he is criticized so much but others are not who are worse.
Ok he is a professor but there professor who are far worse. For example the ones that promote Nazis ideology like critical race theory and they do not even know that they are promoting that, becasue they lack intelligence that qualifies them to speak on scientific topics.
I mean, Dr. Andrea Love misrepresented Huberman's claims in obvious ways. @48:48 she says Huberman claimed getting sunlight in the eyes is for vitamin D but he clearly states it resets the circadian rhythm to optimize wakefulness and sleep. Also to criticize anyone for advising to lower your sugar/alcohol intake is a clear sign you should take her word with a grain of salt.
Most Phds start to really learn the board picture and basics of their field when they start to teach introduction courses to undergraduates. Unfortunately, the general public does not realize how narrow the knowledge of PhDs is. This tunnel vision also often leads to ill judgement in many things as well, sometimes even in their own little area. Mentioning his own professorship every time and selling suppliments is unethical, period. Giving platform to dubious figures, regardless of their credentials and academic employments, is harming the public. Thanking audience for interest in science is self-gradiolizing since you are not the representative/spokesperson of science. No, 2-3 hours rambling with big words doesn't mean depth but, unfortunately, many academics are trained that way or think they should talk and write that way to sound profound and intelligent. Plus, protocols are not solutions for individual situations
His science is linked to affiliate payments. That is specifically the FIRST core problem with his science.
Also, he takes paper thin knowledge briefed to him by others who have flimsy medical overlap with a topic, and then presents it with absolute confidence.
How do I know this? I know it because I am a Dr and my area of mastery fell under his discussion one day where he (as he routinely does) was pushing the research of a colleague on a topic his colleague was clearly of limited expertise. He presented factually incorrect remarks with full confidence as though they were his experienced view, NOT "stuff way off his reservation".
The more I listen to his podcast, the more holes I find in much of his content.
Like too many before he may have begun as a means of democratising knowledge but he has clearly become his own brand and business and the goal is money.
Give me an example of something that hes talked about that was backed by flimsy science?
@@nickmagrick7702 listen to the interview with the cannabis expert. Everything Huberman said about cannabis turned out to be wrong in some respect, often fundamentally wrong.
And keeping his exchange with the cannabis expert in mind, recall that the most respected ketamine expert had some nasty views on Huberman's takes on ketamine.
So we've gotten better information on cannabis from a researcher who had to waste his time on an airplane flight and stay in another city - time out if his personal and research commitments correcting Huberman - (Huberman made money on the bad information and the correction, he has no incentive to put out good information) but the other researcher who didn't want to put more money in Huberman's pocket and waste their time when Huberman could have done better research himself - didn't want to be Huberman's unpaid proofreader and researcher, we've yet to be corrected on Ketamine.
@@michaelrobinson9643 thank you for sharing
@@nickmagrick7702 I wrote a detailed reply - I can't find where it went. :/
@@michaelrobinson9643 UA-cam has a habit of censoring comments if they include links or words in their list that they don't want people discussing
I enjoyed this. I would push back on the assertion that regulated pharmaceutical companies are necessarily always safe-Purdue Pharma comes to mind…seems like the core of the problem is more about greed and power. Just saying.
That’s true.
@@msflaneuse4340 greed, power, and control.
Johnson and Johnson also knew that they were causing cancer with the talcum powder they were selling, but never provided a disclaimer and kept it from the public…until they got sued.
The point is that because of oversight and accountability we can identify when big pharma fits wrong and adjust the regulations, but big supplement is a giant black box, and we rarely know it's gone wrong except when they run afoul of government agencies outside of public health, such as DEA or SEC. And that should be terrifying, but the public is getting seduced by "no news is good news."
And this very real corruption is what gives con artists a niche to make a lot of money pointing at how bad the fraud is in some places. So cleaning up the corruption just uplifts us all and leaves less room for more corruption. But if we do nothing this can always get worse.
I will happily sit in the middle in this one.
In one hand, I agree that Huberman sometimes brings up scientific "facts" that are far from solid and should marinade a little bit more in the scientific community before being so widely broadcasted. Also, he goes a long way from his area of expertise and arrives at places where he no longer punches with the same intensity and precision, occasionally generating mistakes.
On the other hand, I find his content very useful and, considering the academic level of the average UA-camr, much more robust than 90% of the available options in the platform. Also, he always remind us to form our own opinion, do our own research and figure out for ourselves what work for us. He also has publicly corrected himself several times, and is very transparent when showing any type of evidence (I.e. article of origin, scientific magazine that published it, year, name of researchers, whether it's peer reviewed, etc).
So in conclusion, I do not think his content is bulletproof. But I do think is useful, way above average and very transparent, and I am happy with that. After all, lets remind ourselves: it's FREE.
@@jrodartec I think that saying his content is more robust than 90% of UA-cam is not a great reason to believe him. Maybe getting your health advice from UA-cam and not from experts in the field of health is not a good idea?
@@nickmacleod2368 I disagree. There is a lot of useful content on YT for people wanting to improve on their health.
100%. This conversation honestly falls into the same cringe-worthy category as most other social media content. I absolutely respect discernment and disagreement on any subject. It's not scientific without it. But these experts were doing the exact same thing as those promoting pseudoscience. The cringe is that they don't recognize it in their own rhetoric.
The fact is, and this isn't a figure I'm just making up: but fact is that 75% of all published, peer-reviewed, clinical research results in findings that are favorable to the sponsorship; 20% results in neither favorable nor unfavorable and only 5% ever results in findings unfavorable to the sponsorship funding the research.
Now, what should be gleaned from that statistic? Does that mean that all scientific research is a scam? No, absolutely not. Does that mean we should be more skeptical and less trusting to what we're told is scientific fact? Yeah, probably so. Definitely, in my personal opinion.
Fact of the matter is, we have no idea how the world actually works. None whatsoever and anyone that believes they do, is only fooling themselves.
