General rule of thumb, if the production quality is too good and the talk about the science doesn't bore you to death with meticulous nuances. Then they're probably talking bull shit.
Thanks for this. I'm a recovering Huberman fan and appreciate the good work folks like you and Dr. Andrea Love are doing debunking his content. The AG1 plugs popping up on many UA-cam channels is making me quickly hit the unsubscribe button.
4:59 this is the sole problem. Since I do it for a living, i thought it was great to see a Prof establish a podcast, I was interested to read the evidence he refers to. However, I found murine models (studies only on mice) or statements based on a single small study. This is basic science. Then this happened more and more. Then I saw him doing “the podcast circuit”. I just thought it sad. It could be done and still be authentic and robust. In a world where people need authentic correct information, this just adds to the problem and now it’s just another topic dividing people.
Thank you so much for drawing attention to this. I’ve been yelling similar sentiments into the void for two years. He started going off the rails not long after he started his podcast…once his popularity took off. Now at 5M+ he approaches his podcast (and as a guest on other podcasts) as though he is beyond reproach. He has offered a portal for people to send him studies that contradict his claims, but I’m only aware of one person he’s placated prior to that portal, yet I’m also aware of a number of scientists and medical professionals who have reached out to him already, and he’s done nothing to even acknowledge them or refuses to show any attempt to consider them (as you have pointed out). Why would anyone take the time to school him again? Unless he makes every counter claim and any supporting study that comes through that portal public, there’s nothing stopping it from being a trash bin.
I quite liked some of his stuff, but any time he talked about psychology, I was surprised how incorrect he was. Given I am a psychologist I started to wonder if other people who are subject matter experts felt the same…it didn’t take much digging to find a lot of academic criticism of him. It came as no surprise that his personal ethics are so shambolic. People who continue to support him seem to be generally very poorly educated.
Appreciate this and good video but just to add Huberman did also make very clear that he wasn't advising people not to wear sunscreen at all, to me it was more balanced than this video makes out...still appreciate you though!
His episode about male and female fertility contained so much nonsense, including telling women over 35 to try for a year or a year and a half before seeking fertility treatment!! Which is beyond ridiculous. And the way he was confidently talking about stuff that he gets wrong enrages me!!
I read that hit piece article that came out about Andrew Huberman a while ago about him having a bunch of gfs and although i remained sceptical of its validity thoughout reading it, the one thing that stood out to me was the claim at the end of the article someone made that andrew likes to get peoples hopes up then let them down and you can supposedly see that behavior on his podcast by how he says a lot without getting to the point. And then i remembered how i would frequently get annoyed while watching his podcast because i was always anticipating him finally get to the - how to actually do it - bit of info i actually needed but it seems like he keeps over explaning and beating around the bush.
This video is so important and it was great. People are just mesmerized by him and will believe anything because he has Stanford and Neuro-whatever in his credentials. He lost me at the sunscreen…like bro have u heard of melanoma?! Also the fluoride is just insanity…Thanks for your hard work on this video :) I’ll check out your podcast as I never have!
Thank you for beginning the debunking of influencer A.Huberman. Just watched one of his videos about how he has increased his muscle hypertrophy using the Henemann theory, In one sagment of this video he explains the mind muscle neuro connection, and postulates that someone with good nueromuscular control should be able to contract muscle tissue by simply thinking about it. Well, give that a try see how it works out for you. Muscle contraction in the absence of any force put on it just by using my developed neuro-muscular control ? I don't think so, so to speak. Keep up the great work and any comment re the above appreciated.
most of the benefits he's getting from recent life changes are likely from an increase in ppl who listen to him (purpose), affirmation from others, and sharing social rituals with people who then also benefit from doing something others are doing and are hopeful about. and then anyone who doesn't buy in, or aren't so hopeful, are just told they have mindset issues, which is true, but it's only true that it's the shared social ritual buy-in that's making these weak as water supplements (seem to) do anything more than what they're biochemically capable of. they believe together, and act together, and that's why all these disparate quasiscientific fads work, until they don't. mix that in with basic health advice that definitely does increase resilience, and you've got an unfalsifiable "protocol" that works, but not for the reasons they think it's working. (which is why it doesn't work for very many ppl, or it stops working until they move onto something else to believe in). it's unfalsifiable, and anyone who doesn't believe, it doesn't work. But since the people experiencing benefits (from social sharing they refuse to acknowledge the effects of) can just look at the people it doesn't work for and say "You have the wrong mindset", it has an extra layer of quasi-psychology to hide behind.
The way this man weaponizes his “understanding” of research to repackage the results to fit whatever idea he’s selling. Ridiculous. I’ve hated this man from the moment I watched more than 1 video. This guy is a quack. Insane that he cites the research too and some couldn’t be found, wow
::opens with critique of perverse incentive structures:: “The past few years my entire focus has been take downs of public-facing health and science experts.”
What first set my ego-maniac alarm off was how much he talked about himself and his skateboarding achievements on like every other episode, even when it had nothing to do with the topic being discussed. I liked the overall idea of bringing health science to, uhm, ordinary people, but this is clearly not the way.
