3 ms·

After hearing that he advocates for nicotine use to prevent Alzheimer's I'm pretty skeptical of him. He seems to entirely ignore the risks associated with nicot

After hearing that he advocates for nicotine use to prevent Alzheimer's I'm pretty skeptical of him. He seems to entirely ignore the risks associated with nicotine drive vasoconstriction all for a possible minor benefit. I suppose you don't need to worry about neurodegeneration if you die from a heart attack or aneurysm before you get that old

noname120 2y ago
> he advocates for nicotine use to prevent Alzheimer's Could you source this?
- debacle 2y ago
  https://podcastnotes.org/huberman-lab/episode-90-nicotines-effect-on-the-brain-body-how-to-quit-smoking-or-vaping-huberman-lab/ https://podcastnotes.org/huberman-lab/episode-90-nicotines-e... It has been known for a long time that nicotine, as well as caffeine and other stimulants can delay Alzheimer's. I don't think that Andrew's claim is novel or controversial, but he is making an observation not a recommendation.
- jjtheblunt 2y ago
  https://www.hubermanlab.com/episode/nicotines-effects-on-the-brain-and-body-and-how-to-quit-smoking-or-vaping https://www.hubermanlab.com/episode/nicotines-effects-on-the...
  - sickofparadox 2y ago
    Do you have a specific timestamp of him advocating for the use of nicotine? From the description and timestamp chapters this seems like a fairly reasonable episode on the effects of nicotine in the brain, which, given the topic of the podcast seems in his lane. It even dedicates a decent portion of runtime to quitting smoking and vaping, even though that isn't really on topic.
    - jjtheblunt 2y ago
      This alternate link to the same site seems more attuned to what you just asked. (Not going to listen to it all myself...life's too short, then you do or don't get forgetful!) https://ai.hubermanlab.com/s/dqcKio7m https://ai.hubermanlab.com/s/dqcKio7m
Invictus0 2y ago
He's wrong about X because he says Y is a logical fallacy
- whytookay 2y ago
  Sure, but if he has a track record of being wrong about X then being skeptical of future claims seems reasonable.
  - Invictus0 2y ago
    There's no nicotine in cannabis, so I don't see how they are at all related
    - mrgoldenbrown 2y ago
      If someone has a history of misrepresenting research on drug X and drug Y, it's reasonable to be skeptical of their claims about drug Z
- astine 2y ago
  That's not what the GP said. They said Huberman's incorrect statements on something they understood made them more skeptical regarding his other statements, not that these other statements were definitely wrong because the first statements were wrong. It's about judging Huberman's reliability as a source of information, not deciding whether he's correct or not, ie whether it makes sense to take Huberman at his word or whether one should doublecheck the things that he says.

noname120 2y ago

> he advocates for nicotine use to prevent Alzheimer's Could you source this?

debacle 2y ago
https://podcastnotes.org/huberman-lab/episode-90-nicotines-effect-on-the-brain-body-how-to-quit-smoking-or-vaping-huberman-lab/ https://podcastnotes.org/huberman-lab/episode-90-nicotines-e... It has been known for a long time that nicotine, as well as caffeine and other stimulants can delay Alzheimer's. I don't think that Andrew's claim is novel or controversial, but he is making an observation not a recommendation.
jjtheblunt 2y ago
https://www.hubermanlab.com/episode/nicotines-effects-on-the-brain-and-body-and-how-to-quit-smoking-or-vaping https://www.hubermanlab.com/episode/nicotines-effects-on-the...
- sickofparadox 2y ago
  Do you have a specific timestamp of him advocating for the use of nicotine? From the description and timestamp chapters this seems like a fairly reasonable episode on the effects of nicotine in the brain, which, given the topic of the podcast seems in his lane. It even dedicates a decent portion of runtime to quitting smoking and vaping, even though that isn't really on topic.
  - jjtheblunt 2y ago
    This alternate link to the same site seems more attuned to what you just asked. (Not going to listen to it all myself...life's too short, then you do or don't get forgetful!) https://ai.hubermanlab.com/s/dqcKio7m https://ai.hubermanlab.com/s/dqcKio7m

Invictus0 2y ago

He's wrong about X because he says Y is a logical fallacy

whytookay 2y ago
Sure, but if he has a track record of being wrong about X then being skeptical of future claims seems reasonable.
- Invictus0 2y ago
  There's no nicotine in cannabis, so I don't see how they are at all related
  - mrgoldenbrown 2y ago
    If someone has a history of misrepresenting research on drug X and drug Y, it's reasonable to be skeptical of their claims about drug Z
astine 2y ago
That's not what the GP said. They said Huberman's incorrect statements on something they understood made them more skeptical regarding his other statements, not that these other statements were definitely wrong because the first statements were wrong. It's about judging Huberman's reliability as a source of information, not deciding whether he's correct or not, ie whether it makes sense to take Huberman at his word or whether one should doublecheck the things that he says.