What about his content is useful to you, exactly? His advice is not practical at all, making it worthless. All he does is ramble on in thick technical jargon. Not sure how that benefits anyone. I know I couldn't get anything practically useful out of any of his content. It all SOUNDS real cool. But, nothing practical about his "advice"
@choosetolivefree Huberman helped me improve my sleep quality, my caffeine regime, my relationship to alcohol, and my exercise routine. I see doctors regularly now I beat (by far) all benchmarks in my yearly check-up. So yeah, he helped me quite a bit. Sorry if he didn't have the same effect on you.
No scientist or clinician has a monopoly on being correct 100% of the time. All experts will bring their own biases to the table. Their outlook, experience and interpretations will influence their analysis and the message they communicate. One fact is true, Huberman has tapped into a global interest in seeking knowledge, specifically scientific knowledge, this absolutely must be welcomed. He's also a worldclass communicator. He may not get everything he talks about correct as far as some people are concerned but he's at least willing to have the conversation. He features experts to help him introduce subjects to an audience of millions. For this he should be applauded and I say this as someone who does a similar job to Huberman, albeit nowhere near as well. As far as his private life is concerned, it's utterly irrelevant.
An interesting discussion. I followed the autophagy principal by fasting for quite long periods of time for (18 hours a day for nearly two years) which cured my afib. I also noticed a growth hormone release, which even though I was fasting kept my muscle size and increased it. The problem I have found is fringe science is rarely looked at in depth and the usual problem is there is no money for companies to make.
I find nearly all videos on UA-cam are either sponsored, selling something, or has a patreon link. You could argue the point that why any health care professional earning a good wage already needs to do this?
Great conversation! Massive thanks to you and Dr. Love.
She brings up fluoride but Huberman agrees with her, he did an episode on fluoride and it agrees with what she says… so far the examples of him misinforming are weak
You only named one example and you didn’t read the article she wrote
@@lyinbobbycottonseed I actually did read the article, and I hold to it that Huberman and her both agree Fluoride is important for your dental health. But lets not pretend fluoride in high dosage is not toxic, there is a reason your dentist recommends to spit it out after brushing. So because Huberman said its toxic in high dosage thats suddenly not science? Come on now.... I did a full response to a comment by Scott carney himself while there are sure to be valid criticisms about Huberman if you try to be the champion of science at least make sure you are accurate in your criticism.
I also think the double standard is hillarious where we posit that none of the Huberman listeners do any follow up on anything he says but we expect people here to read the article before responding to the substance of the video
She did a four-piece on his terrible flu and cold prevention episode. That one was full of misinformation and generally very poorly researched.
Tap water fluoridation is mostly an American thing (just like non-therapeutic male circumcisions, tonsillectomies, prophylactic appendectomies, elective C-sections, etc.). There isn’t a worldwide scientific consensus about its real health benefits and absence of detrimental effects. In addition, unlike other medical treatments, it implies that there’s no patient’s consent or dose control.
They are not… just implying that a research study was done in humans instead of rats is wrong
It was a pleasure listening to Dr Andrea Love. Thank goodness there are scientists out there who are measured in how they talk about science publicly. She was so clear and precise in how she refuted the claims made by AH and others. We need more people like her in the public arena.
lol hard to guess what party you will vote for.
@@kschulte9847 I’m not American, sweetheart.
“goes to the gym with RFK, Jr….” say NO more!😵💫😂
Vaccine researchers being big mad about hanging with RFK Jr. 😂
@@Eliphas_Elric science schmience🤷♀️🤣
When the powers that be across all platforms ( cnn, abc, nbc, cbs, Fox News) use propaganda and try and character assassinate people like RFK instead of debating Best seller. RFK has spent 40 years in science and law. The book that RFK wrote " The real Anthony Fauci" was a best seller. Not one lawsuit because of his accuracy. His knowledge is vast. You should listen to a few long format interviews with him.
RFK is a rare genuine gem. It's always difficult to speak truth to people that don't want to hear it. Takes courage to do what RFK does. Clearly his truth telling doesn't benefit him in any way
@@choosetolivefree ok. but dude the bear in the park, cmon, what are we, five?
A protocol can be speculative as long as it is not actively harmful. The cost - benefit analysis with Huberman is pretty clear. Nonetheless, calling on him to be more clear about the confidence in the underlying science is good.
I agree. If there is no harm then it’s fine. But harm can come in many forms-some unintended.
Huberman's intended audience (in terms of rhetorical analysis) for his podcast was highly educated university students and grad students. Unsurprising since this reflected his professional work environment.
Any consumer of Huberman's (early?) podcast should already have a working knowledge of the scientific hierarchy of evidence, the genre of literature review, and maybe even some basics of study design. A huge bonus if you know the difference between Type I error (Huberman's weakness) and Type II error. This protected me from every (?) problem Andrea Love describes. I think the problem was a combination of the listening audience not understanding how critical these frameworks are for consuming Huberman's content, and Huberman's improper assessment that he really was speaking to the "every man."
Dr. Love is smart. Her message should be understood by everyone. My wife is also in immunology and says the same things about science. She also always rolls her eyes when I mention something I heard on the Huberman Lab podcast, which I do listen to sometimes, but definitely take everything with a grain of salt. I'm weary of any science influencer, because while they do know their niche, everything outside of their niche they only know as much as I do.
This woman seems to have chosen Hubermann as her nemesis. She is biased by her own unsympathy towards Andrew on such a level that her criticism of him loses credibility. I'm not a wacko anti-vaxxer but it really pissed me off when she suggested that he doesn't care about general public health because he dares to suggest that vaccination is unnecessary for a simple cold or flu. Me or my whole family including my kids never got a single flu vaccination and we are just fine. In my country, we give the obligatory vaccinations for the kids and that's it but imo most normal people wouldn't opt for a flu vaccine. Honestly, I also find it an utter waste of time running to a doctor even for testing with simple cold symptoms. It's pointless when your body heals itself anyway.
It's also interesting how she selectively fearmongers about the risk of flu yet completely downplays the risk of experiencing disabling, long-term symptoms from Lyme disease.
Lame effort huh!
I couldn’t agree more. These two come across to me as two very angry “mean girls” jealous of the popular and prettier girl in the class. I would not give either any credibility. Scott is piggybacking on those who have actually achieved some degree of success and the woman seems completely indoctrinated and needing some help in presenting her beliefs more professionally.
