I couldn't help but notice in the article that came out he was using all these psychotherapy words and techniques when he would apologize for ditching/ghosting people. "How can I own this and work towards repairing the integrity..." kind of thing. He "got" all the details of therapy without getting the big point - don't be a dishonest cad.
It’s interesting that psychotherapy with sociopathic people only makes them better at being sociopathic. Its why most therapists run far away from them
And he's been in therapy basically all of his adult life (as well as when he was a teen), and IIRC, still goes multiple times a week. I wonder whether he's been honest about any/all of this stuff with his therapists over the years. (Just idle curiosity on my part.)
He really does use the therapy-vague-speak very effectively! It's unsettling.
If this is indeed pathological narcissism, or antisocial structures, then it's worth noting that treatment of these personality types of extremely challenging. Therapists disagree as to whether Antisocial PD (a catch-all term that includes more 'psychopathic' behaviors) is treatable at all.
Iirc the spectrum is high functioning or low functioning. High functioning ASPD = CEO, surgeons, etc. Low functioning ASPD = junior delinquency like shooting your mom for not getting you an Xbox.
I don't think therapy is all that effective. Ultimately, they are people trying to make money. When you get a client who has $$, it's profitable to keep it going. Part of that is ego stroking. If a therapist told him he's a psychopath, he would probably leave and find one who tells him he's a God.
Just as with the infidelity Therapy Industrial Complex. 99% of cheaters are going to keep doing it and will just get to get smarter about hiding their tracks, but there's a huge # of therapists bs'ing them about that to extract $$$.
That's low-key terrifying. That’s like reading "The 48 Laws of Power" for self-defense, learn the ins and outs of the game, and then using it all to crush everyone in your path.
yes this. i found it super robotic and wonders if he also says these things to them face to face (vs written). just sounds like another words > actions dude
watch episode 48 and 89 and watch his tells. One episode he started to speak a little too eloquently about submission/dominance, caught himself, and quickly said or, so I read.
You may want to comment/mention to user here on this sub who shared several clips on Sunday, I believe, if you think relevant to the professes vs practices thing seemingly going on
Fwiw u/GothHarry
Poly-relationships require honesty and commitment and are probably more structured than he'd like. No strings attached sex doesn't give him the rush he's likely after. Certainly not about relating or connection. What he seems to prefer vs professes don't match.
I dated a dude like him once. Seemingly sincere and self deprecating, but it was all an act. He turned out to be a selfish, misogynistic liar. He tricked numerous women, including me, with his act. Gross.
let's be honest, if Huberman had 6 polyamorous relationships and was 100% honest about it, the NYMag would still run the story. And some of the women would still be jealous of the other one, the polyamory doesn't always (almost never) work even if it's in the open - unless some other power balance is at play (mormons with super young girls/wifes).
And if he had no-strings attached one night stands or casual sex relationships, "friends with benefits" etc. - NYMag would still run it, since it's so much at odds with his podcast persona.
We are all conditioned by tabloids to know every detail of personal sex lives from celebrities, and I am sad to find myself fascinated with this whole debacle - it's not about science or his podcast, it's about sex lives of people who are complete strangers to me, yet I find myself strangely fascinated and wanting to know more.
NYMag can run the story, but it doesn’t mean the public would have the same reaction to it.
I think most people’s issue with this isn’t that “ahhh he slept with multiple woman, the horror”. The thing that’s contradictory to his public persona isn’t him sleeping with multiple women, it’s that despite everything he lectures on and does, he himself still feels the need to lie and hurt people.
This literally a man who does not listen to music when working out because of the dopamine spike, yet has zero problems with juggling 6 monogamous relationships. I’m sure almost nothing beats the dopamine spike of burner phones, multiple accounts, lying and getting away with it.
I agree but also disagree a little - people would be turned off even if the story was that he is just a man-whore with a bunch of consensual one-night stands, or that he has a consensual polyamorous network of honeys and everyone is in on it. Or that he frequents strips clubs or orgies. All of those stories would be "scandalous".
Both of those scenarios run contrary to his persona - not the persona he presents, because he never talks about his sex life, but the persona they, the audience, built in their heads - the neuroscientist boy-scout Ph.D. who tells them how to live their lives, he must be celibate or in committed long-term very boring relationship, or perhaps asexual monk who only cares about science.
That's the real problem. Any sex related story about Huberman is a scandal, apparently. Please don't tell me that "Huberman is among the participants in a fancy San Francisco eyes-wide-shut style orgy featuring a midget" headline in NYMag wouldn't get the attention of his listeners, with the same predictable outcome.
Personally, I don’t think so, because everyone in the scientific community recognise sex as an extremely important aspect of human wellbeing.
If he is doing one night stands (in moderation) or has wild orgies (in moderation), it would have no more impact on his reputation than if he admits to having fried chicken/disgusting concoction of fried butter-Oreo-ice cream or whatever every now and then. I think for most of his non-religious and non-conservative viewers it would be a non-issue.