Thank you for this Im a 3rd year immuno/micro phd and he had me fooled for a video, pretty scary. Then i tried to find his lab website and its supplement grifting... so infuriating. Do any of this guys Stanford colleagues call him out?? I guess they would have very quiet voices in comparison. PS Joe Neurogan is the funniest thing ive heard in a while
I was waiting for you to say something about AG1, that’s something that always bugged me about Huberman promoting, especially him being a doctor. It should be average knowledge that the best vitamins and minerals come from whole foods themselves and not a supplement, and a product saying “just use us on the side!” is just them begging you to buy when you can live perfectly fine without their supplement. AG1 is overpriced and whole vegetables are a much cheaper and sufficient route to maintain your health.
I'm sure to be labeled as a "bro science" guy, especially if you you go by my profile pic alone, but you'd be mistaken. Saying Andrew Huberman is a "danger" is a bit much in my opinion. Huberman does more good than bad, but I agree he seems to want to fill the voids with something and when there's nothing new out there he's willing to entertain things like the sunscreen topic. But in his defense, he provides a lot of great content from legit expert interviews and discussions. I kind of see it like going to my family MD, he's a great guy, I trust him, and he gets it right 90% of the time, but 10% of the time he is wrong, and occasionally entirely full of shit. I stumbled onto your channel via TikTok, looks interesting so I'll follow and hopefully you're someone truly interested in getting to the truth in a minefield of quacks and frauds (Gary Brecka comes to mind).
This guy has no credentials, is just a writer and yoga instructor (so is guilty of the same thing he accuses Huberman of), has a bone to pick because someone personally doesn't get flu vaccines (I wouldn't either unless you're around people at risk, especially since everyone has different reactions to them and knows a bit too much about what's in them, plus they may have good immune systems that handle the flu just fine). The immunologist didn't even disagree with Huberman on the catching colds through your eyes (last two times I got a cold I got viral conjunctivitis), both said its possible but not the main way. If you're dealing with a highly highly contagious strain of something, or work in an environment where you're more exposed more often, you prob should protect your eyes (IN ADDITION TO MASKING, so yeah no idea where he's pushing this right wing manosphere anti-covid vaccine bs he's projecting onto him). He also didn't disagree on the skin thing, he just used different words as a mealy mouthed way of saying this guys not really wrong but he didn't phrase it perfectly, so gottem. Assists with immunity (even passively) == extension of immune system. How dare someone speak in general layman's terms when talking about things on a podcast. On the studies thing, he talks about other companies talking about studies, not Huberman talking about studies, so its a way of insinuating the studies Huberman cites contradict what he says without saying it. This guy just shills his book instead of supplements. I've heard all the ingredients about AG-1 but when I try to source all the things individually (not the extra stuff, the vitamins that are listed in exact amounts), I end up paying more cause multi vitamins don't have all the same things so I have to buy extra supplements like magnesium, Methylated B12 , etc and end up paying more when its all combined. I've also tried other cheaper supplement powders that have the exact ingredients and they just didn't work. I think a big issue is these people have an arrogance, in that they see someone who respects their audience, doesn't regard them as the dumb masses, capable to take information and make their own decisions, and that they have the right to, even if that risks someone making the wrong decision. These people (usually on the opposite side of the spectrum they're accusing Huberman of) assume, that Huberman says something people will suddenly stop vaccinating, wearing masks, and wearing sunscreen even though he never says that. I mean honestly, if you're that jaded and think the audience is drooling Rogan fans, wouldn't you be okay with them doing that? Turns out the one thing they hate is people making measured informed decisions for themselves based on their own risk factors and risk tolerances. Not to mention the hypochondriac vibe I'm getting from the way these things are discussed here.
I came also after TikTok and share similar thoughts that Huberman does more good than bad as at least he brings science and heath issues and present it in more understandable way. He does not claim as he's guru and can sometimes be wrong but at least brings awareness on how you can benefit on things he discuss. And I see an other trend coming up lately where so called "debunk influencers" come up with the idea on how to win and shine when they find such guys like Huberman or Peter Attia telling sth not 100% true. Bring your own topics, discover better method on how to broadcast science but it's easier to criticize others. I'm not a Huberman psychofan but these podcasts are not for believing in everything they say, rather to give you perspective on healthy habits but as always - do your own research as well before trying everything
It reminds me of the old saying "The hyena eats the leavings of the lion's meal, thinking he has eaten well" I don't know Huberman . Perhaps he is not a "lion" but I say that Derek is a pompous twit.
I took some of his advice on alcohol. As for vaccines, you use your head with these. The flu vaccine helps a lot of people. Im not so sure about the covid vaccines...as for athletic greens...well...why would you buy that stuff.
He's wrong on alcohol. He doesn't differentiate types of alcohol, such as red wine (very healthy, been around for 5,000 years, French paradox, etc.) vs. spirits. (unhealthy).
You have to get the real cbd and I didn't like effect of that but from just a healthbfood shop don't waste your money, $140 for nothing, the other cbt works though!
8 місяців тому+3
lol, taking what he says in his ag1 ads as truth is asinine. I listen to all sorts of podcasts and never have I ever believed that the hosts truly use/believe in the products they’re advertising. Do you chew Trident because 4 out of 5 dentists recommend it?