I no longer follow Huberman due to the interview with Zuckerberg and the association with AG1. I am not a fan but I find his POVs to be much more healthy than those of these two.
Also, I find it amusing how they both seem very puffed up and important by the fact the girls who were mentioned in the NY Magazine article “reached out” to them. Scott actually said “I know their REAL NAMES!” Well whoopity do! How blessed and brilliant that made him feel. Look at the excitement in his body language.
I am sorry but this looks like a thinly veiled attempt to pull someone down.
It's false advertising and they're getting rich on selling useless products.
Hes best friends with Sinclair, hes his idol Thanks! 😊 Your awesome Sir!!
Thank you too!
This was so good!!! Please do another segment with her. I really want to know more about her opinions on Huberman, especially on his lab and what’s going on there.
So glad I tuned in. I'm blown away by your deep dives into all these issues with other so-called experts, I was even running around telling people, "Have you heard of Huberman? You have to listen to him." he comes across as very genuine; I certainly bit, WoW!!! Thank you!
He snookered me for years, too
She is wrong about not seeing a correlation between diet and hormones. Period!
I can agree about the pseudoscience being pushed within the online health and wellness community, but to say what you eat does not affect your health at a micro level is just plain biased and wrong.
Totally agree. I believe there are podcasters piggybacking on Hubermans success. Leeches....
@@nickys6656 um she didn’t say that :). If you would like to assert that diet can substantially affect a delta in hormone measure site the study sweetie
@@victoriaboster1177 Well, that took 3 seconds with the Google machine: pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3888442/
@@victoriaboster1177 There you go. When I want to start an objective and unemotional debate with someone, I call them "sweetie" right at the end of my first sentence. Works like a charm.
Exactly! Analogically: is also Benjamin Bikman a pseudo-scientist? He also claims strict and fundamental correlation between diet and hormones.
I will never watch another Huberman podcast ever again ❤. Eyes mind heart and soul wide open. NO FEAR ❤. Time will tell 😢❤.
Two things:
1- Huberman has many guests, that are reputable and serious people.
2- how good are the sponsored products is not the same as the validity of the tools and the information he presents
Two things:
1- many of his guests also talk about things outside their area of study and misconstrue things
2- the fact that he will hawk non-scientific products says a lot about either his integrity or his ability to scrutinize the science behind those products. Either way it’s bad.
End of story.
@@lyinbobbycottonseedI don’t find the product advertisements to be memorable at all, much less pushy, so it’s a moot point.
Science is not about being an “expert” in only one area. Generalists are necessary for understanding anything at all.
You’re probably not smart enough to read a scientific paper.
@@bryanutility9609 1. You lack of ability to memorize his product endorsements has no bearing on their integrity. You don’t seem capable of being objective, so it being a “moot point” to you is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things and simply indicates your lack of critical thinking skills.
2. Actually, that’s exactly what science is about. That’s why scientists, including Huberman, pick one area of study to become an expert in and spend many years focusing on that one area. No Ph.D goes to school to study ophthalmology, and exercise science, and sleep. The subjects are simply too complex and there’s too much to learn. Even scientists who study one subject for 30 years understand their own weak areas on that very subject.
3. That’s an ad hominem attack, a logical fallacy, and it shows your inability to control your emotions and exercise maturity.
I suggest you research Dunning-Kruger effect, spend some time learning how to self-analyze, gain self-awareness, and then come back to the table to try having discussions with other adults. Case closed.
Before I started reading the studies he cites and realised he misrepresents them, I read a book he recommend by someone he interviewed and it was pure pseudoscience. It was also harmful, for example, it claimed fibromyalgia was caused by engaging in too many enjoyable activities. There is zero evidence of that, zero, and the author didn't claim there was any evidence even though she claimed it was true.
I was taken aback. This guy works at Stanford! He doesn't tell you when the guests have fringe views that go against all the evidence and aren't widely held
@@therabbithat what guest was that?
This lady is clearly bitter and has something personal against Huberman. Not sure she is even correct. Hard to determine but I don’t recall Huberman ever claiming definitive things about taking x.
All I can say is anytime I‘ve followed a huberman protocol like for better sleep for example, my life has vastly improved.
Exposing yourself to light in the morning and shunting in the night is more common sense than "protocol". Cold showers can temporarily activate your sympathetic nerve system and make you feel awakened (it has been known for centuries). Eating good food and doing exercise is literally what all health experts recommend. There is really nothing special about "Huberman protocol". You don't need AG1 or tinted glasses. That's why he is criticized.
I don’t know about autophagy, but I have been practicing intermittent fasting (as advocated by Dr. William Li, for example) for approximately a year now, and the results have been quite satisfying. I’ve lost around 28 lbs., and my blood pressure and heart rate have decreased significantly. Moreover, my migraines have decreased in frequency. My RN wife also follows this diet and has had similar results. We emphasize lower carb intake but aren’t afraid of fruit/fructose (most days, I consume over a cup of blueberries and a banana in a smoothie). The bottom line is that intermittent fasting is hands down the most effective and easiest method for losing and controlling weight that I’ve ever tried (I’m 63 and have tried a number of different approaches). Yet you indicated (or at least implied) that it isn’t that great. What gives?
Lol. This guest just mischaracterized something Huberman said and got it COMPLETELY wrong. I was already pretty turned off by this interview (see my long comment downthread) but this is just unethical. Huberman tells people to get sunlight in order to reset the circadian rhythm, which is good advice, as humans set our circadian rhythm in large part through our exposure to sunlight. So, if you need support for your circadian rhythm, as people with sleep problems do, it helps to get natural sunlight (or a blue light device--but the sun is cheaper). That has NOTHING to do with vitamin D, as this guest claims. This is pure incompetence and bad faith.
Give him time and he will be speaking about sun gazing
I agree they are oversimplifying some of huberman's things in the same way they are criticizing him of oversimplifying things. I believe hubermann really does care about making people's lives better and using real science and maybe he gets a few things wrong here and there, like they did. On one of his recent shows they talked about how fructose is great and shouldn't be vilified. I also believe he does a lot of preparation for each show. So what we have here is a bunch of people doing their best. It would be super cool if people would leave their biases at home, but we don't live in that world.
