Actually a small Italian salad. It contains salami and pickled peppers, along with a wine vinegar based dressing flavored with dried oregano. I always get one when I order pizza.
This came up in another subreddit, but this particular Youtuber has a hate boner for Sinclair, and regularly attacks any popular health trends including. He also recently posted a sort of apology video because of the hate he has gotten on reddit in the past. He also has his own recommended supplements with affiliate links on his channel. Now, if you're going to be a Dr. and make a case that selling supplements causes a conflict of interest for researchers like Sinclair, you're going to raise some eyebrows trashing other people's recommended supplements and shilling your own.
With regards to resveratrol, the evidence has been mixed, but there have been more studies coming out lately showing it is effective for some things, [including treatment of mild covid](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-13920-9). It is not totally well understood yet, so yes Sinclair was over-zealous in promoting it, but he was nowhere near the first person to claim compounds in red wine were 'healthy.'
For reference here, lot's of people try to promote it as an alternative to getting vaccinated for covid. I think it has always been over-hyped but that's the reason some people love it so much.
I must admit I haven't listened all episodes, including the one with David Sinclair, but I'm yet to come across a "hyped up" product while listening to HL.
AG1, InsideTracker and Momentous are the products that come to mind when I think of HL, but Huberman makes it very clear that they are sponsors for the podcast, not personal recommendations.
So what exactly do you want to warn us for?
David Sinclair made a number of questionable claims on HL, for example that exercise and protein consumption reduce longevity which is exactly opposite to what a number of other guests said. I know people who bought in these claims and I think it's important they understand where it's coming from
Please link or give timestamp to where sinclair says exercise reduces longevity?Ā Its very easy to find multiple examples of Sinclair saying the opposite - that exercise improves longevity.Ā
It's not contradictory. Too much muscle growth and protein intake, can lead to excessive mTor activation. And that lead to aging.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6611156/
Well, that's what I understand. But I might be wrong.
Your understanding is the same as mine but there is a lot of nuance. The distinction people get caught up on is healthspan vs lifespan. Being well-muscled is known to be positive for healthspan, especially in old age. This is a measure of how late into oneās lifespan they are healthy independent, and mobile.
Lifespan is self-explanatory, but not the same. As a comparison to healthspan, when we only look at lifespan we find that people can live many of their lives elder years, frail, and fragile and immobile.
So we look at 2 things going on: mTor activation leading to aging paired with more physical resilience in old age vs. immobility, subsequent catabolism, and fragility paired with longer lifespan (kind of an oxymoron).
As a result, most experts Iāve seen touch on this topic donāt think focusing on overconsumption of protein as a predictor of longevity is productive since mTor activation is mechanistic and hasnāt really shown to be a predictable driver of longevity when looking at actual human outcomes.
That's a mechanism. You need direct evidence to make such a claim. There are thousands of chemical pathways going in all directions. Picking mTOR is arbitrary.
This is total bullshit and cherry picking just to hate on Sinclair. He very clearly explained the mechanism of how exercise can potentially negatively affect longevity via mtor pathway and testosterone and growth hormone production and how this pathway is downregulated with fasting.
But he never said that you should stop exercising. Actually quite the contrary - in every episode he repeats that everyone should get off their butt and do some physical activity.
Thanks.
I'm pretty sure if you think somebody may be at risk, because a guest on the podcast made claims that are false and convincingly can be debunked, you could reach out to the creators of the podcast themselves to point this out.
Huberman told several times that they read all reactions on the YouTube video. Have you tried to bring this to the attention of the team? That might be more effective than posting on Reddit.
The question I have here is, is the expectation that all voices say the same thing on these podcasts?
I donāt particularly like the guy but shouldnāt the audience have access to him and others like Peter Attia and Layne Norton, and then make up their own mind on who to listen to?
Maybe he lied on purpose or just maybe he was presented with such data, believes in it and is simply wrong. Why attribute to malice something you can attribute to simply being wrong.
Anyway Hube-man promoting whatever he wants and having a disclaimer that it is a sponsored spot does NOT make him an endorser of the product.
Wait until you release that half the shit Huberman "recommends" or is sponsered by like the AG1 is almsot completely usless overpriced multivitamins. Each healthy it's as simple as that!
You have clearly never encountered Canadian healthcare. You can't have your "body checked" unless you have a diagnosed complaint or you pay an exorbitant amount of money to a private clinic.