I never liked him from the beginning because of the things he was saying which I can't remember, so I never watch him, looks like I was right, there is so much rubbish on many of these streams, you cannot take anything at face value, especially health, you need do your own research and think deeply about any claims in my opinion!❤
@@twelfthhour 1. “MY PRESCRIPTION FOR LONG COVID," as he called it 😅 AM sunlight (outside), a hearty breakfast (fiber for gut microbiome), a medium lunch, skipping dinner (nothing except water after 5:30 PM), 7 hours of sleep, and hydrotherapy (hot/cold for interferon). There is no clinical evidence for these claims. 2. Hyping Red/Infrared Light to treat COVID-19 based on shitty non-clinical evidence. 3. He praised his episode on the flu/cold, which was full of pseudoscience.
If you think the sun is killing us and the answer to prevent that is sunscreen, you're insane. If the sun is killing us, we are all doomed as it touches every single thing in the universe not just our skin. I was open to hearing you out but I can see you've got a bad boner for Hubberman. I wish someone honest will make these videos without personal hate tripping in.
Hi Derek, Been following you from early pandemic times, thanks a lot for many insights! I want to share how some of your work appears on my end. You can take it or leave it. I definitely share many criticism how have for many “conscious” communities. I do not always think your confrontational and aggressively accusing is giving your voice more receptive ears, at least not for me. The not-so-subtle suggestion Huberman is right wing was not backed up by any evidence (if I hears correctly) and not ok to do. Why would you do that? The fact he is a shareholder of a drink and promotes it without telling listeners he’s invested in the company is there. Also Huberman not replying to scientists in the field is questionable. Maybe bring them on to get more credibility on your end over hearsay. And sometimes you also seem to cynically question things related to communities that sound like you question the entire community. I do think it’s at least an honorable approach to think everyone tries their best, and there are many mistakes. Condemning communities that are peace-seeking at least is not kind nor professional. I agree with you on many stances, but a more scientific approach, more evidence and more experts are things I’d like to see. And having grown up outside the US, this aggressive attacking style of yours is also the norm in the US. In order for a society desperately in need for communication between different opinions it might be good to reflect on your aggressive approach which might alienate people you accuse, over trying to find common ground for fruitful conversations. And Huberman not replying to professionals in the field btw is something you did to me - and I’ve been a professional in the “mindfulness” space for 10y. You ignored any and all of my messages to you. I just remembered it now actually. So what you accuse others (here Huberman) of is also what you do…or not?
I always knew Huberman was full of bs in many subjects. At some point I thought I was the only one who could see past this bs. Thank you for this video and for showing people who he really is: another jackass that wants fame and fortune with awful lying content.
Hello, I am writing from production of the Joe Rogan Experience and would love to invite you to debate, live on air, Joe Biden. How can we make that happen?
Not defending the sunscreen claim here but I have to say that I really dislike the "what study?" response to podcasts. I dislike it precisely because I see the primary value of podcasts like this being their ability to share knowledge that researchers believe to be true but haven't published. My experience is that I learn the most interesting things from what academics tell me about their field while we're sharing a beer, not from what they've submitted to journals. Podcasts allow you to get this type of content without having to know the academic personally. Just watch any podcast with, say, Michael Levin, for example. He will tell you all about the experiments they're currently doing in their lab, what the early results are looking like, what avenues have proved to not work out etc etc etc. Another great example is like sports coaches who may have worked with thousands of athletes in their career and have very detailed logs of how different nutritional strategies have affected their athletes, but who haven't ever don't an RTC. There are all sorts of reasons that professional expertise may not make it into a journal. The results aren't finalised yet, the results were negative so not "worth" publishing, not enough time, not enough funding, still just a theory, or an opinion/interpretation that doesn't warrant a whole article, the expert works in industry not academia, etc etc etc. Of course studies are what we should regard as having a higher certainty of being correct. But I also want to know what things experts believe to be true but haven't published. There's even a word for this in mathematics, "folklore", and "folklore" is often cited in journal articles! You just have to keep in mind to take it with a pinch of salt and check the credability and authenticity of the presenter. But in my mind this unpublished stuff is exactly what these podcasts are for. To some extent also clarifying published work for the general audience but I think that's a secondary goal. There is no other outlet for this information other than "chats over beers" and to that extent I think the podcast is a really important component of science communication that covers a gap that publishing misses.
I don't think that's the issue. Also, Hitchens Razor would say that what can be claimed without evidence can be denied without it. Huberman was asked by researchers to provide the study that he quotes of sunscreen crossing the BBB and didn't. If he had it, or even the name of the researcher, why not provide that?
@@ginnion.7759 "I don't think that's the issue." -> What? "Also, Hitchens Razor would say that what can be claimed without evidence can be denied without it." -> Yes, in a debate, not in a good-faith presentation of information. If you call a plumber for a leak and they recommend you switch to a different type of washer to prevent further issues are you going to tell them "where's your citation bro? HiTcHeNs RaZor BrO?" Almost everything we're told we're told without evidence. What we believe and don't believe is based on our assessment of the credibility of the person saying it, not their citations. "Huberman was asked by researchers to provide the study that he quotes of sunscreen crossing the BBB and didn't." -> I didn't even hear him mention a study. Maybe it's not published information? Maybe he ain't got time for all the haters? (JK lol). But yea, I'm not defending the sunblock thing. I know nothing about it. I'm also not even defending Huberman. I've listened to a handful of his podcasts and he has always struck me as being somewhat fanciful so I take nothing he says as fact without further research. My only claim is that the "where's your citation bro?" rebuttal to an informative podcast is a stupid one in general based on a false burden of proof.
