Andrew Huberman· PhD
More than shrimp, oysters are even a more dramatic example, one bad oyster is all you need to be driven that way for the next six months.
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.
More than shrimp, oysters are even a more dramatic example, one bad oyster is all you need to be driven that way for the next six months.
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.
I learned coming up in neuroscience that this is one strong example of one trial learning, that from that point on, it's not the restaurant or the waitress or waiter, or the date, but it's my notion of it had to have been the shrimp that leads me to then want to avoid shrimp in every context, maybe even shrimp powder.