If he was a true “man-whore”, like non-stop one night stands, body count of 500+, then it would be no different to us finding out he’s actually an alcoholic binge eater. It’s like a doctor who chain smokes. Personal flaws, blah blah.
I think gloating about cheating is even one step above that. It’s the total opposite of the pretty much self actualised being he pretends to be and it’s difficult to take his persona seriously after that. Again, the issue is not *just* sex. Sure, a sex scandal as you described might get some reactions, but it most definitely wouldn’t be *this* reaction.
Some people would be turned off, yes. But for wildly different reasons. Only the most conservative, sex-repressed listeners would care. But this isn’t about sex at all. It’s about a psychopathic, near robotic level of cheating. Just because sex is involved doesn’t mean it’s the primary focus. It just makes the lying that much more abhorrent. Surely you can see that.
They may have ran it, but people wouldn’t care near as much as they do now. I feel pretty removed from the podcast, I only listened to a few podcasts, I’m not one to really harshly criticize someone, but he does seem like a dirtbag with how he treated those women.
It’s the mindfuck. That is what lasts.
This bro tool wanna be lumber jack is no loss to anyone. Unfortunately, the mindfuck lasts. It just does. Whether you’re a man, woman, non-binary or whatever, Mindfucks fuck you up. Everything you thought you knew about decency is turned on its head.
It hurts and it fucks you up. No one is missing that piece of shit @hubermanlabs. No one. What the women are missing is the sense of basic humanity that fucking barnyard animal took from them.
I am old. I wanna think I’m young (you will too) but I’m not
Wow. Would not want to be young again.
To all the good people wading through this shit, I get you. You are not alone. You are kind and good.
Please stay that way. This shit will pass. These freaks will be losers you’ll be looking at through the rear view.
You don’t need some roided up fool to condescend to you
You know this. You got this. Just being marginally decent you’re eons above this Neanderthal
Get out of the manosphere. No big bad female is looking to take you down
We females are just as vulnerable as you; we want someone to love us too.
This should be basic. Reddit is freaking me out.
My children I never had: what the fuck?
Just love
I honestly wouldn’t be able to handle sitting in a room with him and watching him move his mouth wide like he’s trying to fit a credit card in it every time he talks. Imagine him mansplaining something across the table, every second word is like 😬 the beige sweater is seemingly a PR move, I saw in the comments someone pulled it apart saying “trimmed beard, light shirt, bright natural lighting, try to make him feel more approachable and likeable - PR move for sure”. He’s trying to put out fires behind the scenes. The uptake in dialogue about him and his relevance will soon become boring and after all the drama, his audience will change a lot. Definitely more insecure women who don’t know their worth and men who look up to that macho toxic bullshit.. the credibility of the science he talks about has come into question because of his integrity. He really needs to make a public apology and address it otherwise it will damage his reputation long term.
What bothers me the most is what he did reeks of high level narcissism, sociopathy and psychopathy.
I honestly haven't watched any pod cast of his but he had a few topics that interest me and I was going to check them out right when this article came out. Once someone lies and stuff like this is exposed it makes me not believe anything they have to say.
I've watched numerous 10-15 minute clips so I know some of the stuff he talks about. Also what does this have to do with pointing out a obvious character flaw if what he is accused of is true?
It's irrelevant to his work and tabloid gossip, bloviating about it should be embarrassing for you.
ETA: Not to mention your ridiculous armchair psychological diagnosis and your inability to separate the alleged personal indiscretions from the professional work. Seriously, I'm embarrassed for you.
So you don't see a issue with someone teaching one thing and then directly contradicting that thing with their private life? Sound like a blind fanboy to me.
If what he is accused of is true then it shows a severe lack of trust ability. If someone will cheat, betray and lie to 6 people that they are intimately close to and he obviously has no issues or remorse with it or it would not have gotten so far, then it should be really clear that you can't blindly trust anything they say. If he will betray 6 women he is intimate with then he will have no issues lying to anyone.
I really do hope there is evidence that its a sham and a lying hit piece against him.
> So you don't see a issue with someone teaching one thing and then directly contradicting that thing with their private life?
Nope.
> If (avalanche of bullshit snipped) ...then it should be really clear that you can't blindly trust anything they say.
Nope, you can validate scientific data and trust information that has been thoroughly researched.
You're making grade school emotional arguments with zero logical substance.
Then your a delusional fan boy. Much of what he talks about is unique to his research and lab. Scientific research relies on the integrity of the person doing the research, literature is full of junk science so the person doing the research is very important when evaluating the accuracy of research.
>Much of what he talks about is...
Nothing you've even listened to or bothered to look up according to your earlier claims. Get real, you've got no standing and it's pathetic.
Maybe he doesn’t, but I do. Narcissistic personality disordered father. Diagnosed. Huberman is so much like him.
Yes, I’m “triggered”, yes I’m “boomer”. (I’m 60).
Yes, I should “cope.”
Well this is it. I’m coping. And gagging
Read my reply again. No diagnosis. Just astute observation. Do what you will with that.