So your 10 years with no degree makes you credible? And his over 10 years with multiple degrees makes him false. Those are advertisements. He even states that.. disingenuous of you to quote his ad and interpret it as his claim. While he may not be correct about everything, he often warns when things are still contradictory
You lost your own credibility, as much as his deceit loses his credibility. He also exclusively says he has his own company that sells supplements, so it should be apparent for us listeners that those aren’t to be taken too seriously. We listen to the good science. While you don’t sell science, you share deceit and use other people’s scandals to advertise your UA-cam content
Huberman is a gem for great extensive knowledge and also intelligence which is his gift, you literally trying to bring him down with a non sense video, just because he s against flu vaccine or high level Floride, that s really pathetic comparing to what he is bringing to the table, seriously you are a joke, at least make a bit more effort when you are trying to make a hype on social media. Or try to convince people otherwise with scientific literature and not just bashing.
Why do you think huberman knows everything he talks about more than experts in those fields? I'm fascinated why people believe certain podcasters more than others
@@jasonwhite5578 You can't think for yourself. You're just in a parasocial relationship - a friendship simulation - with a charismatic podcaster who makes egregious errors every episode. He just makes people feel like gamifying their life with hacks based on terrible science. YT search: "Fact Checking The Huberman Lab Podcast. Response to Robert Lustig", or scientists responding to his episode on influenza, or pharmacologists slaughtering his cannabis episode, or when he literally made up a non-existent study about sunscreens and neurons, or the strongerbyscience response to his terrible misrepresentation of a study to claim that cooling palms in a workout is comparable to a steroid-enhancing effect, or when he didn't issue a correction when a meta-analysis showed that 5-HTTLPR is not linked to depression, or his bizarre choice of guests like Sara Gottfried ("functional medicine") who links constipation to the patriarchy and promotes a "hormone diet", or when he made claims about the gut microbiome based on a small study that he didn't reveal discussed mice cells (not humans - a common tactic of his), or his hilarious comment about how "floppy feet" measure tibialis anterior strength (utterly wrong - physiologists corrected him) never mind the supplements he peddles, or when neurodivergence experts said his episodes on autism and ADHD were nonsense, or his weird claim that Bluetooth headphones are harmful even though that is scientifically impossible.
All the shit these haters are saying is false. I’ve been listening to him for years. I’ve listened to every single podcast and these people are blatantly making up shit
But! He does do a great job of qualifying. YOU DON'T! You're a book collector for your shelves - I doubt you've read more than 5% of them. You sound a little jealous and very critical about a guy who is simply talking about things you don't. Your subscriber count says it all - find a new hobby and be more kind. And just a tiny bit more....oh....a little less bitter and critical. You mention you're careful about advertising - do you get any one???
I think you might be misunderstanding what qualifying statements are and why other experts in those fields are having a problem with what he is purporting. There is such a thing as staying in your lane in specialist community. I will also point out that Huberman is an associate professor not assistant or tenured professor at Stanford if he is even still there. Universities usually have a clause in their contracts that if you make money outside of the university you have to pay them a percentage. For that reason I think there is some ambiguity around Huberman.
General rule of thumb, if the production quality is too good and the talk about the science doesn't bore you to death with meticulous nuances. Then they're probably talking bull shit.
except Kurzgesagt. I will stan Kurzgesagt till i die
Love it! You summarized almost all serious academic work.
@@CharismaticGeriatricwho is this mad scientist???
"watch what they say, then watch what they sell" is a gem.
Thanks for this. I'm a recovering Huberman fan and appreciate the good work folks like you and Dr. Andrea Love are doing debunking his content. The AG1 plugs popping up on many UA-cam channels is making me quickly hit the unsubscribe button.
I am completely baffled how anyone, let alone a woman, be a fan of this uber creep.
Bro science that gets a pass because he's at Stanford. Glad not everyone is fooled.
Thanks for making this video! We need more like this. The health misinformation is so rampant right now. Happy to subscribe
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31961417/ here is the link to the sunscreen study. This guy above is the one spreading misinformation
Huberman is a sick puppy.
Hubermans always rubbed me the wrong way, he sounds very convincing while saying some pretty absurd shit.
4:59 this is the sole problem. Since I do it for a living, i thought it was great to see a Prof establish a podcast, I was interested to read the evidence he refers to. However, I found murine models (studies only on mice) or statements based on a single small study.
This is basic science. Then this happened more and more. Then I saw him doing “the podcast circuit”. I just thought it sad. It could be done and still be authentic and robust.
In a world where people need authentic correct information, this just adds to the problem and now it’s just another topic dividing people.
Thank you so much for drawing attention to this. I’ve been yelling similar sentiments into the void for two years. He started going off the rails not long after he started his podcast…once his popularity took off. Now at 5M+ he approaches his podcast (and as a guest on other podcasts) as though he is beyond reproach. He has offered a portal for people to send him studies that contradict his claims, but I’m only aware of one person he’s placated prior to that portal, yet I’m also aware of a number of scientists and medical professionals who have reached out to him already, and he’s done nothing to even acknowledge them or refuses to show any attempt to consider them (as you have pointed out). Why would anyone take the time to school him again? Unless he makes every counter claim and any supporting study that comes through that portal public, there’s nothing stopping it from being a trash bin.
Efficacious for transferring money from your wallet to the bank account of the grifters.
