I was not a podcast guy at all, but I stumbled upon Andrew Huberman a few months ago and wow, what an amazing source of information and it has helped me a lot while making conmutes and training sessions a lot less wasteful.
The thing is that, now that I basically have consumed all their catalogue, I feel the need for more.
I am very interested in science, backed-up self-improvement, open source stuff, and… Maybe, if it’s really well done I could enjoy some politics.
I mostly like to get informed and to grow. I have other sources for entertainment.
Thousands of papers against a single article. Yeah, right.
To be honest, I would love to see him truly debunked. That would be incredibly useful. But so far science has his back, and as long as that keeps going, I am going to listen to what he says.
How many of these papers are peer reviewed? Can you show me medical studies with NIH funding and repeatable methods? Huberman uses the same principles as conservative think tanks.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KuIFF-LCI4k
Thousands of papers mean nothing without rigor.
Also it’s not just one article
https://futurism.com/neoscope/neuroscientist-andrew-huberman-podcaster-behavior
https://www.unbiasedscipod.com/episodes/science-for-sale-huberman
https://www.acsh.org/news/2015/07/07/the-detrimental-effects-of-junk-science
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://m.piped.video/watch?v=KuIFF-LCI4k
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Okay so, half of those links have nothing to do with Huberman, so I am not going to bother commenting on those.
As per the other 2, one is about his personal life, which… Why should we give a f*ck? I don’t see how that is related to his podcasts; and the other link is a video where some scientists say “actually Huberman does a great job of bringing science to the masses, but of course some of the technicalities get lost when reducing things down”… Um…
So the only argument against Huberman is that some dumbf*cks may bypass his warnings about experimental treatments… So let’s ban science discussions in general… Right?
Still, I am not saying that his work is perfect. There are things I’ve seen in the podcast that I did not like (Zuckerberg’s one, for example), but that is the good thing about life, you know? You can like some parts and not the others.
Not seeing any of these papers you’re referring to. I’ll re-engage with this when you can provide sources and not personal anecdotes or opinion.
I don’t have to provide any source because Huberman has done it already for you.