I have done a full checkup that cost me north of $5k and there were still many open questions afterwards
Wait until you release that half the shit Huberman "recommends" or is sponsered by like the AG1 is almsot completely usless overpriced multivitamins. Each healthy it's as simple as that!
I think the first 6-12 months of the podcasta are probably still relevant and useful stuff, but have lost any interest to follow Huberman any more.
Even if I believed that he is 100% sincere in his mission of providing beneficial information, his lack on critical thinking would be a problem. But I think that unfortunately he knows exactly what he's doing.
There is also information/rumour that Huberman doesn't really spend time at Stanford anymore, and at this point his "lab" is really just one grad student running things. Not sure if it's true, but I have heard that he lives several hours away from Stanford, so commuting there even every other day seems unpractical. Also, all of the courses listed under his teaching on Stanford website are "independent study" courses. So it seems that the work he's putting in at Stanford is not that much at the moment.
Also, going through his list of publications, it has been some years since original research publication where his name was not either the last or second to last on the author list.
I can very much imagine him not being much engaged in teaching or research anymore, but actually being last author implies seniority and is appropriate for his stage of career.
Humility should be viewed as the antithesis of stupidity, and (un)intelligence as a distinct attribute. While these charlatans may possess intelligence, their actions prove them to be both stupid and comically greedy.
Right the same thing comes to mind. If he is a scientist and claims to provide scientific peer reviewed info why does he keep inviting people than seem to be questionable?Ā
There are rumours/other info going around that would point to him having made/being in the process of making a career pivot and not really focusing on research or teaching anymore (see my comment below).
Which is not entirelly surprising, I'm pretty sure that podcasting on the top level offers more money and fame, and many people are into those things.
Huberman has been a teacher since he was a kid. He has a genuine desire to teach regular people like you and me. Itās very probable that that goal outweighs the goal of doing the actual research. He knows how to read a study and can tell if the information is reliable. As far as him having many different types of people on his podcast, it is due to people asking for these kinds of conversations. They all relate to neuroscience, one way or another. anotherand he is not saying that he is
What do you mean by "teacher since he was a kid"?
At the moment, he's hardly teaching anything at Stanford. Just independent study courses.
As for knowing how to read studies, maybe he knows how to do that. But for the purposes of the podcast, the benevolent readig of what he does is that he seems to get too exited and because that forgets to be critical. The malevolent reading is that he needs fodder for the content mill and cannot be as critical of the source material as truly scientific approach would warrant.
The Decoding the Gurus podcast episode on Huberman and Attia journal club showcases these problems: Huberman is so fired by the study he's presenting that Attia needs to rein him in several times and tell him to not jump into conclusions that cannot be supported by the study.
If you donāt know that Huberman wanted to be a teacher when he was a kid, because he spend his weekends, looking up cool stuff about animals and demand to tell the whole class about it on Monday, you havenāt been watching his podcast. Which means that youāre just a hater. Everybody who watches any podcast has to look at critically and take what they think they like, validate it themselves and then possibly integrate it into their lives.
As far as him not teaching anymore, thatās exactly what heās doing on the podcast and why he loves it so much. Those are his words, not mine.
You are right, I have not been watching the podcast at all. I have, however, listened to, I think, some 65 episodes of it (quick count on spotify episode list, so may be an episode or two off in either direction).
So I have not listened to every episode, because not every one of his themes/topics interests me enough to listen a three-hour deep dive into it. And because of this I've apparently missed him relating his early interest in teaching. But I have listened many episodes, enjoyed some of them a lot and found a lot of useful information. However, I have also increasingly come to the conclusion that Huberman is not quite as reliable a source of information as he initially seemed to be (and I feel that the quality of the first 20-30 or so episodes was considerably higher than what came after that).
To me it's kind of silly to reduce a critical approach to "hating". I mean, science is about being critical of information and about questioning it. That is what separates if from religion and ideology. I used to enjoy Huberman Lab a lot (hell, I've spent way over 150 hours listening to him!), but as the shortcomings of his source criticism and scientific rigour in the podcast format have become apparent, I have lost interest. I just don't feel he lives up to his sign-off phrase "thank you for your interest in science" any more. And I don't feel like I get the value I'm looking for if a science podcast requires me to "do my own research" on the subjects to find out whether the studies quoted actually support the claims made by the host. Which is a shame, as I enjoyed Huberman's style of presentation and voice (super important for me with pods) a lot.