I no enjoi but he try his best his brakes and four this I am so proud. He speak no so much smartly but he is working hardly four improve
imagine falling for the humberman grift lol
Exactly. He's a specialist--like most of us are--who gaslights people into thinking he's an expert on all things under the sun.
I quite liked some of his stuff, but any time he talked about psychology, I was surprised how incorrect he was. Given I am a psychologist I started to wonder if other people who are subject matter experts felt the same…it didn’t take much digging to find a lot of academic criticism of him. It came as no surprise that his personal ethics are so shambolic. People who continue to support him seem to be generally very poorly educated.
Damn, Derek. You killed it (as usual)!!!
You ought to cover psychiatry and the therapy industry generally for self interested nonsense
This AG1 garbage is simply grinded hay XD
😂 yep
Appreciate this and good video but just to add Huberman did also make very clear that he wasn't advising people not to wear sunscreen at all, to me it was more balanced than this video makes out...still appreciate you though!
His episode about male and female fertility contained so much nonsense, including telling women over 35 to try for a year or a year and a half before seeking fertility treatment!! Which is beyond ridiculous. And the way he was confidently talking about stuff that he gets wrong enrages me!!
He granted a lot of Darwin awards 😢
It's actually the policy of many fertility clinics (in Ireland where I'm from) will not see you until you've been trying for at least one year
Thanks for this enlightening recording!! 😊
He has a beard, he rolls with the boys, talks mysticism. Caught fire. That was that. Any narcissism is agentic.
Man I appreciate this video a lot, and a agree with most of your points. The said truth is that many people just don't want to hear this.
I read that hit piece article that came out about Andrew Huberman a while ago about him having a bunch of gfs and although i remained sceptical of its validity thoughout reading it, the one thing that stood out to me was the claim at the end of the article someone made that andrew likes to get peoples hopes up then let them down and you can supposedly see that behavior on his podcast by how he says a lot without getting to the point. And then i remembered how i would frequently get annoyed while watching his podcast because i was always anticipating him finally get to the - how to actually do it - bit of info i actually needed but it seems like he keeps over explaning and beating around the bush.
I only saw a couple of his videos and was not convinced about what came out of his mouth. 😬 I guess I was right..
Thank you for stating the truth!
That was weird with the yerba mate thing. It started raising alarm bells for me. (I am a yerba drinker.)
Eye opening. Thanks for the insight
This video is so important and it was great. People are just mesmerized by him and will believe anything because he has Stanford and Neuro-whatever in his credentials.
He lost me at the sunscreen…like bro have u heard of melanoma?! Also the fluoride is just insanity…Thanks for your hard work on this video :) I’ll check out your podcast as I never have!
You don't put anyone on a pedestal, including Taylor swift or this guy....that's a good rule of thumb
Thank you for beginning the debunking of influencer A.Huberman. Just watched one of his videos about how he has increased his muscle hypertrophy using the Henemann theory, In one sagment of this video he explains the mind muscle neuro connection, and postulates that someone with good nueromuscular control should be able to contract muscle tissue by simply thinking about it. Well, give that a try see how it works out for you. Muscle contraction in the absence of any force put on it just by using my developed neuro-muscular control ? I don't think so, so to speak. Keep up the great work and any comment re the above appreciated.
most of the benefits he's getting from recent life changes are likely from an increase in ppl who listen to him (purpose), affirmation from others, and sharing social rituals with people who then also benefit from doing something others are doing and are hopeful about.
and then anyone who doesn't buy in, or aren't so hopeful, are just told they have mindset issues, which is true, but it's only true that it's the shared social ritual buy-in that's making these weak as water supplements (seem to) do anything more than what they're biochemically capable of.
they believe together, and act together, and that's why all these disparate quasiscientific fads work, until they don't.
mix that in with basic health advice that definitely does increase resilience, and you've got an unfalsifiable "protocol" that works, but not for the reasons they think it's working. (which is why it doesn't work for very many ppl, or it stops working until they move onto something else to believe in).
it's unfalsifiable, and anyone who doesn't believe, it doesn't work. But since the people experiencing benefits (from social sharing they refuse to acknowledge the effects of) can just look at the people it doesn't work for and say "You have the wrong mindset", it has an extra layer of quasi-psychology to hide behind.
The way this man weaponizes his “understanding” of research to repackage the results to fit whatever idea he’s selling. Ridiculous. I’ve hated this man from the moment I watched more than 1 video. This guy is a quack. Insane that he cites the research too and some couldn’t be found, wow
::opens with critique of perverse incentive structures::
“The past few years my entire focus has been take downs of public-facing health and science experts.”
Quit huberman when he invited Zuckerberg
What first set my ego-maniac alarm off was how much he talked about himself and his skateboarding achievements on like every other episode, even when it had nothing to do with the topic being discussed. I liked the overall idea of bringing health science to, uhm, ordinary people, but this is clearly not the way.
While I agree with most things you said the moment you said fluoride was safe I call bs . On the other hand we don't have to agree on everything
He's a globalist shill...
like all poison, its 100% dose dependent
Thank you for this
Im a 3rd year immuno/micro phd and he had me fooled for a video, pretty scary. Then i tried to find his lab website and its supplement grifting... so infuriating. Do any of this guys Stanford colleagues call him out?? I guess they would have very quiet voices in comparison. PS Joe Neurogan is the funniest thing ive heard in a while
shameless self reply but your podcast fuckin rocks
I was waiting for you to say something about AG1, that’s something that always bugged me about Huberman promoting, especially him being a doctor. It should be average knowledge that the best vitamins and minerals come from whole foods themselves and not a supplement, and a product saying “just use us on the side!” is just them begging you to buy when you can live perfectly fine without their supplement. AG1 is overpriced and whole vegetables are a much cheaper and sufficient route to maintain your health.
