Andrew Huberman· PhD
Um, and I would imagine they would allocate more funding for studies of nutrition um, given who's in charge.
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.
Um, and I would imagine they would allocate more funding for studies of nutrition um, given who's in charge.
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.
It's a fact that NIH, which has been the major funder of, which is the major funder biomedical research in the world, has basically pulled the plug on clinical research support in general as a general area of emphasis. The infrastructure for doing good, and nutritional studies in particular has relied on a mechanism that is now being withdrawn due to funding constraints, and it's affecting our ability to do good nutritional research.