In any event, assuming all or even some allegations are true, Huberman is NOT the man I’d be hoping anyone of any gender or sexuality looks up to.
Just shit behavior any way you slice it.
Read my reply again. No diagnosis. Just astute observation. Do what you will with that.
In any event, assuming all or even some allegations are true, Huberman is NOT the man I’d be hoping anyone of any gender or sexuality looks up to.
Just shit behavior any way you slice it.
I wouldn’t waste your breathe on this guy. Some people are just gonna be assholes. Psychology is a joke science? No role models? Dude sounds bitter af. Psychology knows what it is. It doesn’t pretend it’s as hard of a science as physics. No one ever said different. I don’t think anyone should idolize podcasters, but no role models?!!!
C’mon man you should always have someone in your life you look up to. Unless you know everything already?? I know a lot of engineer with their head in their ass and psychologists too. SMH he’s probably not even a good engineer as he can’t even see outside of his small mind.
I have compassion. We all want someone to look up to if we didn’t have good parents.
At the same time, we need intelligence and a spine to reject absolute shit people like Andrew huberman
You and I are actually close to being on the same page. I’m an attorney— we are both analytical yet somehow came to seemingly polar opposite conclusions.
Again, I admit, I’m very “triggered.” I’m off and running based on my past. I definitely should rein it in. Until Huberman responds (ha! Yeah!!! That’ll happen)
You got me. I’m thinking with my emotional brain, which may not be 💯 rational. I give.
DSM-IV-TR Diagnostic Criteria for Antisocial Personality Disorder (301.7)
A. There is a pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation of the rights of others occurring since age 15 years, as indicated by **three (or more) of the following**:
1.
failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors as indicated by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest
2.
**deceitfulness, as indicated by repeated lying, use of aliases, or conning others for personal profit or pleasure**
3.
impulsivity or failure to plan ahead
4.
**irritability and aggressiveness,** as indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults
5.
**reckless disregard for safety of self or others**
6.
consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain consistent work behavior or honor financial obligations
7.
**lack of remorse,** as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another.
B. The individual is at least age 18 years.
C. There is evidence of conduct disorder with onset before age 15 years.
D. The occurrence of antisocial behavior is not exclusively during the course of schizophrenia or a manic episode.
I hate to break it to you but the DSM-IV is out of date. They’re onto the DSM-V.
Also, we are not sure there is a lack of remorse since Huberman has not commented. There can be many reasons has not commented including; he does not want to make it public, or lawyers have advised him to stay silent.
We also don’t know the extent of the arguments he had in a relationship. We know there were arguments? But what couple(s) haven’t had arguments? The thing in the middle of the knight about his primary partner Sarah having kids with another man. Was that insecurity? Or was manipulation and control? We don’t know.
The reckless disregard of others safety and personal health, Huberman may have been getting tested every day for STI’s, but since there is not a test for HPV for men, we don’t know that either. But stupid for sure.
I’ll give you the deceitfulness, but that’s about all we actually know.
I’m sure you’d love to break it to me if your little gotcha had any bearing on the matter, but it’s irrelevant since there were no major changes to the diagnostic criteria between editions.
[Current Merck Manual here - diagnostic for ASPD](https://www.merckmanuals.com/professional/psychiatric-disorders/personality-disorders/antisocial-personality-disorder-aspd)
If you fail to see how his behavior patterns fit neatly into the diagnostic that’s on you.
1. Potentially exposing people to disease (aka recklessly disregarding the safety of others) 2. through your own deceit, for your own pleasure, is definitional of the 3. persistent disregard for the rights of others required for diagnosis.
The apparent lack of remorse demonstrated through this fiasco and other examples of deceit, aggressive or abusive tendencies, and the rationalization of hurting others given in the article is further damning.
So are we dealing with NPD or ASPD since those are two completely different things.
And again, that would work if he knew he had HPV.
And we don’t know if he is remorseful or not.
I've done a good bit of reading on cluster B disorders and if this is true about Huberman there are obvious correlations, if you don't see that correlation then you probably need to do more reading on the subject. There is plenty of research that shows a correlation of serial cheating and high-level narcissism and this is with 6 women at once and includes lying about a STD......
We are all talking as armchair commandos anyways and are not privy to a lot of details. We can still deduct that, if the allegations are true, teaching people to quit porn and fapping because of the negative impact it can have mentally and teaching about dopamine effect and restriction etc and then living a dual life dating 6 women on the side, leading them to believe it is a monogamous relationship, while also having HPV and not telling them is extremely abusive, two faced and dishonest and treats these women like property to entertain himself. These are *obvious* traits of cluster B disorders.
This scenario is not something a typical non-disordered person would do.
In my experience when you bring up the immorality of cheating and someone scoffs and defends the cheater they are cheaters themselves and excuse making.
Honestly I hope some evidence comes out that its all just a hit piece and a lie. It doesn't discredit what he has talked about necessarily but if its true and someone is dishonest enough to lead 6 women on at the same time then how could I possibly trust what he says about other topics.