With that said, I haven't heard any of huberman's discussion about vaccines, and if they correctly portrayed what he really believes about them, then he deserves every critique. RFK Jr is a nut
@@veryimportantperson3657 omg !! You’re so right!! This two are sounding like jealousy is taking precedence over reality!!!
@@claudiapasavel7469 very much so. they both seem to have decent credentials in their respective fields, but the childish attitude and apparent bad faith really hurt their credibility.
About Andrew Huberman podcasts, the first video intrigued me, the second video left me confused, and the third video I watched felt uncanny. This was years ago and now I know why. Thank you for the enlightenment.
So far she has brought up one lie and it was a lie not told by Huberman but by his guest…
A few lies I noticed. She says Huberman advises to get sunlight in the eyes for vitamin D although Huberman never even mentions vitamin D. Huberman explains that sunlight activates the photoreceptors in the eyes that triggers the circadian rhythm, to optimize wakefulness and sleep. Also she fails to recognize his nuanced point about deliberately activating short term stress (cortisol) in a way which is beneficial to the body/mind. Also she criticizes Huberman's guidance on lowering sugar/alcohol intake, which is nutrition 101. Doesn't take a scientist to see she's biased.
Vitamin D was spoken.about in the Lustig podcast A.H. made.
@@Zeylin17 Sure its a very important vitamin to be aware of if you want to live healthy but the context they discuss vitamin D in, the morning eye sun exposure, is not for vitamin D so they are misrepresenting what AH said while claiming to be on the side of truth, that makes for an untrustworthy argument
@@davidoh8745 She doesn't criticize the claim that you should lower alcohol and sugar intake. But his particular methods lmao. His guidance, not the actual goal.
That's some serious cognitive dissonance you've got going on there.
Pharma companies have done enough to discredit themselves and that’s the reason supplement companies are thriving, as well as science guys such as Huberman.
13:52 Dr. Lustig's "schtick" about fructose and ultra processed foods has been EXTENSIVELY proven. These people are criticizing Huberman and basing it on exactly the kind of thing they criticize.
I think this doctor is just as siloed as Huberman. Everything she hates about him is mirrored in her own approach. Western medicine is her religion and she can't see the problems and holes that the USA's incentivised-science, obscene lobbying and immoral advertising have created. Her appeal to the authority of that system keeps her safe because it's currently the respected norm, but it's hard for me to look past the obvious flaws. And so I must take my health into my own hands. Honestly, her narrow-minded zealousness seems just as dangerous as anything I've heard on Huberman.
Where do you get your health advice from, and what is it based on if not science?
@@WilliamRoscoe - it's still based on science, just a more honest application of the method. I like Vinay Prasad for his ability to interpret studies and find flaws, and Suneel Dhand for general common sense health advice. Mike Israetel for science based exercise protocols.
@@ronp4529 So when it comes to atherosclerosis and vaccinations you prefer to believe doctors rather than scientists, and particularly those doctors who are anti-science.
I prefer Jeff Nippard to Mike Israetel but that's just a matter of personal taste.
@@WilliamRoscoe - are you familiar with Vinay Prasad? He is a doc, but certainly a scientist as well. His interpretations of the data and the policy implications are spot on. He is not antivax. He would however argue that boosting young healthy males is detrimental, esp the moderna jab, and that is based on data. Whereas the CDC made recommendations before any studies were done, and that caused net harm, not only to many young males but also to the public perception of vaccines. Many people are at such a point with pharma that their abysmal track record of profiteering while harming people is reason enough to be skeptical.
We're at a time when there is so much information available and certain experts have carved out niches in fields and they're at the cutting edge and sharing what they are finding and debating it with colleagues. I just think this particular doctor is lazy, and hiding behind the "authority" which has proved itself incompetent. Many, maybe most, doctors are this way because the system is set up to encourage these blanket recommendations as a heuristic, and that makes these so called authorities a shield for lazy docs to hide behind so they can save time and avoid thinking critically about the needs of each individual patient.
I like Peter Attia on atherosclerosis btw. And I also enjoy Jeff Nippard's content. But I'll even allow myself to enjoy some entertainment from Ryan Hummiston because laughing is good and practical knowledge is also worth considering.
@@WilliamRoscoe I wrote a long response that seems to have disappeared. Perhaps UA-cam comments aren't the best place for a fair debate.
I will say this, Vinay Prasad and Suneel Dhand are medical doctors but they are certainly not anti-science. VP is the best I've seen with regard to reading and interpreting studies. If there are flaws, he will find them; if the conclusions are sound, he will communicate that. SD gives common sense advice with regard to diet and exercise and critiques the myriad flaws he sees from working within the system. I hope you would spend a couple hours watching some Vinay Prasad videos or reading his substack before calling him anti science. If you provide some direction to professionals that you trust I will look at them.
My main point is that too many doctors use blanket guidelines from failed agencies as heuristics rather than digging into research themselves and giving nuanced medical advice to individuals. If those agencies functioned properly, then this would be ok. Unfortunately they demonstrated incompetence multiple times in the response and any doctors hiding behind their recommendations are lazy and are using that appeal to authority as a shield.
Pharma and the regulators have been compromised and it's more important than ever to be medically literate and advocate for oneself.
With regard to atherosclerosis, I look to Peter Attia for guidance. Is he also anti-science?
Also a fan of Jeff Nippard's 👍
Firstly, it’s important to remain mindful that it’s important to be circumspect about information they encounter. Everyone should be accountable and kept honest.
But this interview got rants. Emotionally so.
Ms. Love misrepresents Lustig’s claims by saying that he’s got people afraid of fruit; he repeatedly and clearly states that there is NO concern about eating fruit because of fiber.
I’m sure that she didn’t intend to lie or misrepresent. I wonder if that same phenomenon might also apply to Huberman and guests…? 🤔
Also, the vast majority of what we today consider solid science were, once upon a time, “pseudoscience”.
I was able to put my prediabetes into remission, fix my sleep, and more. Because I was empowered by people like Huberman (including himself).
