Andrew Huberman· PhD
A negative result says this particular pathway, molecule, mechanism, etc. is not doing what we hypothesized it would. And that's a real advance in our scientific knowledge. Absolutely. without question.
Loading…
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.
A negative result says this particular pathway, molecule, mechanism, etc. is not doing what we hypothesized it would. And that's a real advance in our scientific knowledge. Absolutely. without question.
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.
Ne so-called negative results aren't incentivized. very hard to get a good paper published for showing that something isn't true.
although negative findings are just as important for the establishment of knowledge right