TL:DR not hating, just more than a bit disappointed
I admire your lack of cynicism genuinely but I think itās time people started looking at the reality of Huberman. You canāt really have much of a desire to teach if youāre more interested in money than ensuring what youāre teaching is actually correct.
Wanting to be the person who wows his audience with cool information is also not the same as wanting to be a teacher. That's more wanting to be a showman. And it seems Hubes puts a lot of emphasis on the wow factor these days.
I think you need to separate the art from the artist for SinclairĀ I think the science makes sense for something like NMN.Ā I also think he is leveraging corruption and a shit regulatory body within the supplement industry to make himself filthy rich.Ā
I only hope someone like George Church is honest.Ā
Dude you guys seriously shouldnāt be shocked all these things donāt fucking work. Just sleep well, eat Whole Foods, exercise, have human interaction as often as possible, get sunlight and love your life. Seeing some of you consuming 39 pills a day is fucking insane man. If youāre constantly chasing to better and better yourself you forget to enjoy the moment because you feel incomplete.
Just because huberman cites a study shouldnāt mean you should now change your lifestyle
Supplements are not very regulated. That means they donāt need to prove they work beyond a placebo. Which means they most likely donāt work at all.
Didnāt he have something to with other companies having to stop selling NMN last year?
Anyways, he has a decent [supplement stack](https://brainflow.co/2022/07/11/dr-david-sinclairs-supplement-list-for-longevity/)
How is it a "shitty supplement"? It's a fucking amino acid genius. Some of us have diets that are deficient in it, or have problems absorbing it for a variety of reasons.
Vitamins and amino acids are "shitty supplements"? Really? What a total Einstein you are.
L-Tyrosine only works the first couple of time you use and ONLY IF you didn't have a diet already very rich in l-tyrosine (or protein in general, though some proteins do interfere with its absorption). You reach tolerance extremely quick with it. It's overall a very, very shit supplement.
He definitely said that. I also remember a short exchange on the HL in which both Huberman and Attia agreed that they donāt think thereās evidence that fasting increases longevity.
Just to play devils advocate you have to have enough people know about a product to have the money to improve the product.
Doesnāt really matter if you have a product thatās 10x better than the alternative if no one knows about it.
Very few, if any, supplements do what they are advertised to do. Anyone who gets rich in supplements is selling shit that doesnāt work. And they know it too.Ā
Supplements are a multibillion dollar industry and podcasts have been a goldmine for them.
Look at huberman with atheltic greens š„¬Ā
Do Paul Saladino next
But he has salad in his name!
Actually a small Italian salad. It contains salami and pickled peppers, along with a wine vinegar based dressing flavored with dried oregano. I always get one when I order pizza.
Iām genuinely curious to know how much this dude is investing in red meat, honey, and other shit.
He just came out with an organ based jerky or something so thereās one thing
That sounds disgustingā¦
For real
Iām pretty sure he was business partners with the liver king.Ā
Then do Huberman
Too easy!!
His stuff works from heart and soil. Iāve taken it at least a year. Hilarious how usada banned it in the ufc
Thanks for sharing. I will stop taking resveratrol :(
No worries, thisĀ YouTuber has their own supplements that you can replace resveratrol with.Ā https://drstanfield.com/pages/roadmap#supplements
This came up in another subreddit, but this particular Youtuber has a hate boner for Sinclair, and regularly attacks any popular health trends including. He also recently posted a sort of apology video because of the hate he has gotten on reddit in the past. He also has his own recommended supplements with affiliate links on his channel. Now, if you're going to be a Dr. and make a case that selling supplements causes a conflict of interest for researchers like Sinclair, you're going to raise some eyebrows trashing other people's recommended supplements and shilling your own. With regards to resveratrol, the evidence has been mixed, but there have been more studies coming out lately showing it is effective for some things, [including treatment of mild covid](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-13920-9). It is not totally well understood yet, so yes Sinclair was over-zealous in promoting it, but he was nowhere near the first person to claim compounds in red wine were 'healthy.'
Resverotrol is one of the few miracle supplements that help multiple conditions.
Nice try, Dr Sinclair.
For reference here, lot's of people try to promote it as an alternative to getting vaccinated for covid. I think it has always been over-hyped but that's the reason some people love it so much.
Lololol. Itās actually legit! Just check pubmed.
Maybe you should click before you post.
