3 ms·

I’m happy to have this idea refuted but character attacks and platitudes aren’t the best way to go about it. What Huberman says, even if it is an mis representa

I’m happy to have this idea refuted but character attacks and platitudes aren’t the best way to go about it. What Huberman says, even if it is an mis representation is based on scientific studies. There are some links in the notes here to some of the studies: https://www.hubermanlab.com/episode/how-to-increase-your-willpower-and-tenacity# https://www.hubermanlab.com/episode/how-to-increase-your-wil...

FollowingTheDao 2y ago
First, the OP paper is called : "Motivating Personal Growth by Seeking Discomfort". Huberman does that all the time, posting "footnotes" so people can think his CONCLUSIONS are scientific. Some of those "studies" are only articles. ("Ego depletion: Is the active self a limited resource?") And NONE of them show evidence that the AMC shrinks or grows based on "doing difficult things" but he just goes out and says this because it makes people freak out to think the brain can shrink or grow. It is a character attack because researchers have already been all over this guy and said the same thing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0thkoCYhJnc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0thkoCYhJnc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zxLok2XrhM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zxLok2XrhM
- gregwebs 2y ago
  One of the links he provides is to this review article: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0010945219303326?via%3Dihub https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00109... It concludes with something not far off from what Huberman stated. Not saying it proves he’s right but makes it easy to give him the benefit of the doubt and try to track down the actual new research he is referencing. > One intriguing possibility is that the structure and function of aMCC could be altered with sufficient behavioral training. Indeed, as a flexible hub, the MCC may be better equipped than other brain regions to reshape its connectivity in response to learning. It has been proposed that protein receptors important for plasticity (such as CaMKII, NR2B, NMDA) are highly expressed in limbic circuits including aMCC (Wei et al., 1999; Palomero-Gallagher et al., 2008; Garcia-Cabezas et al., 2017; Burt et al., 2018; Palomero-Gallagher and Zilles, 2019). Interestingly, Garcia-Cabezas et al. (2017) recently showed that in adult monkeys, markers of synaptic plasticity are high in MCC (and other limbic regions) while markers of stability (as expressed by cellular factors that inhibit synaptic plasticity) are low. These findings suggest that training related improvement in behaviors requiring tenacity may be mediated through the aMCC. We have seen evidence that aMCC can be ‘trained up” in the domain of exercise (Colcombe et al., 2006).

FollowingTheDao 2y ago

First, the OP paper is called : "Motivating Personal Growth by Seeking Discomfort". Huberman does that all the time, posting "footnotes" so people can think his CONCLUSIONS are scientific. Some of those "studies" are only articles. ("Ego depletion: Is the active self a limited resource?") And NONE of them show evidence that the AMC shrinks or grows based on "doing difficult things" but he just goes out and says this because it makes people freak out to think the brain can shrink or grow. It is a character attack because researchers have already been all over this guy and said the same thing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0thkoCYhJnc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0thkoCYhJnc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zxLok2XrhM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zxLok2XrhM

gregwebs 2y ago
One of the links he provides is to this review article: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0010945219303326?via%3Dihub https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00109... It concludes with something not far off from what Huberman stated. Not saying it proves he’s right but makes it easy to give him the benefit of the doubt and try to track down the actual new research he is referencing. > One intriguing possibility is that the structure and function of aMCC could be altered with sufficient behavioral training. Indeed, as a flexible hub, the MCC may be better equipped than other brain regions to reshape its connectivity in response to learning. It has been proposed that protein receptors important for plasticity (such as CaMKII, NR2B, NMDA) are highly expressed in limbic circuits including aMCC (Wei et al., 1999; Palomero-Gallagher et al., 2008; Garcia-Cabezas et al., 2017; Burt et al., 2018; Palomero-Gallagher and Zilles, 2019). Interestingly, Garcia-Cabezas et al. (2017) recently showed that in adult monkeys, markers of synaptic plasticity are high in MCC (and other limbic regions) while markers of stability (as expressed by cellular factors that inhibit synaptic plasticity) are low. These findings suggest that training related improvement in behaviors requiring tenacity may be mediated through the aMCC. We have seen evidence that aMCC can be ‘trained up” in the domain of exercise (Colcombe et al., 2006).