Many critiques of Huberman are out there from fellow neuroscientists (I couldn’t cite them all in one sentence). But since you’re interested, here’s another good one on Medium (it’s in the comments to my article, but citing here too): Andrew Huberman, I Am a Little Mixed Up About You https://medium.com/science-meaning/andrew-huberman-i-am-a-little-mixed-up-about-you-d445ab942795

I do think some of the criticism comes from jealousy. After all, Huberman is published in elite journals/science publications, and like I said in my piece, he’s interesting, engaging, and charismatic (with a large audience).

But none of that gives anyone a license to lie, mislead, or manipulate other people.

Why are you so quick to discredit these women? What makes you think Huberman is innocent?

And from a science perspective, do you care if he discusses topics he’s not an “expert” in? Look up some of his recent takes on cannabis, for example. They’re being discredited by many who are actual experts in the field. Huberman also was recent called out for his failure to do basic statistical math.

When you combine this hubris with incessant advertising for products like AG1 that have questionable benefits, it smells more like grift than science. Add questions around his credibility to the equation, and it should make anyone at least stop and think if this guy is worth the attention.