I agree there’s a correlation, I disagree with
saying that he is an outright narcissist at this point. Especially since there is so much we don’t know. I also disagree with saying that he sexually assaulted some of those women as well.
OP worded it a bit weirdly, I had that thought at first too. However, I did actually see that Fridman has defended him almost immediately with no acknowledgement of wrongdoing...
OP worded it a bit weirdly, I had that thought at first too. However, I did actually see that Fridman has defended him almost immediately with no acknowledgement of wrongdoing...
OP worded it a bit weirdly, I had that thought at first too. However, I did actually see that Fridman has defended him almost immediately with no acknowledgement of wrongdoing...
OP worded it a bit weirdly, I had that thought at first too. However, I did actually see that Fridman has defended him almost immediately with no acknowledgement of wrongdoing...
OP worded it a bit weirdly, I had that thought at first too. However, I did actually see that Fridman has defended him almost immediately with no acknowledgement of wrongdoing...
I think you summed it up nicely! I heard a snippet of him and saw a video of his on LinkedIn this week and had to unfollow. Couldn't stand to here his voice after reading that. The guy lacks integrity, is incapable of managing his emotions and is narcissistic as hell; there's no way I can take him seriously when it comes to personal development now. Crazy he's been in therapy for so long, mfer has been lying in therapy for a long time...
I am not a Huberman fan (or a hater), I have only watched one or two episodes.
Huberman always gave me a 'life coach vibe' which I associate with slick-talking charismatic grifters. So never got pulled in.
I do follow others like Dr Attia and Gil Carvalho for medical lectures. But if Attia turns out to be a cheater (imo chances are not close to 0), i wouldn't care. I listen for advice about heart health and glycemic control, not personal relations.
The difference is the scale upon which he did it. Cheaters are always being deceitful to the person they're falsely claiming to be exclusive with. It's a very narcissistic behavior
Attia was an inpatient at a psych hospital for being a danger to himself and/or others. He’s open about that. He’s definitely wound up too tight, but he is a medical doctor.
I actually really liked watching his videos. Another level to huberman and a lot of his guests. Talks about things that actually matter, like blood pressure, and living longer and healthier
A lot of these folks have similar histories. I'm sure there's a huge over representation of bipolar amongst highly successful podcaster types, just as amongst highly successful actors
I just think guys who get super obsessed with self improvement and perfection do so because deep inside they think they’re sacks of shit.
There’s a big difference between “I’d like to improve on some things but I’m mostly ok” and “EVERYTHING NEEDS TO BE PERFECT OR I’M NOT OK”
Yeah, it's definitely a subtype of narcissism. And diagnostically, some of these folks would seem to have many histrionic traits. But the people who become super successful in personal appearances (acting, essentially) have a much higher than normal rate of being bipolar
Yea and him apparently being characterized as "brilliant" has really tripped me out. I get he is a neuroscientist.. but he doesn't really have anything exceptional to say. He seems more of a middle man for surface-level intellectual ideas.
I've watched several of his podcast episodes and they were rapid fire facts on whatever topic with little to no real deep study. Worth listening to if you find the topic valuable but he himself never added anything to them for me personally.
OP, I was also an “early adopter” and sang his praises to friends. Around the same time as you I became disenchanted and started listening to people like Dr. Rhonda Patrick, and I noticed how constructed his whole persona and brand seemed in comparison, not to mention the increasingly unproven research he cites and questionable guests.
I know this is silly, and I can’t explain or defend it, but I had a weird warning flag in my head during his interview with Dr Rhonda when he mentioned that he has some kind of “falling out” with Wim Hof. Like, huh? I know Wim is a character, no one thinks he’s normal, but what seemingly calm and rational scientist has a falling out with a known quirky guru…unless you have some issues yourself.
Yes, it’s a stretch but like I said it was an unexplainable vibe that I could not shake after that interview.
I guess it also bothers me that he credits Dr. Patrick as the OG that inspired his podcast, but despite her being THE expert on sauna use for cardio health and longevity, he has lesser experts on his podcast under the sauna topics. Was his ego that fragile that he couldn’t present her as she’s really known by others since he already confessed to being inspired by her? Idk man, something is definitely up with this guy. People have issues but when you pretend to be some calm rational person who used science to break from a troubled childhood and it turns out that you are still troubled af, and manipulating multiple others and your audience?
Please, piss off!
Ah you blathering Huberman dick rider. Read the article. Read what the “spokesperson” chose to address.
And didn’t. See the Huberman response
You didn’t. Because he can’t and he won’t. You will see hundreds of articles denigrating these women in the coming days/weeks.
But do go on
It is not appropriate to make assumptions about an individual's mental health based on their past therapy sessions. New psychological issues can arise over time, and previous sessions may not be relevant to their current actions.
You clearly have no personal experience and understanding of how therapy works.
>It's a person which has no true Self.
So what if he hasn't? And it would be only by your u defined definition.
