Huberman's Outrageous Conflict of Interest at Cell Reports Medicine
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 сен 2024
- Andrew Huberman was on the editorial board of Cell Report Medicine during the entire time that Susanna Soberg's article was under review, and he must have had some role in reviewing her terrible science long before the article was ever published. This is a glaring conflict of interest and points to the possibility of quid-pro-quo between the two of them, or, at the very least an indication of his willingness to influence scientific publications in order to make a bigger splash on his podcast. The editorial board at Cell Reports has so-far refused to comment.
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @sgcarney
Get Exclusive Updates on Patreon:
/ sgcarney
Substack
sgcarney.subst...
Scott Carney Investigates Podcast
www.scottcarne...
RUclips / @sgcarney
Books:
The Wedge
www.scottcarne...
What Doesn't Kill Us
www.scottcarne...
The Enlightenment Trap
www.scottcarne...
The Vortex
www.scottcarne...
The Red Market
www.scottcarne...
Listen to the Scott Carney Investigates Podcast on:
RUclips
• Scott Carney Investigates
Apple:
podcasts.apple...
Spotify:
open.spotify.c...
Anchor:
spotifyanchor-...
Social Media:
Instagram / sgcarney
Facebook / scottcarneyauthor
Twitter / sgcarney
Bluesky staging.bsky.a...
©PokeyBear LLC (2023)
![Tee Grizzley - Blow for Blow (feat. J. Cole) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wNLN5xsx5dc/mqdefault.jpg)
Get Early Access at Patreon: www.patreon.com/posts/101893035?pr=true
Subscribe to my Substack Newsletter: sgcarney.substack.com/
Once Huberman gives advice on psychology or other medical advice, I stop listening. He is unquestionably good on brain and optic but not other fields. It takes different level of years of years of studying, researching and undestanding it. Yes, I still listen to him when he is talking about just brain.
He has a bachelors and masters degrees in psychology, but I would still be cautious about ANYTHING he says. He’ll lie about neuroscience or anything else if he gets money or fame from it, he’s past the point of honesty and integrity.
great take!
Yes this was my take too...he was giving advice way outside his field of expertise which was an immediate red flag and credibility sink.
As a PhD research scientist who recently pivoted to Human Performance Optimization, I initially found Huberman's material helpful just in terms of useful nuggets of info that connected to domains with which I was more familiar (cognitive neuro). HOWEVER- upon doing proper lit reviews on some of his claims, I am having quite a time finding support for many of the claims he confidently rattles off in his podcast. For example, in his podcast on Non-sleep Deep Rest, he asserted that a 20-minute NSDR protocol after an intense period of focused learning accelerates plasticity by 50%. He made a passing reference to his source "two papers that recently came out in Cell Reports" but I have not found any such papers in my lit review. Now of course, because he gets parroted all over the place, the claim has propagated all over the internet in various shades of authoritativeness. I'd love to be wrong and read/cite said papers in my current white paper, but I have to say this all feels pretty bunk. I also wrote him (he's listed as the corresponding author for Balban et al 2023) to ask about some inconsistent reporting in one of his papers. Been three weeks with no response- not holding my breath. All that to say- I will not be counting on him as a primary source for anything. @sgcarney your heads up about AH's dodgy reviewing at Cell Reports makes a lot of this make more sense.
When I originally watched the interview with soberg I just kept thinking, they must have been intimate because there's something flying around between them.
But I was like ah he's a professional, now I look back and that and wonder.
Ofc this is their business if that was the case though I don't care about it but I did wonder about that at the time.
Many people have speculated on that, but I don't believe there is any direct evidence or testimony to it being true.
Lol, I remembered thinking there was definitely chemistry sparking between the two also.
That was my first thought!
Cell Reports Medicine's Response was to send me a link to their own editorial guidelines that clearly show that authors should not profit off their scientific research in the journal...and that they refused to comment on Huberman's role at the journal at all. Their real position seems to be simply trying to minimize public scrutiny. See response below:
Hi Scott,
Thank you for the additional context. Unfortunately, it’s Elsevier policy not to comment on our relationships with authors. For further information on our publishing ethics and peer review policies, please see:
www.elsevier.com/en-gb/about/policies-and-standards/publishing-ethics
The lack of transparency here is astounding. I am mortified Elsevier responded like this.
Hi Scott, could you please clarify why do you refer to Elsevier here? Could you could confirm to which editorial house does Cell Reports Medicine actually belong? thanks
@@nikon976 Yes. Cell Reports is an Elsevier publication.
😲 keep digging! Grateful for your posts!
As always - you’ve got to follow the money Scott
Thanks for the idea. I just changed the thumbnail because of your comment.
😊
He was probably sleeping with her.
You provide absolutely no evidence that Huberman had anything to do with the article getting accepted or getting on the cover. Was he the handling editor? Were there conflicting peer reviews? What is your professional issue with the actual science of Søberg? Further, is Huberman the person in charge of what gets to the cover of the Cell Press (that really would be newsworthy given that he’s not the editor-in-chief).
