Andrew Huberman· PhD
Uh and and and in fact in fact I think any uh largecale scientific uh uh institution that seeks to support the the mission that the NIH has has to have both in it.
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.
Uh and and and in fact in fact I think any uh largecale scientific uh uh institution that seeks to support the the mission that the NIH has has to have both in it.
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.
And the reason I'm setting it up this way is because I think nowadays, part of the reason you're here is that we are potentially looking at a redirecting of a significant amount of the research dollars that taxpayers provide to the NIH and the NIH to labs away from basic research, which understandably has some people concerned.