Anyway. You guys both have passion and are human. I get it. I am too, and have done similar things in my day (and likely will again).
I, for one, am heartened that voices like Huberman are shifting people into a more proactive place. We DO have agency. We are NOT just passive victims to every negative health outcome (as started to be acknowledged around the 23 min mark).
Net positive, IMO. With due caution also merited.
Also: love the 2nd Ed AD&D Monstrous Compendium in the background!
41:20 - scott seriously characterized the shots as having “had oversight”: in their original iteration prevention of transmission wasn’t even tested (a pharma exec, not going to type the company name but you know which one i mean, testified to this in EU Parliament with the laughable excuse of “we were moving at the speed of science”)
I kinda stopped watching Huberman when he started doing life hacks. Seemed gimmicky. He really did help me understand the way the dopamine works and I do credit him for that. The constant need to get more views often ruins the credibility of so many influencers I use to have so much respect for in the beginning of their career.
Very legitimate criticism... I follow Huberman. I became annoyed that he has guests that are clearly "non legetimate" to be polite.
Thanks!
Thank you! This is amazing.
The 'Sunlight thing' is not Huberman's. Dr Jack Kruse has been leading the charge/educating about it since 2007.
the bigger point is that for years western medicine doctors never mentioned this
@@kschulte9847 "Wake up early, open the curtain, and make your bed" is more of Mom's part to teach. There is really no magic about keeping your circadian rhythm by following natural light exposure. It's common sense. Most doctors' don't mention it because it's not as effective as other interventions like meds. If you need a major lifestyle change, like, due to diabetes, then adjusting circadian rhythm will be a part of education. Ask an endocrinologist.
@@korsakoff76 I disagree with you that it is commen sense. That is not the case for many people. Mark my words, medicine is in for a big change over the next decade or our country will collapse. Look at the deficit and look at the line items. I believe strongly that many of our "experts" are flat out wrong and working in an outdated paradigm, that was based on ignorance and or corruption. There are countless examples at this point. Do you need some? Meds for type 2 diabetes are from optimal for many people and at a societal level it is catasrophic. Do you understand why? Please think about it and respond. This country has lost the ability to critically think. Feel free to respond to specific statements I have made in this comment, but be specific...do not just come from a feeling. Map that feeling to rationality. Please see if you can do that.
@@korsakoff76 Your comment is extremely short sighted and you have opened up a host of negative consequences from short sighted thinking. 1). Many doctors for quite some time dont message this because of the conflict of interest between big pharma/insurance companies. and medical training. Are you not aware of this? If you think you this is an exaggeration, you are sorely mistaken 2). Common sense? I radically disagree with you on this. You are absolutely missing the game theoretic consequences of thinking like this. Some people are aware...but a significant amount of people are not. 3) As far as type 2 diabetes??? this one is controversial...do you understand why? Many people with type 2 diabetes can be cured and or treated with an optimal diet. That is where a healthy society should mostly be. Metformin should be the last line. When this is not the case disastrous consequence at a societal level await us. Do you understand why? I have the answer...but I would really appreciate it if you can respond to why it is so important at a societal level, Metoformin is not the predominant way to treat blood sugar issue. I am concerned for America, if most think like you. Can you explain why I am concerned with specific evidence and not just a feeling? If you do answer, level up your logica...there are outliar solutions, but when you please consider responding with the frequency at which a society should impement its response to maladies??? Do you understand that last statement? If not I will clarify. Try to interact with it and level up your critical thinking skills. Feel free to build out scenarios for me so I can level up my critical thinking. But be specific and remember what ever solution and or solutions you provide there will be secondary and tertiary consequences. Do you understand that? Can you give examples?
@@korsakoff76 your response is concerning for multiple reasons. 1). How deeply are you aware that their a radical/extreme conflict of interest along with inefficiencies that naturaly occur due to bureaucracy with regards to big pharma/traditional med/food system and more. It is important you get a grasp on this if our society is going to make out of this. 2). I strongly disagree with you that sunglight in the morning and grounding by much of the population is common sense. 3). Meds for sleep should be a last last resort. A cost benefit analysis needs to be made for each individual. 4) Your take on meds for diabetes type 2 is concerning. Type 2 diabetes at scale in a society is a society that is setting itself for collapse. Do you understand why? Please engage with this and tell me why I state this. If you cannot, your thinking is short sighted. Ask an endroconolgist is the wrong answer. Do you understand why? Think of old the food pyramid that was put out by the US decades ago and has since been radically debunked...by some science and infinite amount of anecdotes. Sit with this for a while, please sit with this and process. I guarantee blood sugar medication has been and will be continued to seen from higher level thinkers for the wrong solution at scale. I hope you understand why. Can you at least make the argument as to why I have come to this conclusion. Please be specific and do not operate from the feeling level.
Yoshinori Ohsumi won the 2016 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for his discoveries about autophagy, a process that helps cells recycle and break down their contents. The term autophagy comes from the Greek words auto- meaning "self" and phagein meaning "to eat".
Ohsumi's discoveries include:
Identifying genes that are essential for autophagy
Elucidating the molecular machinery that's involved in autophagy
Demonstrating that similar machinery is used in human cells
Characterizing the proteins encoded by key autophagy genes
OK. Well then. Your point is...?? What?
@petermccavington8232
That's what a lot of intermittent fasting is based on. The idea that if you don't consume food, the body starts consuming itself starting from the old and damaged cells.
I'm a fan of this channel and a subscriber on Substack, and I have to say that this could be the weakest video on the channel. Endless rambling and straw man arguments without even citing where Huberman or any other person mentioned in the video has said it.
Also, I don't see what harm is there to say that people should be mindful of how much sugar they consume, whether it's from fruits or coffee. Neither do I understand what harm is there to avoid gmo and consume more organic food, as the expert in this video doesn't give any details.
@@novideostoday I am always skeptical if whatever anyone says or claims. I also do not fall all out just of current science. Has anyone ever question on who funds clinical studies? I heard but have not yet research enough on who sponsors the new pharmaceutical research. Imo, I think it’s the pharma cos.