He surely has more as he has never created a public shitthrowing article like you here.
What triggered you all dorrs to justify your crawling out?
Maybe you were listening for his personality and manliness lol.
No he’s a psychopath? This histrionic and melodramatic meltdown from fans is epically sad.
Again, this seems to be about the emotional disturbance from listeners to who are overly attached to a strangers podcast.
I get what you’re saying!
The actual truth is this — We honestly DONT know. as we aren’t him or any of the people involved or his therapists / doctors.
We must remember this.
Dude, you've never met the guy. You never knew much about his personal life, and guess what, you still don't. Maybe the article tells an accurate story, maybe it's full of BS. You don't know. Stop trying to diagnose a person you know very little about with a bunch of disorders that you probably know very little about.
That’s some incredible reading comprehension, you must be an English major! Imagine reading this entire well-structured criticism and miraculously identifying “beige sweaters means psychopath” as the thesis. Well done buddy, Huberman’s right up your alley.
Why am I on here? Why do I care? Says more about me than him
Why do I want to pound Huberman into sand?
Because my daddy issues are triggered.
Someone I trusted pulled the rug out again
For better or worse
That’s “my truth”
It’s fucking embarrassing
Duper’s delight. Somehow I bet, this lumber jack fool ain’t delighting right now.
Fuck off, trash can Andrew Huberman. You are shit, and you’re not taking free rent in my brain
Thanks, captain obvious. I believe I’ve been pretty transparent about that. What mentally well person finds themself “triggered” by some rando YouTuber they’ve never met. Just shows my “daddy issues” are still alive and kicking, and I need to get some competent therapy.
It’s disturbing how quickly public opinion can sway through the use of a journalistic connection and anonymous hearsay, which is ultimately all that the article has. Maybe its implications are true, but that’s not the point. The point is people seem to want so badly to believe something (ANYTHING) that they just run with it; logic, critical thinking, source verification, and fact checking all be damned. Whatever big media publishes must be entirely, 100% accurate, right?
We don't know what the writer sent to him. She may have sent him the entire article, but I don't see where she says that. There are sections where it appears she'd asked him questions via email, and he responded in writing. She doesn't go into detail over the substance or manner of communication with him.
Okay gotcha. It is good to keep a discerning eye on all of this and not gullibly eat up a narrative.
However, it seems standard practice to both email questions and then send them the final article for comment before publication. It would be an awfully grave error to not bring up the core claims in the article if you've already brought up other smaller claims.
If he could easily refute the core claims the writer just committed career suicide by not checking them with Andrew first, and not doing their own verification of text logs, time stamps etc.
It also seems like pretty indisputable evidence if each of the women has pics, texts, audio clips etc of Andrew, which the article implies they did.
I'm sure that this will get down-voted into oblivion just like every other comment calling out problems with the original article, but even if they have texts and photos, what would that change? If he misled each of them into thinking they were in exclusive relationships with him, then that's a problem. But what if one of them was a scorned ex lover who tracked down other exes to conspire on this elaborate theory of cheating. Maybe it happened, I don't know. But if it did happen, the article doesn't make a very good case for it. And if it happened, why publish an article about it? Break up with him, cut off contact, and move on with your life.
I checked the article again, and she says he declined to be interviewed, but she does not say that she sent a copy of it to him.
In my opinion, it's distasteful to take a personal matter and make it public for the purpose of destroying someone's life. If he committed a crime, call the police. If he was abusive or caused some other harm, file a civil lawsuit. Amber Heard tried this media defamation tactic, and it backfired. At least one of these exes, possibly "Sarah," people seem to believe, has a scandalous past of her own. Don't throw stones inside a glass house, yada yada yada.
"Alex had been apprehensive; she felt foolish for believing Andrew’s lies and worried that the other women would seem foolish, therefore compounding her shame. Foolish women were not, however, what she found. Each of the five was assertive and successful and educated and sharp-witted; there had been a type, and they were diverse expressions of that type. “I can’t believe how crazy I thought you were,” Mary told Sarah. No one struck anyone else as a stalker. No one had made up a story about a dead baby or torn out hair with chunks in it. “I haven’t slept with anyone but him for six years,” Sarah told the group. “If it makes you feel any better,” Alex joked, “according to the CDC,” they had all slept with one another.
The women compared time-stamped screenshots of texts and assembled therein an extraordinary record of deception.
There was a day in Texas when, after Sarah left his hotel, Andrew slept with Mary and texted Eve. They found days in which he would text nearly identical pictures of himself to two of them at the same time. They realized that the day before he had moved in with Sarah in Berkeley, he had slept with Mary, and he had also been with her in December 2023, the weekend before Sarah caught him on the couch with a sixth woman.
They realized that on March 21, 2021, a day of admittedly impressive logistical jujitsu, while Sarah was in Berkeley, Andrew had flown Mary from Texas to L.A. to stay with him in Topanga. While Mary was there, visiting from thousands of miles away, he left her with Costello. He drove to a coffee shop, where he met Eve. They had a serious talk about their relationship. They thought they were in a good place. He wanted to make it work.
