Andrew Huberman· PhD
However far more important than knowing a protocol is understanding why a given protocol works.
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.
However far more important than knowing a protocol is understanding why a given protocol works.
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.
if one can wrap their head around even just a small fraction of the mechanisms that underly a given protocol it gives both tremendous depth and meaning to that protocol and makes it so much more flexible for people they can really think about what's happening as they're engaging in a given protocol and know exactly what they can expect in terms of results