I have no ties or sponsorship from any companiesbut what’s to say AG1 is indeed a sham. You can definitely get the nutrition from buying wholesome and organic foods and spend a whole bunch of money doing it. It could really boils down on what and how to supplement any shortfalls.
What is to say that Slant is sponsored by big pharma? I hear alot about “science” in this episode that I lost count.
I just saw an ad popup about “nocturnal bacterium” about type 2 diabetes.
You're using could. That's not a strong term for accepting or endorsement in science..She stated that supplements are unregulated ' what this means in general, is they've got to meet thresholds to sell..the supplements makers don't, because of the the non governmental aid. I used to be like you, but the perfect or proof is not a part of science, consensus is.gt used to it.
@@madra000im your research enthusiast. I have my research at the ready
Disclaimer I love Huberman, I’ve been there since day 1 whilst doing my final year of my degree from home during Covid lockdowns. I needed to get out the house for movement but was gripped with the ‘needing to constantly learn anxiety’ (counter productive I know) so found him on the day he launched and it felt like fate as I was already intuitively researching the areas he was discussing based on my own personal experiences and wanting to ground it in science. Anyway, I think it’s good to confront your own dependencies on people, I very much rely on him out of laziness and low self belief, needing someone to give me the answers and being desperate to change my experience of myself and life. I always felt admiration for him that he seemed to be very down to earth and wise, objective and seemingly wanting to make a change in the scientific world that is so corrupt with ego. But then you have to also remember he is also just human, and therefore flawed and susceptible to the darker side of having so much power and influence. He feels safe and calm and wise, but he is also battling things personally that we don’t see that will influence his decisions. So yeah. A reminder to not idolise.
Let’s get this channel to get 1M subscribers.
@@theflyingdutchman787 right 😂 that seems to be going well lol
29:30…. She thinks fluoride is not a toxin… yikes
As a person who got really sick a few years back and didn’t get any real help from any of the doctors I saw (ER doctors, Urgent care doctors, PCP, and 2 different gastro doctors), I finally saw an MD who was a functional medicine doctor. Before the testing came back to substantiate the diagnosis, he accurately diagnosed me with a leaky gut due to high cortisol which then caused a leaky gut, Sebo, and dysbiosis. He put me on a protocol and I recovered. Even the plethora of food sensitivities I had were reversed. My issue with “western doctors” is there arrogance and refusal to confer with naturopathic practitioners. Western doctors often dismiss anything they were not taught in medical school and I see that as limiting and damaging to the profession of the medical field.
What was the protocol if I may ask?
This was awesome! Please do another one!! You could had a whole show on any of the topics you skimmed! Really great conversation and really needed information ❤
I really do appreciate the pushback that the host and his guest are giving to Andrew Huberman. We need a diversity of perspectives, especially when it comes to healthcare, nutrition, etc. What I find concerning is the idea (offered by the guest) that social media companies need to be regulating/fact checking social media influencers. As if there is some “official” position that is inherently factual/consensus opinion and anything that deviates from that needs to be publicly challenged by mega corporations and their government backers. This creates a censorship regime and a threat to the 1st amendment. The answer to supposive misinformation is to put your own video out and challenge views you disagree with.
Yeah. It's a real problem. I 100% agree.
33:20 Glad you included this but you probably shouldn't have. This immediately tanked your credibility for me.
All of a sudden it just seems like a character assassination because you personally got ghosted by him.
I've stopped listening to Huberman, so I'm not a deluded fan.
Is there anyone else who is reminded of a younger
Michael Keaton, when they watch Scott talk?
Threads? It's the first time ever I hear someone mentions Threads.
Thanks for these "de-bunking" videos. It's great to hear someone calling bs on Huberman, Hof, Attia, etc.
Someone is going to put this Scott Carney in his place.
He's always saying things about people like Wim hoff, Huberman and others and how he helped them get where they are.
Then talks about their personal issues and does nothing to debunk anything that anyone has done.
We are all pretty aware the way things were that Huberman was pushing supplements. Pretty obvious he was being compensated. We're all aware that not all things including studies are great references. But that does not mean that cherry picked study has no relevance to what he's saying nor does it mean it is not true what he's saying. But to bash people without facts is terrible taste on any end.
Is this the point the pendulum swings back the other way, ie. back towards science. Or is it going to get more crazy? Great video Scott, definitely more for you to dig into, though please don,t tell me not to listen to rich roll, he,s the only one left now😢
I hope the pendulum swings back to reality. I've heard Rich Roll is great, so I'll refrain from looking into him for now.
I've had a lot of benefit from listening to Huberman, mainly in my motivation to work out and eat healthy (no AG1, thanks) and yet I must say you are 100% spot on.
He is a prof in neuroscience, not sport and exercise sciences or nutrition sciences. So not qualified to talk about those topics
I agree. I wondered what Huberman would do his first season of podcasting after he exhausted his own (sub)field of knowledge. One thing he did was interview experts in other fields, great! Another thing he did is what I categorized as literature reviews; this is where he was out of his depth. In hindsight, it didn't bother me because I never thought he was positioning himself as an expert in these fields, just throwing light on research. Curious if you would have a different take, cheers!
Yeah God forbid anyone talk about anything that they have not been officially certified in by big food and big pharma.
hence why not to believe everything you see on youtube
@@TheRealJavierNovoa OK bud, how’s your tin foil hat fitting?
Are you a podcaster? What makes you think you're qualified to comment on podcasting?
maybe ask also whats wrong with Dr. Andrea Love Science, as she is sponsored by Bayer (Ex Monsanto) and limits heavily the comments on her instagram
Huberman works with and has a friend, Derek, who owns a very succesfull online trt company, Marek health.
I think Hubes only consulted on a formulation for Derek's supplement company, Gorilla Mind. It's called Sigma Male (?)
Meh she's basically upset about people trying new systems of testing in a world where everything is shared instantly. What do you expect? Perfect propagation? She's almost saying "trying to optimize on some corner case data and being a human trying new things is bad", listening to institutions is 100% never wrong 🤦♂
"Safe and effective".
That's not financially backed whatsoever.
🤪😉
Karen makes herself very unbelievable with her claims.
I.e. fluoride is indeed beneficial for teeth health. But there are MANY studies that show how bad it is for your brain any body health.