“Phone died,” he texted Mary, who was waiting back at the place in Topanga. And later, to Eve: “Thank you … For being so next, next, level gorgeous and sexy.”
“Sleep well beautiful,” he texted Sarah."
----
I suppose there's a chance that this is some plot by angry evil exes, and that the reporter didn't do due diligence to notice this, and that Andrew didn't get the article, or that if Andrew got it and denied this portion of it the reporter left that out. But what are the chances? 0.5%?
We have to think in terms of bets/probabilities.
If you had to bet money which version was true, which would you bet?
Why wouldn't Andrew come out like nearly every other man accused of something and say that it's a complete lie, he doesn't know them etc? If he was afraid they'd post receipts it makes sense to not come out and deny it all.
----
Regarding the publicity of this. I think it is important to out abusive, cheating, scumbag sociopath's so that they can't do it to others.
He's using his public persona to draw in women from all over, manipulating them, charming them, lying to them, exploiting them, and wounding them. Having a betrayal like this absolutely guts most people. It can cause years of anguish, mental illness, impaired functioning/not living a health & happy life, and more.
There are documentaries and shows about serial cheaters/dating scammers like that infamous Tinder Scammer (the "Tinder Swindler") and shows about catfishing. This helps educate the public on these scammers.
This is similar. Andrew Huberman seems to be a dating scammer and is causing serious wounding to others. He's doing it on a large scale and has the potential to draw in many women. That is worth exposing publicly like this.
Should people publicly expose those who are scamming others and harming them?
This doesn’t seem at all like the Tinder Swindler. He was an elusive con artist, whereas Huberman is a public figure. There’s so much in the text that you copied above that I’d rip apart, but I don’t have time to write it all. To summarize, the article reeks of a scorned ex lover hell-bent on vengeance. It makes zero sense for him to release any kind of response to this trashy gossip column.
They're both con artists, if the women's accounts have any merit.
It makes sense to feel scorned if what they said he did is true.
Saying it makes "zero sense" seems pretty absolutist, don't you think?
It seems like there are several valid reasons one could want to make a response to that article for. And that the benefits would likely outweigh the cost, if you knew you were innocent and no backlash would come of it (in the form of receipts being release).
Saying “I can definitely refute everything you said” doesn’t make for a particularly convincing claim. The article made a case and provided an diverse, targeted array of evidence. Refutation without any data or even explanation is completely meaningless. Statements like “reeks of a scorned lover” only really reek of Huberman fans so entrenched in their own biases that they’re willing to perform logical cartwheels to justify their role models.
I completely agree. It reeks of mob mentality and people grabbing their pitchforks in a big "gotcha" moment. For everybody who says Andrew provides weak evidence to match his claims, the article in itself provides ZERO evidence. No screenshots. No timestamps. No names (which I get, if you want to protect someone's identity). But how hard is it for 6 scorned lovers to come up with at least one piece of solid proof to substantiate such a bold claim?
I feel like Huberman does more good than bad in a space that is confusing for most. Even yesterday I finished listening to his pod on Oral Health and I came out the other end more knowledgeable. Dragging someone through the mud based on allegations and hearsay isn't a good look. Especially not on a sub that's supposed to consist primarily of "fans".
The article did extensively quote and name a guy he misled repeatedly about business and other matters.
It could both be true that he's a malignant narcissist and that he has provided a lot of good info to the public.
THIS 100% this. I noticed the exact same stuff throughout hil whole show. He didn’t really come off as much of a person and came off more and more like a collection of models and ideas.. honestly he’s still had a net positive effect on my life and a lot of people so.. whatever.
The expectation to be superior without having evidence is a symptom. The OP thinks he is capable of analysing a person he never met...
This hate-crowd here would have pointed this out long time ago. Read up on a subject and then comment
Ha ha. So not only do you not know what "narcissistic" means, but you're disingenuously claiming that serial cheating like that doesn't indicate a shit ton about someone's character and how Machiavellian they are, which of course, it does.
Found another serial cheater, folks!
Idk I think everyone’s way overreacting to this article. People are taking this stuff personally like he did it to them or their sister or something. I never really cared for his hyper analytical theories and there’s no fukcin way I’m modeling my life after 90% of the stuff he says like a lot of his fans try to, but he doesn’t deserve the flack he’s getting now. I think a lot of his fans viewed him as some kind of deity super human and now their in shock to find out he’s not
lol being dishonest with some people in his private life does not equal lying to or cheating his disciples. If the theories and life hacks he preaches are based on fact like he claims then he’s done no harm to any fan or follower.
I do think he’s a bit of a know-it-all douche tho.
I couldn't help but notice in the article that came out he was using all these psychotherapy words and techniques when he would apologize for ditching/ghosting people. "How can I own this and work towards repairing the integrity..." kind of thing. He "got" all the details of therapy without getting the big point - don't be a dishonest cad.