It honestly seems like you are grasping at straws, systematically searching for anything related to the guy that you can spin (or free associate) in a negative light. Yet you seem to think you’re Woodward or Bernstein. It seems quite sad to be honest.
I know from a source that he was involved in review. But that's all I can say about my source.
Damn I noticed Dr Huberman changing his tune for cold exposure and cold showers and all… never knew it was this fishy
If cold water therapy produces brown fat then why does Wim’s brother who does none of Wim’s protocols have nearly twice as much brown fat? So much for cold water immersion producing brown fat!
Yep. Good question.
Great point. I read that Wim and his brother both have similar (very good) brown fat function and that it's therefore likely genetic.
Incredible fact finding here. Would love to see some further work on the ill-advised use of hyperventilation as a daily practice (mouth breathing dust particles, lack of NO2 uptake, bohr effect and not releasing enough O2 to muscles due to lack of CO2, no nasal breathing, overall insensitivity to CO2 in the bloodstream, all red flags). The proof is seen in recent Hof guided videos where you can clearly hear him take deep, labored breaths in-between sentences - a clear indicator of long term, over breathing as a result of using the method. Why is this method advocated? Keep up the great work.
I still do the WHM breathing just about every day and my N of 2 study (my wife does it with me) doesn't show any obvious long term side effects over the last ten years. However there are instances of Tinnitus in some people which are concerning. As for particulate matter etc... I wonder how we could study that.
@@sgcarney blowing off CO2 on a daily basis in excess amounts seems to be a counterintuitive way to optimizing O2 uptake to muscles and vital organs. It plays a major role in releasing O2 from hemoglobin. Why would we want to limit this vital activity? It strikes me as I’ll advised.
Yeah. it could be. But the WHM takes only like 5-15 mins. So in such a small dose I would be surprised if there were long term problems. That said...definitely worth studying if someone can.
great post ancient farmer! in the freediving community we've been preaching this for decades, and on my channel i've made elaborated videos on the exact issues you mention here. Besides those issues, there's also the major issue of creating a habit , even if you only would practice the WHM for 5 minutes a day.
ps. Another factor which is often overlooked is the mammalian diving reflex which is triggered by breathing less (higher co2) and suppressed by breathing more (hyperventilation).Have you ever seen a dolphin or whale hyperventilate before they go down? 😊
Hey man! I am new to the channel and really enjoy your way of speaking and thinking (found you through your quotes on the New Yorker article). I will say, just like a few of the other commenters on this post, I am a little put off by your persistence with the Huberman story. On the one hand, I think your coverage is helping us better understand who Huberman is, especially as a scientist. But on the other, I get this unsettling feeling that you are just milking the story and disparaging him in the process. I would just love to have some transparency on your end for why you are covering this story is so much detail because it really is hard to trust people on the internet these days. With all respect, I hope you understand my point.
It's just me covering a beat. I knew Huberman since 2017 and have some insight. And I keep finding problems with his science.
I think he was trying to recruit the author to his harem if she wasn’t already in it. Did anyone see his live with her? Wasn’t she in Denmark? Isn’t that where his dad moved? Maybe he wanted some supply there.
Did Bernardo Huberman move to Denmark?
GOT TO ADMIT THIS GUY THOROUGHLY DUPED ME
They got to sell the magazines somehow
Hey Scott, quick question, do you still recommend the Wim Hof Method?
Yes, though I no longer support learning it from Wim.
@@sgcarney Ok cool, thanks man.
Great video as usual, thanks!
SAY IT AIN’T SO.
It's clear what Søberg got from this, but wondering what did Huberman got out of that?
@ProudToBeBritishF 😅
Is the Huberman podcast on Alcohol true…?
He just forgot to disclose that info. Wink wink 😉
I'm sure that is honest mistake by Huberman. Wink wink 😉
He just wanted to help that lady, as she is doing a big favor to a humanity. Wink wink 😉
Whoop Whoop, actually. Other papers of his read like a promo for Whoop more than they do actual results. Remember the "Physiological Sigh"? www.cell.com/cell-reports-medicine/pdf/S2666-3791(22)00474-8.pdf
@@sgcarney I believed the physiological sigh was an effective science based tool.. are you saying that it isn't effective after all? Thank you.
20 years ago I was a big fan of Wilhelm Reich, an heretical psychoanalyst, who was the first to have the ambition to marry Freudianism with Marxism. Long before Marcuse...
My admiration ended, when I read a pamphlet by "conservative" psychoanalysts against Reich. I took the time to think about their arguments and decided finally that Reich was perhaps not a charlatan - but certainly a madman, a snake oil salesman, whose propagated "method" could not only defeat neuroses and psychoses, but also economic systems such as capitalism, as well as political ones such as “fascism”. He was ultimately the Wim Hof of his time... with longer news cycles...
Reich gradually expanded his field - like Huberman: after politics and psychotherapy came medicine: his bioenergetic version of psychoanalysis was also supposed to be able to cure cancer. Yeah - that´s right: cancer ...!!!
Shortly before the FBI closed his small sect compound in Maine, the cult leader operated machines that could influence the weather. At least he thought, that they could that. What the Indians call Prana, Reich called Orgon.