So I don’t know what she is on about, but she is insanely naive and a bit over confident in her science
...as a German Bio Chemist Ph D
several times I asked you already
is that ALL you can do...
participating in ad hominem
smear campaigns???
Is there anything of original Value
YOU contribute???
anything???
This person doesn't cite a single study to prove her point. She is doing exactly what she accuses Huberman of. I came for facts and got opinions. Very disappointing
why did you add the german qualifier? haha.
@@MsJVM well if you comprehend what she is saying, you will see she doesn't need to cite studies. She is pointing out that the studies Huberman cites are not good evidence and cherry picking of studies (Mechanistics, rat studies, small studies, in vitro). It would then fall to Huberman to gather relevent studies to support his claim as would be expected of a Standford Professor.
As a journalist he informs the public. What seems to be great about him is that he is not afraid to go against sacred cows. I’m pretty sure that a lot of other people wanted to criticize Wim Hoff and Huberman, but simply didn’t want the problems associated with “attacking” a highly popular public figure. Unfortunately for Huberman, his moral conduct is now in question and that opens the door for other criticism.
I think it was about time for people to start questioning the prevalent podcaster/youtuber influencer-guru paradigm, especially in the realm of health, productivity, and science. The western society has had encounters with a kind of guru before - the spiritual guru - and it wasn’t pretty. The same lessons should be applied here.
@@robjows you're absolutely right. Gossiping doesn't need evidence to back it up.
How do you know how people think of feel about internet info - do you have studies to show this?
Dr. Andrea Love is probably good at what she does, but why so aggressive and angry. Trying to flip everything that Huberman says, I'm sure Huberman has made mistakes but it's so hard to reach the average person with such in-depth science that is constantly evolving through learning. Sense a bit of jealousy and a grab for popularity here.
Why don't you work together rather than throw 'intellectual bombs' at each other... So much anger and discontent... As a scientist, you don't have to scream to be heard by the right audience.
I appreciate your concern about the visual downside of Andrea's lighting. I spent most of my life making videos, one of the most important things I learned was that audio was more important than video. In early days of TV people always walked away during commercials; but if they made it back at some time they "heard" everything. I am very aware of visuals as a result of my life of image making. The aspect of "just listening" is so important to YT I want good information like this.
Thank god this real scientist has never heard about this and will happily use their 2014 Headphones that came with her Android.
Yeah... very professional
The generalizations in this interview are quite concerning. While Western medicine is "good" at addressing symptoms and treating diseases, dismissing the impact of diet and lifestyle as pseudoscience is misleading and wrong. This falls under the field of epigenetics, where we know and have been scientifically proven by multiple studies that diet and lifestyle choices can significantly influence our health outcomes. This lady seems to be heavily biased towards pharmaceutical solutions, disregarding alternative perspectives without consideration. I appreciate your interviews and am open to diverse viewpoints, but the absolutism in her opinions was quite disappointing and quite wrong to be honest.. With the current obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease epidemic in the US, are we really going to pretend that what people eat doesn't matter? Ha ha ha...
Exactly
I completely agree.
I enjoyed this discussion and different viewpoints to my own.
To see how they cover this with certain keywords was very helpful for spotting it in the future.
Agree
"with the current obesity diabetes and CVD epidemic are we really going to pretend that what people eat doesn't matter"
holy straw man dude, horribly bad faith argument that is not at all what she is saying. comments like your ruin my faith in humanity tbh
One, not epigenetics. Two, as of right now, diet and lifestyle are pseudoscience, as they have yet to be proven.
Epigenetics is the study of how an environment can effect the expression of genes.
And if you think she's is completely wrong about her statements, then show us the published papers that show she's wrong
10:50 and 11:20 robert Lustig on fructose = misinformation ?
thank you, it was interesting.
The first red flag came for me when I was listening to an episode with David Sinclair on longevity.
Sinclair was fanatically pushing the benefits of NMN. He was saying that he feels like a superhuman when he is taking it and feels awful if he stops.
He was sounding more like a drug addict than a professor, and I've seen so many people develop this kind of dangerous psychological dependency on supplements they think are the magical key to their health.
On top of that, I believe he started taking it based on trials done on rats.
This discussion doesn't make any sense. I'm not Huberman fan but this conversation neither debunks or proves anything, more of a waste of time
I'm so sorry you feel that way.
@@sgcarney you should feel worse that you platformed something as misleading as what she said at 55:10 given that the last measles death in the united states was in 2015.
Thank you really helpful it's so hard to know who to trust. Great interview 😊
If these people get their way, expect frivolous lawsuits for saying that vitamin c is good for preventing colds...
Too many snake-oil salesmen whose day jobs are ordinary medical practitioners...My first experience with a dodgy practitioner was when I bumped someone driving a Mercedes Benz in the rain.
It turned out to be a doctor who took my details and contacted me later for compensation for the nasty dent on his chromed bumper...When I saw the dented bumper I realized it was too high and my plastic bumper could never have caused the dented shape...I told him as much and never saw him again...and pitied the clientele he serviced..As an architect have had the displeasure of a few more doctor clients lacking morals... Scott keep weeding...wonderful podcast.
thank you for providing a counterpoint to all the "hitpiece" narratives floating around. I'm kind of in that "bro" space of youtube and it is EVERYWHERE and it's like people have just turned off their brains!
The morning light thing is correct in sleep science in regulating the circadian rhythm. As it’s through the retina to the pineal gland to regulate melatonin. So one area he can actually comment on because there is a an optical component. I saw him live and was kinda disappointed because he kinda just talked about himself.
I was invested in the conversation until she started interjecting with her opinions on vaccines, felt like she was doing the same thing she’s accusing him of. SMH.
Why? What was so abhorrent about what she said about vaccines?
I'm glad to see other people feeling the same way. She was doing a lot of ranting that was contradictory. "Science moves very slow..."...*proceeds to talk about vaccines, when there is obvious concerns with the COVID vax since it was not properly tested*. She used saunas as one example of being hyped up, dismissing lots of discussions on it. Fasting/autophagy has a lot of research behind it. She's not someone I would want to have as a doctor.