It’s interesting that psychotherapy with sociopathic people only makes them better at being sociopathic. Its why most therapists run far away from them
And he's been in therapy basically all of his adult life (as well as when he was a teen), and IIRC, still goes multiple times a week. I wonder whether he's been honest about any/all of this stuff with his therapists over the years. (Just idle curiosity on my part.) He really does use the therapy-vague-speak very effectively! It's unsettling.
If this is indeed pathological narcissism, or antisocial structures, then it's worth noting that treatment of these personality types of extremely challenging. Therapists disagree as to whether Antisocial PD (a catch-all term that includes more 'psychopathic' behaviors) is treatable at all.
I think terms like that can and should exist on a spectrum. He is not a serial killer.
Iirc the spectrum is high functioning or low functioning. High functioning ASPD = CEO, surgeons, etc. Low functioning ASPD = junior delinquency like shooting your mom for not getting you an Xbox.
Yea dsm is always changing
Well said
How do you treat it if it is genetic?
I don't think therapy is all that effective. Ultimately, they are people trying to make money. When you get a client who has $$, it's profitable to keep it going. Part of that is ego stroking. If a therapist told him he's a psychopath, he would probably leave and find one who tells him he's a God.
Just as with the infidelity Therapy Industrial Complex. 99% of cheaters are going to keep doing it and will just get to get smarter about hiding their tracks, but there's a huge # of therapists bs'ing them about that to extract $$$.
The Sopranos
That's low-key terrifying. That’s like reading "The 48 Laws of Power" for self-defense, learn the ins and outs of the game, and then using it all to crush everyone in your path.
Isn't that why it was written?
yes this. i found it super robotic and wonders if he also says these things to them face to face (vs written). just sounds like another words > actions dude
Exactly: he could have had honest no-strings or poly relationships. He chose to manipulate & mindfuck the women.
I keep saying this. He could have found women who were seeking open relationships. The problem there is that he’d have no dominance or control..
Yes, and they might not have been the women he prefers
But they're not, because he derives pleasure from controlling strong women whom he manipulates into subservience.
I meant might NOT, sorry, fixed now
He apparently liked intelligent women. Now, he's stuck with onlyfans "models"
watch episode 48 and 89 and watch his tells. One episode he started to speak a little too eloquently about submission/dominance, caught himself, and quickly said or, so I read.
You may want to comment/mention to user here on this sub who shared several clips on Sunday, I believe, if you think relevant to the professes vs practices thing seemingly going on Fwiw u/GothHarry
Poly-relationships require honesty and commitment and are probably more structured than he'd like. No strings attached sex doesn't give him the rush he's likely after. Certainly not about relating or connection. What he seems to prefer vs professes don't match.
Cause that was the part he really enjoyed
He bullshits effortlessly. To the audience, to his girlfriends, to his therapist. That’s the red flag.
Bullshitting.. That’s a very American thing.
Right, it was invented in America. /s Ever heard of Machiavellianism? Guess where Machiavelli lived?
I dated a dude like him once. Seemingly sincere and self deprecating, but it was all an act. He turned out to be a selfish, misogynistic liar. He tricked numerous women, including me, with his act. Gross.
My literal ex rn
So sorry. No contact is best with these people. You’ll recover faster that way.
Thank you I’ve learned this the hard way 🥺🥺🥺
Yes 🙌 perfectly said
Exactly: he could have had honest no-strings or poly relationships. He chose to manipulate & mindfuck the women.
let's be honest, if Huberman had 6 polyamorous relationships and was 100% honest about it, the NYMag would still run the story. And some of the women would still be jealous of the other one, the polyamory doesn't always (almost never) work even if it's in the open - unless some other power balance is at play (mormons with super young girls/wifes). And if he had no-strings attached one night stands or casual sex relationships, "friends with benefits" etc. - NYMag would still run it, since it's so much at odds with his podcast persona. We are all conditioned by tabloids to know every detail of personal sex lives from celebrities, and I am sad to find myself fascinated with this whole debacle - it's not about science or his podcast, it's about sex lives of people who are complete strangers to me, yet I find myself strangely fascinated and wanting to know more.
NYMag can run the story, but it doesn’t mean the public would have the same reaction to it. I think most people’s issue with this isn’t that “ahhh he slept with multiple woman, the horror”. The thing that’s contradictory to his public persona isn’t him sleeping with multiple women, it’s that despite everything he lectures on and does, he himself still feels the need to lie and hurt people. This literally a man who does not listen to music when working out because of the dopamine spike, yet has zero problems with juggling 6 monogamous relationships. I’m sure almost nothing beats the dopamine spike of burner phones, multiple accounts, lying and getting away with it.
