Andrew Huberman· PhD
this could be stated in real world terms as people are taking fewer tokes um of the higher concentration stuff that allow them to match blood levels that were present in the person taking many more toes in the 70s
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.
this could be stated in real world terms as people are taking fewer tokes um of the higher concentration stuff that allow them to match blood levels that were present in the person taking many more toes in the 70s
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.
what you're saying is that unless one is talking about concentrates that people and animals in the laboratory will self-regulate the amount of intake in a way that leads to approximately the same blood levels of THC so it may not be as much of a concern at least in light of the concerns about oh these levels are so high that um people are overwhelming their system with THC basically
because they titrated like even at the at the rodent level they're able to titrate because of the lag between inhalation and feeling the effects is only on the order of a couple of minutes people can titrate better I mean not just people it seems like the rodents can as well