Andrew Huberman· PhD
And then they make the cardinal mistake, which is to tell the joke again at the same dinner. And it just burns it. It burns it there, and it burns it the previous time.
Loading…
The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
And then they make the cardinal mistake, which is to tell the joke again at the same dinner. And it just burns it. It burns it there, and it burns it the previous time.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
But any comedian you talk to will tell you that this is true, where you go and you say this thing. Right, it might be your opening thing. Or it could be a couple minutes in and you say the joke, you tell the thing. And it kills. And you're like, fuck yeah, this is awesome. Your brain just goes, lock it in. And then the next night, you go and you say it. And it gets laughs. But it's a little less. And then this progresses. You keep doing shows. And it's like two months later, and you're like, the thing is not-- it doesn't really work.