He is the CURATE'S EGG embodied in muscular bro science form. Let's not throw the baby out with the ice bath water...
Appreciate the information
Now where do you find a video debunking Derek Beres? :)
Great show
Does anyone know which podcast Dr. Huberman pronounces corpuscle as “ cor- pusk-le”?
That’s when he lost me. Wanna share that proof with my sisters.
Have never understood the hype. Dude said making your hands cold can make you lift 200% more weight.
Never said that
@@raindangelo2168 Why lie? Lots of video evidence of ridiculous claims. ua-cam.com/users/shortsuJUQOdT-GWg
I'm sure to be labeled as a "bro science" guy, especially if you you go by my profile pic alone, but you'd be mistaken. Saying Andrew Huberman is a "danger" is a bit much in my opinion.
Huberman does more good than bad, but I agree he seems to want to fill the voids with something and when there's nothing new out there he's willing to entertain things like the sunscreen topic. But in his defense, he provides a lot of great content from legit expert interviews and discussions. I kind of see it like going to my family MD, he's a great guy, I trust him, and he gets it right 90% of the time, but 10% of the time he is wrong, and occasionally entirely full of shit.
I stumbled onto your channel via TikTok, looks interesting so I'll follow and hopefully you're someone truly interested in getting to the truth in a minefield of quacks and frauds (Gary Brecka comes to mind).
This guy has no credentials, is just a writer and yoga instructor (so is guilty of the same thing he accuses Huberman of), has a bone to pick because someone personally doesn't get flu vaccines (I wouldn't either unless you're around people at risk, especially since everyone has different reactions to them and knows a bit too much about what's in them, plus they may have good immune systems that handle the flu just fine). The immunologist didn't even disagree with Huberman on the catching colds through your eyes (last two times I got a cold I got viral conjunctivitis), both said its possible but not the main way. If you're dealing with a highly highly contagious strain of something, or work in an environment where you're more exposed more often, you prob should protect your eyes (IN ADDITION TO MASKING, so yeah no idea where he's pushing this right wing manosphere anti-covid vaccine bs he's projecting onto him). He also didn't disagree on the skin thing, he just used different words as a mealy mouthed way of saying this guys not really wrong but he didn't phrase it perfectly, so gottem. Assists with immunity (even passively) == extension of immune system. How dare someone speak in general layman's terms when talking about things on a podcast. On the studies thing, he talks about other companies talking about studies, not Huberman talking about studies, so its a way of insinuating the studies Huberman cites contradict what he says without saying it.
This guy just shills his book instead of supplements. I've heard all the ingredients about AG-1 but when I try to source all the things individually (not the extra stuff, the vitamins that are listed in exact amounts), I end up paying more cause multi vitamins don't have all the same things so I have to buy extra supplements like magnesium, Methylated B12 , etc and end up paying more when its all combined. I've also tried other cheaper supplement powders that have the exact ingredients and they just didn't work.
I think a big issue is these people have an arrogance, in that they see someone who respects their audience, doesn't regard them as the dumb masses, capable to take information and make their own decisions, and that they have the right to, even if that risks someone making the wrong decision. These people (usually on the opposite side of the spectrum they're accusing Huberman of) assume, that Huberman says something people will suddenly stop vaccinating, wearing masks, and wearing sunscreen even though he never says that. I mean honestly, if you're that jaded and think the audience is drooling Rogan fans, wouldn't you be okay with them doing that? Turns out the one thing they hate is people making measured informed decisions for themselves based on their own risk factors and risk tolerances. Not to mention the hypochondriac vibe I'm getting from the way these things are discussed here.
I came also after TikTok and share similar thoughts that Huberman does more good than bad as at least he brings science and heath issues and present it in more understandable way. He does not claim as he's guru and can sometimes be wrong but at least brings awareness on how you can benefit on things he discuss.
And I see an other trend coming up lately where so called "debunk influencers" come up with the idea on how to win and shine when they find such guys like Huberman or Peter Attia telling sth not 100% true.
Bring your own topics, discover better method on how to broadcast science but it's easier to criticize others.
I'm not a Huberman psychofan but these podcasts are not for believing in everything they say, rather to give you perspective on healthy habits but as always - do your own research as well before trying everything
Huberman is a charlatan that takes advantage of scientifically illiterate people who want to "feel" informed.
@@digiwatt I worked with this prissy kiss ass and I can say without a doubt that this is a case of envy.
It reminds me of the old saying "The hyena eats the leavings of the lion's meal, thinking he has eaten well" I don't know Huberman . Perhaps he is not a "lion" but I say that Derek is a pompous twit.
i always though CBD was just weed without weed. Useless
I took some of his advice on alcohol. As for vaccines, you use your head with these. The flu vaccine helps a lot of people. Im not so sure about the covid vaccines...as for athletic greens...well...why would you buy that stuff.
He's wrong on alcohol. He doesn't differentiate types of alcohol, such as red wine (very healthy, been around for 5,000 years, French paradox, etc.) vs. spirits. (unhealthy).
