Andrew Huberman· PhD
BTW: the drug in this instance is #nicotine
The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
BTW: the drug in this instance is #nicotine
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.
the belief effect isn't just changing what one subjectively experiences oh this is the effect of high nicotine or low nicotine it actually is changing the way that the brain responds to the belief and that to me is absolutely wild
moreover people who were told that they received a high concentration of nicotine performed better than either the individuals who were told they received a medium or small concentration of nicotine but as I mentioned before everyone received the same concentration of nicotine
for the group that was told that they received a medium concentration of nicotine they performed better on a cognitive task than did the people who were told they received a smaller concentration of nicotine
in other words everyone gets the same dose either zero or moderate but depending on what you're told your performance changes accordingly and that's cool but what's really cool about the study is they actually recorded from brain centers of these individuals and the levels of activity in particular areas of the brain that are relevant for cognition changed according to what the people believe