3 ms·

I guess it depends on what you mean by convincing. If by convincing you mean Walker played fast and loose with some of his data presentation, then I'd have a ha

I guess it depends on what you mean by convincing. If by convincing you mean Walker played fast and loose with some of his data presentation, then I'd have a hard time disagreeing. He was also pushing the marketing circuit hard back when that blog post went up (NPR, Rogan, etc). Which can make him feel like a snake oil salesman. So I understand the suspicion But if by convincing you mean that guzey brought us back to square one - that is, sleep might not be as important as we think - then I don't think its a convincing critique.

lolc 6y ago
Yes by convincing I mean it convinced me that Walker is a quack. Way beyond suspicion. As an author he didn't only waste the time I spent reading his book. He put bullshit in my head. I can't fully protect myself against that, but I don't generally give people a second chance on it. I didn't get a "sleep less" message from the critique. Just a "don't read Walker" message. It feels weirdly patronizing to suggest that the critique is wrong when you just fear people will sleep less after reading it. Why not say that right away?