When I completed Reich's biography for myself, I decided that the man is at least "toxic" (to use modern lingo) - and began reading other books.
Decades later, however, I discovered that Reich had not only made a comeback in the New Left of the 1960s, but that Kate Bush had been inspired by Reich in the 1980s:
"Cloudbusting", based on the autobiography of Reich's son Peter, became a pop classic.
The video clip featured Kate Bush as Peter Reich in his childhood as well as Donald Sutherland as the mad scientist father.
The crazy thing is: even though I know, who Wilhelm Reich really was, I find both the song and the video deeply touching. And I feel some "righteous indignation" against the FBI agents who placed Reich under arrest (where he died)...
My guess on Wim Hof and Huberman: the scandal will only make them stronger, because our non-cortical brain structures are designed to trust those who speak with complete conviction. No matter how nonsensical these beliefs are. No matter how delusional they are...
And if a talented Kate Bush joins the discussion, scouts will become FBI snoops with fedora hats and leather coats for eternity. Sorry Scott... 🙃🙃🙃
But however: here is Kate Bush with Cloudbusting:
ruclips.net/video/AJll-eF5zUA/видео.html
Watch Huberman's video where he talks to Søberg on his channel. He's flirting. It's obvious.
I didn't want to say it. . .
You shouldn't.
When one blows gently at a house of cards, people remember the house was made of cards. When one talks a lot of shit about how the house is made of cards, people remember a guy talking shit.
Let your viewers do the shit talking. You're good at gently knocking down houses of cards.
This is my logic why I stopped to listen Huberman podcast
The main benefit for me was - trustworthy material from science. But if person behaves like sociopath or narcissist - I loose trust immediately, as psychotherapist I know how often they are lying for benefits. I don’t trust any word from Hubermans part. Especially about scientific critic I knew already from you, thank you.
But how about guests. It’s also interesting. Guest chooses to not confront this fact, because there is no feedback from Huberman about situation - it means guests are choosing consciously his side. Side of manipulation, lying, playing with facts. Why I should trust this guest in this case? I don’t. And don’t recommend anyone.
I would echo your sentiments and reasoning about Huberman, very closely. Guests are choosing their profile being raised significantly and to disregard AH’s highly questionable actions. Personally I’m very glad that Scott has highlighted this issue particularly, as I wasn’t aware of the facts behind it.
It’s more important than questions specifically about the (potential lack of) integrity in AH’s personal life that have been well documented recently.
Cell Reports Medicine has a dreadful Schimago H ranking.
I don't know what that is, but it sounds bad.
Why are you showing up in my feed?
RUclips needs a block feature like IG because even when I say don’t recommend channels you’re still in my feed
I don’t want to see your videos!!!
Haven’t had this much fun with someone in a while 😂
...woman ..
Something stinks here! This bloke sounds like a 'deeply spurned wonan'. And his dramatic gestures made me laugh!!! ah!!! H has some interesting stuff but he never interested me. Leave H alone
You are a hater 🤦🏾♀️. Be a bigger person and stay focused on what you’re building instead of kicking people whole they are already down. Don’t let your life be about someone else
@ProudToBeBritishF I love you
He’s criticized for not having enough women on the podcast and criticized for promoting a female scientist’s work. Can’t win 😅
That's not the point The point is he helped her with her career knowing full well her research was rubbish - whether in exchange for money or payment in kind - either way his listeners were lied to deliberately
If missing the point were part of the Olympics, you'd have gotten the Gold medal for sure 🥇
I bought one of your books. Then i chance upon your channel and everything is about pissing on other people. Feels small and catty. That is underwhelming.
I’m following the story as it unravels.
@@sgcarneyyou should start a different channel called Exposing Huberman and get anyone who can/will to contribute. Anyone who needs to lie/cheat and trick people to make money to be exposed. Machiavellianism should not be rewarded by society.
It maybe wouldn't feel small and catty if it wasn't for the original kinda bias you have regarding meeting him before.
@@jonw3462I've met neither. What are you going on about.
He "probably had". Do you notice how every bit of proof you have is some shade of this. I called it.
Have you ever seen a news report where someone is being taken away in handcuffs and the reporter says "the alleged criminal"?
@@sgcarney Yes. But do you notice on your crusade against one human being this is literally the only proof you have is a bunch of probably. And did you notice that as soon as I heard this video was coming out I knew exactly what you had? Or didn't have.
I would stop man. The second you have something legit I'm with you. But don't go promoting science and logic with all this gossipy bullshit.
You may consider getting some therapy for whatever issues you have with Huberman. If you're just trying to get clicks more power to you. If not; you should probably reach out for some help. Good luck to you.
Fascinating response.
Scott! Thank you for posting. again!
I'm glad people are looking at his papers. I hope that, if it's there to be found, people find legit reason to criticize his papers. Something more than "probably". That's what science is. That is most certainly not what you are doing.
When Cell Reports won't share any data about their editorial process you report what you can. He was definitely on the editorial board. And those responsibilities involve getting papers approved.