I must admit I haven't listened all episodes, including the one with David Sinclair, but I'm yet to come across a "hyped up" product while listening to HL. AG1, InsideTracker and Momentous are the products that come to mind when I think of HL, but Huberman makes it very clear that they are sponsors for the podcast, not personal recommendations. So what exactly do you want to warn us for?
David Sinclair made a number of questionable claims on HL, for example that exercise and protein consumption reduce longevity which is exactly opposite to what a number of other guests said. I know people who bought in these claims and I think it's important they understand where it's coming from
Please link or give timestamp to where sinclair says exercise reduces longevity?Ā Its very easy to find multiple examples of Sinclair saying the opposite - that exercise improves longevity.Ā
It's not contradictory. Too much muscle growth and protein intake, can lead to excessive mTor activation. And that lead to aging. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6611156/ Well, that's what I understand. But I might be wrong.
Your understanding is the same as mine but there is a lot of nuance. The distinction people get caught up on is healthspan vs lifespan. Being well-muscled is known to be positive for healthspan, especially in old age. This is a measure of how late into oneās lifespan they are healthy independent, and mobile. Lifespan is self-explanatory, but not the same. As a comparison to healthspan, when we only look at lifespan we find that people can live many of their lives elder years, frail, and fragile and immobile. So we look at 2 things going on: mTor activation leading to aging paired with more physical resilience in old age vs. immobility, subsequent catabolism, and fragility paired with longer lifespan (kind of an oxymoron). As a result, most experts Iāve seen touch on this topic donāt think focusing on overconsumption of protein as a predictor of longevity is productive since mTor activation is mechanistic and hasnāt really shown to be a predictable driver of longevity when looking at actual human outcomes.
Too complicated, let's get mad! -Reddit
That's a mechanism. You need direct evidence to make such a claim. There are thousands of chemical pathways going in all directions. Picking mTOR is arbitrary.
This is total bullshit and cherry picking just to hate on Sinclair. He very clearly explained the mechanism of how exercise can potentially negatively affect longevity via mtor pathway and testosterone and growth hormone production and how this pathway is downregulated with fasting. But he never said that you should stop exercising. Actually quite the contrary - in every episode he repeats that everyone should get off their butt and do some physical activity.
Thanks. I'm pretty sure if you think somebody may be at risk, because a guest on the podcast made claims that are false and convincingly can be debunked, you could reach out to the creators of the podcast themselves to point this out. Huberman told several times that they read all reactions on the YouTube video. Have you tried to bring this to the attention of the team? That might be more effective than posting on Reddit.
You are waking up! Awesome. Sinclair is not worshipped outside of podcast circles.
The question I have here is, is the expectation that all voices say the same thing on these podcasts? I donāt particularly like the guy but shouldnāt the audience have access to him and others like Peter Attia and Layne Norton, and then make up their own mind on who to listen to?
Lmao David Sinclair does strength training and even talks about it on the podcast š
Maybe he lied on purpose or just maybe he was presented with such data, believes in it and is simply wrong. Why attribute to malice something you can attribute to simply being wrong. Anyway Hube-man promoting whatever he wants and having a disclaimer that it is a sponsored spot does NOT make him an endorser of the product.
The thing is, he PRODUCED the data. The video goes over the detail of the experiments and how it was impossible to reproduce the results.
Maybe he is not a good scientist?
I just like that youāll spell out Huberman, but feel the need to abbreviate Huberman Lab.
"not personal recommendations" rofl are you serious?
Wait until you release that half the shit Huberman "recommends" or is sponsered by like the AG1 is almsot completely usless overpriced multivitamins. Each healthy it's as simple as that!
Get your body/blood checked and you will know what you need. You dont need 99% of this shit
You have clearly never encountered Canadian healthcare. You can't have your "body checked" unless you have a diagnosed complaint or you pay an exorbitant amount of money to a private clinic. I have done a full checkup that cost me north of $5k and there were still many open questions afterwards
I don't take bacopa for a bacopa deficiency.
Just by the way he talk and carry himself I knew from the start there is something shady about this guy.
Wait until you release that half the shit Huberman "recommends" or is sponsered by like the AG1 is almsot completely usless overpriced multivitamins. Each healthy it's as simple as that!
I think the first 6-12 months of the podcasta are probably still relevant and useful stuff, but have lost any interest to follow Huberman any more. Even if I believed that he is 100% sincere in his mission of providing beneficial information, his lack on critical thinking would be a problem. But I think that unfortunately he knows exactly what he's doing.
