Andrew Huberman· PhD
right now those wearables are not accurate enough to meet that threshold
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.
right now those wearables are not accurate enough to meet that threshold
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.
the best ones right now are about 70% effective at staging your sleep. So 70%, it's OK, it's OK. But take it with a grain of salt is what I'm saying.
I think you know people often ask me what's the best sleep tracker and I would say it's the sleep tracker that you wear every night you know I think most of them are much of a muchness in terms of their current in accuracy
10 minutes of bright outdoor light within the first hour of waking anchors the circadian phase and improves sleep onset that night.
Morning sunlight exposure shifts the cortisol awakening response forward, improving daytime alertness.
Long-term morning sunlight reduces age-related macular degeneration risk.
Sleep regularity predicts all-cause mortality more strongly than sleep duration.
Tracking deep sleep on a wearable accurately reflects EEG-measured slow-wave sleep.
Caffeine has a half-life long enough that consumption after 2pm measurably degrades deep sleep in slow metabolizers.