3 ms·

This book dates from 1973. Its author John Nash was born in 1909. At the risk of being that guy, Huberman has a great episode on how lights, both natural and a

This book dates from 1973. Its author John Nash was born in 1909. At the risk of being that guy, Huberman has a great episode on how lights, both natural and artificial can affect your health, supported by more recent science: https://hubermanlab.com/using-light-sunlight-blue-light-and-red-light-to-optimize-health/ https://hubermanlab.com/using-light-sunlight-blue-light-and-... https://hubermanlab.com/using-light-for-health/ https://hubermanlab.com/using-light-for-health/ Turns out we are creatures who have a daily rhythm regulated by the sun, and lots of things like hormones, wakefulness and sleep work better when we act accordingly.

dang 3y ago
Year fixed above. Thanks!
sureglymop 3y ago
At the risk of being that guy also, what are Hubermans credentials and why is he a credible source? As someone who is not a listener, he seems to be a Rogan-esque podcaster with a PhD, who makes a lot of bold and some possibly unsubstantiated claims, producing content marketed as "self-help". Is this a correct assessment? This isn't a criticism, I am genuinely trying to find out. If you are a regular listener I would welcome your opinion.
- wddkcs 3y ago
  You know he has a PhD but don't find that credible? I've seen Huberman smeared recently, don't understand why. Quick search shows he works at Stanford.
  - sureglymop 3y ago
    I in no way meant to smear, I asked for opinions. I find it personally very hard to judge the credibility of any content online these days. Also no, a PhD is just a title, nothing more. I would say when it comes to research, what matters (applicable in some fields) is transparency and reproducibility. The work often should speak for itself, regardless of any titles. Do you find the idea that there could be a PhD who would publish pseudo-science farfetched? Or what about someone without any title publishing a ground breaking paper? Reality is more complex than attended institution and acquired title. Still, I wasn't smearing anyone.
    - wddkcs 3y ago
      I agree about verifying. Currently there are some contested edits on Huberman's wiki. I was wondering if your credulity was related. https://www.reddit.com/r/HubermanLab/comments/15wlz4a/the_science_decimates_huberman_through_checks/ https://www.reddit.com/r/HubermanLab/comments/15wlz4a/the_sc...
  - ChatGTP 3y ago
    There is no way we should just trust a person for having a PhD.
    - Turskarama 3y ago
      There is basically nothing that can guarantee someone knows what they're talking about (and isn't misrepresenting it). That said, having a PhD in a relevant field is really up there in terms of credentials. If that's not good enough for you, what is?
      - ChatGTP 3y ago
        Of course but I’m not going to just trust a podcaster for closing to have a PhD
- blueyes 3y ago
  Huberman has a PhD in neurobiology and teaches that discipline at a top-tier institution (Stanford), where he also runs a lab. He's published several articles in Nature, a top science journal. His subspecialty happens to be vision, which includes how light affects the eyes and brain. So his expertise is particularly strong in this regard. I happen to trust his judgment on many other aspects of neurobiology, and have been a regular listener since he began his podcast. His advice and insights have changed my life in many positive ways; that is, I do many of the things he recommends and I feel healthier, calmer and more energetic because of it. His 2.5 hour podcasts run a bit long and he does not know how to condense his message well. That's the main downside, but if you can find synopses of transcripts, or just play him at 1.5x speed, you can save some time. * https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=andrew+huberman&btnG= https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=andr...
  - sureglymop 3y ago
    Thank you for the insight and for providing the link!
  - bboygravity 3y ago
    Sidenote: one of the reasons his podcasts feel so long is that he is spending a significant part of it making sure to NOT make bold unsubstantiated claims.

dang 3y ago

Year fixed above. Thanks!

sureglymop 3y ago

At the risk of being that guy also, what are Hubermans credentials and why is he a credible source? As someone who is not a listener, he seems to be a Rogan-esque podcaster with a PhD, who makes a lot of bold and some possibly unsubstantiated claims, producing content marketed as "self-help". Is this a correct assessment? This isn't a criticism, I am genuinely trying to find out. If you are a regular listener I would welcome your opinion.

wddkcs 3y ago
You know he has a PhD but don't find that credible? I've seen Huberman smeared recently, don't understand why. Quick search shows he works at Stanford.
- sureglymop 3y ago
  I in no way meant to smear, I asked for opinions. I find it personally very hard to judge the credibility of any content online these days. Also no, a PhD is just a title, nothing more. I would say when it comes to research, what matters (applicable in some fields) is transparency and reproducibility. The work often should speak for itself, regardless of any titles. Do you find the idea that there could be a PhD who would publish pseudo-science farfetched? Or what about someone without any title publishing a ground breaking paper? Reality is more complex than attended institution and acquired title. Still, I wasn't smearing anyone.
  - wddkcs 3y ago
    I agree about verifying. Currently there are some contested edits on Huberman's wiki. I was wondering if your credulity was related. https://www.reddit.com/r/HubermanLab/comments/15wlz4a/the_science_decimates_huberman_through_checks/ https://www.reddit.com/r/HubermanLab/comments/15wlz4a/the_sc...
- ChatGTP 3y ago
  There is no way we should just trust a person for having a PhD.
  - Turskarama 3y ago
    There is basically nothing that can guarantee someone knows what they're talking about (and isn't misrepresenting it). That said, having a PhD in a relevant field is really up there in terms of credentials. If that's not good enough for you, what is?
    - ChatGTP 3y ago
      Of course but I’m not going to just trust a podcaster for closing to have a PhD
blueyes 3y ago
Huberman has a PhD in neurobiology and teaches that discipline at a top-tier institution (Stanford), where he also runs a lab. He's published several articles in Nature, a top science journal. His subspecialty happens to be vision, which includes how light affects the eyes and brain. So his expertise is particularly strong in this regard. I happen to trust his judgment on many other aspects of neurobiology, and have been a regular listener since he began his podcast. His advice and insights have changed my life in many positive ways; that is, I do many of the things he recommends and I feel healthier, calmer and more energetic because of it. His 2.5 hour podcasts run a bit long and he does not know how to condense his message well. That's the main downside, but if you can find synopses of transcripts, or just play him at 1.5x speed, you can save some time. * https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=andrew+huberman&btnG= https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=andr...
- sureglymop 3y ago
  Thank you for the insight and for providing the link!
- bboygravity 3y ago
  Sidenote: one of the reasons his podcasts feel so long is that he is spending a significant part of it making sure to NOT make bold unsubstantiated claims.