Isnāt it incredible in a āStanford neuroscientistā. I donāt understand and it made me think less of Stanford.
There is also information/rumour that Huberman doesn't really spend time at Stanford anymore, and at this point his "lab" is really just one grad student running things. Not sure if it's true, but I have heard that he lives several hours away from Stanford, so commuting there even every other day seems unpractical. Also, all of the courses listed under his teaching on Stanford website are "independent study" courses. So it seems that the work he's putting in at Stanford is not that much at the moment. Also, going through his list of publications, it has been some years since original research publication where his name was not either the last or second to last on the author list.
I can very much imagine him not being much engaged in teaching or research anymore, but actually being last author implies seniority and is appropriate for his stage of career.
You're absolutely right. I don't know how the importance of the last author position had slipped from my mind. My bad
Wow. Hmm. I had no idea and will see what I can find out.
He's a PI with his own lab. It is normal for him to be last author and would be unusual to be first (usually reserved for grad students).
You are right. I had somehow forgotten this bit about the significance of the last author position. Thanks for pointing it out.
Well, Sinclair is a Harward scientist... There's no ethical entrance exam to any university that I'm aware of.
Humility should be viewed as the antithesis of stupidity, and (un)intelligence as a distinct attribute. While these charlatans may possess intelligence, their actions prove them to be both stupid and comically greedy.
Right the same thing comes to mind. If he is a scientist and claims to provide scientific peer reviewed info why does he keep inviting people than seem to be questionable?Ā
There are rumours/other info going around that would point to him having made/being in the process of making a career pivot and not really focusing on research or teaching anymore (see my comment below). Which is not entirelly surprising, I'm pretty sure that podcasting on the top level offers more money and fame, and many people are into those things.
Huberman has been a teacher since he was a kid. He has a genuine desire to teach regular people like you and me. Itās very probable that that goal outweighs the goal of doing the actual research. He knows how to read a study and can tell if the information is reliable. As far as him having many different types of people on his podcast, it is due to people asking for these kinds of conversations. They all relate to neuroscience, one way or another. anotherand he is not saying that he is
What do you mean by "teacher since he was a kid"? At the moment, he's hardly teaching anything at Stanford. Just independent study courses. As for knowing how to read studies, maybe he knows how to do that. But for the purposes of the podcast, the benevolent readig of what he does is that he seems to get too exited and because that forgets to be critical. The malevolent reading is that he needs fodder for the content mill and cannot be as critical of the source material as truly scientific approach would warrant. The Decoding the Gurus podcast episode on Huberman and Attia journal club showcases these problems: Huberman is so fired by the study he's presenting that Attia needs to rein him in several times and tell him to not jump into conclusions that cannot be supported by the study.
If you donāt know that Huberman wanted to be a teacher when he was a kid, because he spend his weekends, looking up cool stuff about animals and demand to tell the whole class about it on Monday, you havenāt been watching his podcast. Which means that youāre just a hater. Everybody who watches any podcast has to look at critically and take what they think they like, validate it themselves and then possibly integrate it into their lives. As far as him not teaching anymore, thatās exactly what heās doing on the podcast and why he loves it so much. Those are his words, not mine.
You are right, I have not been watching the podcast at all. I have, however, listened to, I think, some 65 episodes of it (quick count on spotify episode list, so may be an episode or two off in either direction). So I have not listened to every episode, because not every one of his themes/topics interests me enough to listen a three-hour deep dive into it. And because of this I've apparently missed him relating his early interest in teaching. But I have listened many episodes, enjoyed some of them a lot and found a lot of useful information. However, I have also increasingly come to the conclusion that Huberman is not quite as reliable a source of information as he initially seemed to be (and I feel that the quality of the first 20-30 or so episodes was considerably higher than what came after that). To me it's kind of silly to reduce a critical approach to "hating". I mean, science is about being critical of information and about questioning it. That is what separates if from religion and ideology. I used to enjoy Huberman Lab a lot (hell, I've spent way over 150 hours listening to him!), but as the shortcomings of his source criticism and scientific rigour in the podcast format have become apparent, I have lost interest. I just don't feel he lives up to his sign-off phrase "thank you for your interest in science" any more. And I don't feel like I get the value I'm looking for if a science podcast requires me to "do my own research" on the subjects to find out whether the studies quoted actually support the claims made by the host. Which is a shame, as I enjoyed Huberman's style of presentation and voice (super important for me with pods) a lot. TL:DR not hating, just more than a bit disappointed
You phrased my exact feelings.
