Andrew Huberman· PhD
But I do think there are some benefits from infrared. And they are more affordable. They're less of a fire hazard.
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.
But I do think there are some benefits from infrared. And they are more affordable. They're less of a fire hazard.
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 think infrared saunas are less of fire hazard and better for home use but the health claims they make are not all accurate.
4–7 sauna sessions per week, 20 minutes at 80°C+, reduce cardiovascular mortality risk by 40% over a decade.
Regular sauna use raises BDNF and improves verbal memory in older adults.
Sauna protocols only generate the longevity effect when sessions exceed 30 minutes.
Hot-tub bathing yields cardiovascular benefits comparable to traditional Finnish sauna at matched core-temp dose.