@@Stargirl_-wz8ub it’s not her opinions. She is an actual expert as an Immunologist and what she says about vaccines is backed by scientific evidence and the consensus of other experts from around the world.
Glad I found your channel and reminding me of the most useful advise in all things. ‘If it sounds to good to be true… it’s probably massively exaggerated’… but that is also true for the companies making profit limit the information which is negative to bare minimum as per legal requirement.
Gonna go listen to Huberman and improve my life and health.
Your guest is misleading, Dr Lusteg said the study was in mice.
The Business of America is Business. So when you look at your supplement bottle and discover that this product "supports" so and so or that it plays an "important role" in ... health you'll discover with your magnifying glass writing that"These statements have not been evaluated by the FDA." But who owns the FDA? This is where cognitive dissonance comes in. When "your" FDA hasn't had the time, apparently, to evaluate these claims you start to wonder about conflicts of interest and you start to question the authority of the FDA which is still better in my opinion than the health department of the state of Florida.
Numer TWO: to have any credulence as a health influencer you HAVE to have your own line of products or bare minimum endorse a lot of products. Number three, I really enjoyed this video.
The supplement companies need to run trials if they want FDA evaluations. That’s the way drug approval works. The FDA would be overwhelmed if it has to test every claim some company made.
Even when the supplement companies run those studies, the FDA only takes the information the companies give them. For the FDA to be of any real use at all, it needs to be staffed by people whose pay has no connection to Pharma profits (so government workers), and by enough of those people to do those investigations. There would be so many good, secure, purposeful jobs in it, but the neoliberals (Reagan, Clinton and after) conspired with business to convince everyone that government work is shameful and inefficient, when the truth is the opposite; no entity has the economies of scale and the freedom from the need to make profit that government has, and that true productivity is what corporations really fear.
What am I missing on fluoride? NIH and Harvard had studies indicating its neurotoxicity?
It's funny, Huberman is the only 'health' podcaster I listen to and learn from, from [time to time] and I appreciate. I still listen to some of his older episodes. I have not listened to any 'newer' episode, created in the past year plus. (life stuff, unrelated to anything else)
All the criticisms Scott and Dr. Love discuss in this video I broadly believe in main strokes, and disinformation and bad information is a huge problem in our society.
But Huberman is the one health podcaster I can navigate well. I didn't notice it until listening to y'all talk, that I don't listen to episodes with guests (mostly). I think I must've not liked their topic/content and yeah, I did get a whiff of 'influencer' vibe from at least a couple of guests.
I think for some weird reason, he is the only podcaster that doesn't creep me out (he could very well be a total creep irl). I don't take supplements and basically ignore anything he says about supplements, although I don't recall him saying anything cringey...to my tastes.
I'm not here defending him or against him, I'm just sharing my possibly atypical experience with this podcaster's content.
Save for Huberman, I think of and see (on my own, just with my thoughts) a lot of the criticisms and duplicity and bad science or even just bad takes with most other 'health' podcasters. Cringe.
I can't believe she is defending the idea of putting a teaspoon of sugar in your coffee. Yes, you should be afraid of it and you can get used to enjoying it without any sweetener.
@@blaply3421 I agree. There are people out there that are addicted to sugar and carbs thus becoming diabetic. You can't tell a sugar addict a spoonful of sugar is not going to hurt you. Sugar is super addictive like cocaine. But people normalize it, because hey its just sugar! Like you can't tell an alcoholic a shot of tequila is not going to hurt you. I mean there are people out there who can eat fruit and maybe eat the occasional carb, but there are people that really need to cut it out of their lives completely.
Also found this problematic. One teaspoon of sugar every now and then will not do much to healthy people, but if you tell people it's ok, many will put a spoon of sugar in every cup of coffee they have and maybe they have 3 cups a day.
Same for what she says about non GMO food, etc. We might have no trials that that kind of food is unhealthy, but we also have no trials that it is heathy and in terms of fertilizers, we do have the science to prrof that fertilizers are toxic. Maybe the amount of fertilizer on e.g. an apple is minimal, but if you eat applezes with fertilzers on it everyday, there's a compound effect.
omg Andrea, thank you for mentioning glucose goddess! She has always rubbed me the wrong way, not just for her blatant miscommunication of physiology, but (I know you didn't mention this) also for the smug delivery - kinda reminds me of Huberman. Almost as if the subtext behind her elaborations is "I am much smarter than you, so believe me".
I was an early Huberman subscriber, when he first started posting I watched every video. The slow degradation of quality has been disappointing to say the least. As his star has risen, it seems the ego has as well, to the detriment of content. He's a public figure now, kinda like Bill Nye.
56:30
here’s the answer, Scott:
- the shots are mechanistically novel. it’s reasonable to not want to subject yourself something that reprograms your cells to manufacture pathogens
- we were lied to very directly about its impact on transmission
- people were blackmailed with losing their jobs (with few of those refusing being “made whole”) on the basis of the lie about transmission impact
hope that helps
I’m actually hearing a shootdown on self-care industry and an attack on a podcaster’s personna. He might be several millions. I don’t see several hundred million. Please continue to do your debunking blogs and reject all sponsorships and sales. Thank you. Just bec FDA approved does not mean Dr. don’t overprescribed. Some drs never even took the time to educate patients to make lifestyle changes but instead write more Rx.
When Huberman had David Sinclair on, I read Sinclair's book and started researching into the person. His work in the supplement business pointed towards conflicts of interest, some of the science seemed mere quackery and I began doubting Huberman. Why would he invite a quack? The pop lectures before audiences, AG1, that does not check out as a product I unsubscribed the podcast. - Your work here points at something deeper and I appreciate it.
There is a lot of truth in what you are saying - and a lot of envy.
PS. I never take supplements apart from Vit D3 during the winter. Twice a year I have a full blood work with top results. (I am a Hungarian woman of 4 days short of 78 y.o.)
The secret? Good nutrition, regular training/walking, good books, good friends, and continuous learning.
as seen with the below comments, huberman fans do not like it when his con is exposed.
No they don't
Is there a problem with inviting Andrew Huberman himself to talk about all these episodes you have made about criticizing him?