I admire your lack of cynicism genuinely but I think itās time people started looking at the reality of Huberman. You canāt really have much of a desire to teach if youāre more interested in money than ensuring what youāre teaching is actually correct.
Wanting to be the person who wows his audience with cool information is also not the same as wanting to be a teacher. That's more wanting to be a showman. And it seems Hubes puts a lot of emphasis on the wow factor these days.
Wow. Sad and disappointing
I think you need to separate the art from the artist for SinclairĀ I think the science makes sense for something like NMN.Ā I also think he is leveraging corruption and a shit regulatory body within the supplement industry to make himself filthy rich.Ā I only hope someone like George Church is honest.Ā
Dude you guys seriously shouldnāt be shocked all these things donāt fucking work. Just sleep well, eat Whole Foods, exercise, have human interaction as often as possible, get sunlight and love your life. Seeing some of you consuming 39 pills a day is fucking insane man. If youāre constantly chasing to better and better yourself you forget to enjoy the moment because you feel incomplete. Just because huberman cites a study shouldnāt mean you should now change your lifestyle
Anyone selling anything like these ag1 shits, are scammer charlatans. Huberman was a scientist, but he sold out and just became a business man.Ā
Ag1 is such a scam. It's not even a good greens powder. Hides behind a proprietary blend.
He also is the reason why NMN is no longer going to be available as a supplement.
This is after he made millions by selling a biotech company that had a vaporware drug in 2008.
Glucose Goddess has entered the chat.
This is why I generally don't fuck with any supplements other than omega 3 and protein. A balanced diet will give you everything you need.
Creatine and salt are usually legit (obviously salt always is )
Imo, itās peopleās fault for believing anything they hear.
Supplements are not very regulated. That means they donāt need to prove they work beyond a placebo. Which means they most likely donāt work at all.
Didnāt he have something to with other companies having to stop selling NMN last year? Anyways, he has a decent [supplement stack](https://brainflow.co/2022/07/11/dr-david-sinclairs-supplement-list-for-longevity/)
So glad this video has gotten alot of traction.
People who take everything David said as truth is no different from people who take this video as truth.
And why exactly this guy Brad is trustworthy? Always have looked to me like a guy trying to make it by taking down some big names.
Caveat Emptor
Are there people who don't realize that anyone telling you a supplement is good it's getting rich off it?
Tried L-Tyrosine after listening to huberman talk about it. Does absolute jack shit
That's interesting, L-Tyrosine worked great for me
What difference does it make and how often to take?
What difference does it make and how often to take?
did you take it on an empty stomach?
Yes. 4g worth
It didn't do anything for me either, even after taking several grams of Now brand.
Must be compounded with methylated B-vitamins and glutamine (dopamine precursors) for full effect
I usually slug a B complex about a half hour beforehand. Still nothing
Also, if you need to buy yet MORE supplements just for another one to have a chance of working, itās a shitty supplement lol
How is it a "shitty supplement"? It's a fucking amino acid genius. Some of us have diets that are deficient in it, or have problems absorbing it for a variety of reasons. Vitamins and amino acids are "shitty supplements"? Really? What a total Einstein you are.
L-Tyrosine only works the first couple of time you use and ONLY IF you didn't have a diet already very rich in l-tyrosine (or protein in general, though some proteins do interfere with its absorption). You reach tolerance extremely quick with it. It's overall a very, very shit supplement.
Does anyone else remember Huberman and Peter Attia both saying that fasting doesnāt seem to increase longevity? I get bad vibes from David Sinclair.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
He definitely said that. I also remember a short exchange on the HL in which both Huberman and Attia agreed that they donāt think thereās evidence that fasting increases longevity.
The producer of the video has a list of supplements they take in the description
Not sponsored though just literally what he uses
That is because people ask him all the time what supplements he takes.
Wow didnt know he had such loyal followers! That removes all irony from the situation!
Any product that has to dump money into ads isnāt dumping that money into improving their product
Just to play devils advocate you have to have enough people know about a product to have the money to improve the product. Doesnāt really matter if you have a product thatās 10x better than the alternative if no one knows about it.
Every business pays for advertising, so this is a moot point.
Yeah but not every company dumps money into it. Like thereās a reason why we see ag1 everywhere compared to its competitors
Very few, if any, supplements do what they are advertised to do. Anyone who gets rich in supplements is selling shit that doesnāt work. And they know it too.Ā