Ooff. If only you'd decided to post this a month later. If only you could have known...
Mainly the eyes 😂😂😂… He talks about self discipline then baloneys everything and his 6 girlfriends he needs to get off the PEDs
You have to get the real cbd and I didn't like effect of that but from just a healthbfood shop don't waste your money, $140 for nothing, the other cbt works though!
lol, taking what he says in his ag1 ads as truth is asinine. I listen to all sorts of podcasts and never have I ever believed that the hosts truly use/believe in the products they’re advertising. Do you chew Trident because 4 out of 5 dentists recommend it?
this video is just bullshit
I never liked him from the beginning because of the things he was saying which I can't remember, so I never watch him, looks like I was right, there is so much rubbish on many of these streams, you cannot take anything at face value, especially health, you need do your own research and think deeply about any claims in my opinion!❤
I think Dr. Roger Seheult is one of the MDs
Dr. Seheult is legit though. I don't think he would flunk immuno 101.
@@peybak Not anymore. His claims recently are wild
@@AzIbra16can you point to a claim or two? Just curious, am new to this stuff.
@@twelfthhour
1. “MY PRESCRIPTION FOR LONG COVID," as he called it 😅
AM sunlight (outside), a hearty breakfast (fiber for gut microbiome), a medium lunch, skipping dinner (nothing except water after 5:30 PM), 7 hours of sleep, and hydrotherapy (hot/cold for interferon). There is no clinical evidence for these claims.
2. Hyping Red/Infrared Light to treat COVID-19 based on shitty non-clinical evidence.
3. He praised his episode on the flu/cold, which was full of pseudoscience.
@@AzIbra16 ah thanks!
You're siting one or two sources for your arguments. Not convinced.
If you think the sun is killing us and the answer to prevent that is sunscreen, you're insane. If the sun is killing us, we are all doomed as it touches every single thing in the universe not just our skin. I was open to hearing you out but I can see you've got a bad boner for Hubberman.
I wish someone honest will make these videos without personal hate tripping in.
Great video!
Hi Derek, Been following you from early pandemic times, thanks a lot for many insights!
I want to share how some of your work appears on my end. You can take it or leave it. I definitely share many criticism how have for many “conscious” communities. I do not always think your confrontational and aggressively accusing is giving your voice more receptive ears, at least not for me. The not-so-subtle suggestion Huberman is right wing was not backed up by any evidence (if I hears correctly) and not ok to do. Why would you do that? The fact he is a shareholder of a drink and promotes it without telling listeners he’s invested in the company is there.
Also Huberman not replying to scientists in the field is questionable. Maybe bring them on to get more credibility on your end over hearsay.
And sometimes you also seem to cynically question things related to communities that sound like you question the entire community. I do think it’s at least an honorable approach to think everyone tries their best, and there are many mistakes. Condemning communities that are peace-seeking at least is not kind nor professional. I agree with you on many stances, but a more scientific approach, more evidence and more experts are things I’d like to see. And having grown up outside the US, this aggressive attacking style of yours is also the norm in the US. In order for a society desperately in need for communication between different opinions it might be good to reflect on your aggressive approach which might alienate people you accuse, over trying to find common ground for fruitful conversations. And Huberman not replying to professionals in the field btw is something you did to me - and I’ve been a professional in the “mindfulness” space for 10y. You ignored any and all of my messages to you. I just remembered it now actually. So what you accuse others (here Huberman) of is also what you do…or not?
Very well said. US media is so tribal and unnuanced. Including this channel increasingly.
I always knew Huberman was full of bs in many subjects. At some point I thought I was the only one who could see past this bs. Thank you for this video and for showing people who he really is: another jackass that wants fame and fortune with awful lying content.
So, you are pissed about his sponsors. Jeez. What a waste of time watching this video.
I'll stop listening to Derek now.
He pushes pharma drugs, concoctions and fluoridated water. Nuff said.
Hello, I am writing from production of the Joe Rogan Experience and would love to invite you to debate, live on air, Joe Biden. How can we make that happen?
🤣
Not defending the sunscreen claim here but I have to say that I really dislike the "what study?" response to podcasts. I dislike it precisely because I see the primary value of podcasts like this being their ability to share knowledge that researchers believe to be true but haven't published. My experience is that I learn the most interesting things from what academics tell me about their field while we're sharing a beer, not from what they've submitted to journals. Podcasts allow you to get this type of content without having to know the academic personally. Just watch any podcast with, say, Michael Levin, for example. He will tell you all about the experiments they're currently doing in their lab, what the early results are looking like, what avenues have proved to not work out etc etc etc. Another great example is like sports coaches who may have worked with thousands of athletes in their career and have very detailed logs of how different nutritional strategies have affected their athletes, but who haven't ever don't an RTC. There are all sorts of reasons that professional expertise may not make it into a journal. The results aren't finalised yet, the results were negative so not "worth" publishing, not enough time, not enough funding, still just a theory, or an opinion/interpretation that doesn't warrant a whole article, the expert works in industry not academia, etc etc etc. Of course studies are what we should regard as having a higher certainty of being correct. But I also want to know what things experts believe to be true but haven't published. There's even a word for this in mathematics, "folklore", and "folklore" is often cited in journal articles! You just have to keep in mind to take it with a pinch of salt and check the credability and authenticity of the presenter. But in my mind this unpublished stuff is exactly what these podcasts are for. To some extent also clarifying published work for the general audience but I think that's a secondary goal. There is no other outlet for this information other than "chats over beers" and to that extent I think the podcast is a really important component of science communication that covers a gap that publishing misses.
