Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Huberman Lab Podcast # 41: On Fasting and Time Restricted Eating (TRE)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Huberman Lab Podcast # 41: On Fasting and Time Restricted Eating (TRE)

    I was wondering if anybody here has listened to Andrew Huberman's podcast on fasting and time restricted eating. Here's a link to it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tRohh0gErM&t=2879s

    This is the main review he uses as evidence to argue a lot of the points of the podcast: https://academic.oup.com/edrv/advanc...193?login=true

    I know that barbell medicine has written on fasting before: https://forum.barbellmedicine.com/fo...e-over-fasting

    If you have listened to it, did you agree/disagree with the points he was making? I am still skeptical of all of the benefits that were proposed in the podcast. In my reading, it seems like the data on intermittent fasting and time restricted eating do not have enough human randomized control trials to support the conclusions that he is making. The review Andrew Huberman cites admits, "More rigorous human studies are needed to assess the efficacy, mechanism, and sustainability of TRE in a wide range of populations and diseases."

    I also read this review and it takes a more measured approach to fasting, time restricted eating https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6836017/

    I have listened to a few episodes of the podcast. Huberman is a great host and makes it all really interesting. But after while it feels like information overload and I feel like I am not critically thinking about everything that I am listening to.



  • #2
    I'm going to be honest Sandy. There's no way I'm going to be bothered the whole meta analysis and all the supporting studies. That being said, I'll give my opinion anyway. 1) I'm not going to trust a study that has a fracking instagram infographic in their abstract. 2) It seems unlikely the BBM crew missed all the studies that review relies on, and 3) I have had a really hard time listening to that podcast ever since Jordan and Austin mentioned 'clinical significance'. I can't help but reframe everything he says into "OK, but just because the effect exists to some extent, is there any evidence it helps people in an observable way.

    My arrogant and ignorant two cents!

    [edited]
    Last edited by doubblezz; 11-19-2021, 01:12 PM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Hi Doubblezz,

      I appreciate your arrogant and ignorant two cents . Your reply made me lol. If I'm being honest with you, I didn't read the meta analysis Huberman cited either. I read another article that Satchin Panda (one of the authors of the meta analysis) wrote. In it, he explains the biological mechanism of circadian cells and fasting and why it's supposed to be good. But there's still not a lot of good evidence for it IMO.

      The point about clinical significance makes so much sense. Austin wrote this blog post about logic failing a few years ago and I feel like that is what is going on here. Just because there's a supposed biological mechanism for something working doesn't mean it will work out like it is "supposed to" after it has been studied.

      As for Huberman's podcast, I haven't listened to another one. This episode sort of turned me off to it and I don't feel like listening anymore. Anyway, thanks for your input! All I see on the internet are people singing the podcast's praises. It's getting very popular (620k subs on youtube) and that will only go up.

      Comment

      Working...
      X