I don't think that's the issue. Also, Hitchens Razor would say that what can be claimed without evidence can be denied without it. Huberman was asked by researchers to provide the study that he quotes of sunscreen crossing the BBB and didn't. If he had it, or even the name of the researcher, why not provide that?
@@ginnion.7759 "I don't think that's the issue." -> What?
"Also, Hitchens Razor would say that what can be claimed without evidence can be denied without it." -> Yes, in a debate, not in a good-faith presentation of information. If you call a plumber for a leak and they recommend you switch to a different type of washer to prevent further issues are you going to tell them "where's your citation bro? HiTcHeNs RaZor BrO?" Almost everything we're told we're told without evidence. What we believe and don't believe is based on our assessment of the credibility of the person saying it, not their citations.
"Huberman was asked by researchers to provide the study that he quotes of sunscreen crossing the BBB and didn't." -> I didn't even hear him mention a study. Maybe it's not published information? Maybe he ain't got time for all the haters? (JK lol). But yea, I'm not defending the sunblock thing. I know nothing about it. I'm also not even defending Huberman. I've listened to a handful of his podcasts and he has always struck me as being somewhat fanciful so I take nothing he says as fact without further research. My only claim is that the "where's your citation bro?" rebuttal to an informative podcast is a stupid one in general based on a false burden of proof.
So your 10 years with no degree makes you credible? And his over 10 years with multiple degrees makes him false. Those are advertisements. He even states that.. disingenuous of you to quote his ad and interpret it as his claim. While he may not be correct about everything, he often warns when things are still contradictory
You lost your own credibility, as much as his deceit loses his credibility. He also exclusively says he has his own company that sells supplements, so it should be apparent for us listeners that those aren’t to be taken too seriously. We listen to the good science. While you don’t sell science, you share deceit and use other people’s scandals to advertise your UA-cam content
Huberman is a gem for great extensive knowledge and also intelligence which is his gift, you literally trying to bring him down with a non sense video, just because he s against flu vaccine or high level Floride, that s really pathetic comparing to what he is bringing to the table, seriously you are a joke, at least make a bit more effort when you are trying to make a hype on social media.
Or try to convince people otherwise with scientific literature and not just bashing.
If you read the scientific literature that Huberman cites, you'll realise he's a conman.
Why do you think huberman knows everything he talks about more than experts in those fields? I'm fascinated why people believe certain podcasters more than others
@@claudecarlyle9284 buillshit
Nice to see one person in this thread is actually thinking for himself/herself
@@jasonwhite5578 You can't think for yourself. You're just in a parasocial relationship - a friendship simulation - with a charismatic podcaster who makes egregious errors every episode. He just makes people feel like gamifying their life with hacks based on terrible science.
YT search: "Fact Checking The Huberman Lab Podcast. Response to Robert Lustig", or scientists responding to his episode on influenza, or pharmacologists slaughtering his cannabis episode, or when he literally made up a non-existent study about sunscreens and neurons, or the strongerbyscience response to his terrible misrepresentation of a study to claim that cooling palms in a workout is comparable to a steroid-enhancing effect, or when he didn't issue a correction when a meta-analysis showed that 5-HTTLPR is not linked to depression, or his bizarre choice of guests like Sara Gottfried ("functional medicine") who links constipation to the patriarchy and promotes a "hormone diet", or when he made claims about the gut microbiome based on a small study that he didn't reveal discussed mice cells (not humans - a common tactic of his), or his hilarious comment about how "floppy feet" measure tibialis anterior strength (utterly wrong - physiologists corrected him) never mind the supplements he peddles, or when neurodivergence experts said his episodes on autism and ADHD were nonsense, or his weird claim that Bluetooth headphones are harmful even though that is scientifically impossible.
Do you make money off your UA-cam? Hope you’re donating it to charity.
lol
You're the one pushing pseudoscience nonsense.
bullshit 3:28 I can attest
All the shit these haters are saying is false. I’ve been listening to him for years. I’ve listened to every single podcast and these people are blatantly making up shit
But! He does do a great job of qualifying. YOU DON'T! You're a book collector for your shelves - I doubt you've read more than 5% of them. You sound a little jealous and very critical about a guy who is simply talking about things you don't. Your subscriber count says it all - find a new hobby and be more kind. And just a tiny bit more....oh....a little less bitter and critical. You mention you're careful about advertising - do you get any one???
God, you seem like a real peach. Is simping for Huberman your hobby?
Does a great job? Have you read the 'qualifiers" he states. Sometimes the information he extrapolates is very misleading
I think you might be misunderstanding what qualifying statements are and why other experts in those fields are having a problem with what he is purporting. There is such a thing as staying in your lane in specialist community. I will also point out that Huberman is an associate professor not assistant or tenured professor at Stanford if he is even still there. Universities usually have a clause in their contracts that if you make money outside of the university you have to pay them a percentage. For that reason I think there is some ambiguity around Huberman.
I always get shady vibes whenever i see him... He tries to show dat he is way smarter than he really is...
I just assumed he set the podcast up in order to cash in on the 30-50% sales revenue share he gets from promoting IG1