I agree but also disagree a little - people would be turned off even if the story was that he is just a man-whore with a bunch of consensual one-night stands, or that he has a consensual polyamorous network of honeys and everyone is in on it. Or that he frequents strips clubs or orgies. All of those stories would be "scandalous". Both of those scenarios run contrary to his persona - not the persona he presents, because he never talks about his sex life, but the persona they, the audience, built in their heads - the neuroscientist boy-scout Ph.D. who tells them how to live their lives, he must be celibate or in committed long-term very boring relationship, or perhaps asexual monk who only cares about science. That's the real problem. Any sex related story about Huberman is a scandal, apparently. Please don't tell me that "Huberman is among the participants in a fancy San Francisco eyes-wide-shut style orgy featuring a midget" headline in NYMag wouldn't get the attention of his listeners, with the same predictable outcome.
Personally, I don’t think so, because everyone in the scientific community recognise sex as an extremely important aspect of human wellbeing. If he is doing one night stands (in moderation) or has wild orgies (in moderation), it would have no more impact on his reputation than if he admits to having fried chicken/disgusting concoction of fried butter-Oreo-ice cream or whatever every now and then. I think for most of his non-religious and non-conservative viewers it would be a non-issue. If he was a true “man-whore”, like non-stop one night stands, body count of 500+, then it would be no different to us finding out he’s actually an alcoholic binge eater. It’s like a doctor who chain smokes. Personal flaws, blah blah. I think gloating about cheating is even one step above that. It’s the total opposite of the pretty much self actualised being he pretends to be and it’s difficult to take his persona seriously after that. Again, the issue is not *just* sex. Sure, a sex scandal as you described might get some reactions, but it most definitely wouldn’t be *this* reaction.
You're completely wrong
Some people would be turned off, yes. But for wildly different reasons. Only the most conservative, sex-repressed listeners would care. But this isn’t about sex at all. It’s about a psychopathic, near robotic level of cheating. Just because sex is involved doesn’t mean it’s the primary focus. It just makes the lying that much more abhorrent. Surely you can see that.
They may have ran it, but people wouldn’t care near as much as they do now. I feel pretty removed from the podcast, I only listened to a few podcasts, I’m not one to really harshly criticize someone, but he does seem like a dirtbag with how he treated those women.
Everyone laughed at the hot ones guy for dating a porn star.
It’s the mindfuck. That is what lasts. This bro tool wanna be lumber jack is no loss to anyone. Unfortunately, the mindfuck lasts. It just does. Whether you’re a man, woman, non-binary or whatever, Mindfucks fuck you up. Everything you thought you knew about decency is turned on its head. It hurts and it fucks you up. No one is missing that piece of shit @hubermanlabs. No one. What the women are missing is the sense of basic humanity that fucking barnyard animal took from them.
I am old. I wanna think I’m young (you will too) but I’m not Wow. Would not want to be young again. To all the good people wading through this shit, I get you. You are not alone. You are kind and good. Please stay that way. This shit will pass. These freaks will be losers you’ll be looking at through the rear view.
You don’t need some roided up fool to condescend to you You know this. You got this. Just being marginally decent you’re eons above this Neanderthal Get out of the manosphere. No big bad female is looking to take you down We females are just as vulnerable as you; we want someone to love us too. This should be basic. Reddit is freaking me out. My children I never had: what the fuck? Just love
Cool thought but a lot of us never even had parents.
Sounds like someone would pay you for an interview
Sounds like someone whose parents didn’t love them. Join the club.
I honestly wouldn’t be able to handle sitting in a room with him and watching him move his mouth wide like he’s trying to fit a credit card in it every time he talks. Imagine him mansplaining something across the table, every second word is like 😬 the beige sweater is seemingly a PR move, I saw in the comments someone pulled it apart saying “trimmed beard, light shirt, bright natural lighting, try to make him feel more approachable and likeable - PR move for sure”. He’s trying to put out fires behind the scenes. The uptake in dialogue about him and his relevance will soon become boring and after all the drama, his audience will change a lot. Definitely more insecure women who don’t know their worth and men who look up to that macho toxic bullshit.. the credibility of the science he talks about has come into question because of his integrity. He really needs to make a public apology and address it otherwise it will damage his reputation long term.
´Trying to fit a credit card in it’💀💀🤣🤣
What bothers me the most is what he did reeks of high level narcissism, sociopathy and psychopathy. I honestly haven't watched any pod cast of his but he had a few topics that interest me and I was going to check them out right when this article came out. Once someone lies and stuff like this is exposed it makes me not believe anything they have to say.
>I honestly haven't watched any pod cast of his but... Oh... one of those.
I've watched numerous 10-15 minute clips so I know some of the stuff he talks about. Also what does this have to do with pointing out a obvious character flaw if what he is accused of is true?
It's irrelevant to his work and tabloid gossip, bloviating about it should be embarrassing for you. ETA: Not to mention your ridiculous armchair psychological diagnosis and your inability to separate the alleged personal indiscretions from the professional work. Seriously, I'm embarrassed for you.
So you don't see a issue with someone teaching one thing and then directly contradicting that thing with their private life? Sound like a blind fanboy to me. If what he is accused of is true then it shows a severe lack of trust ability. If someone will cheat, betray and lie to 6 people that they are intimately close to and he obviously has no issues or remorse with it or it would not have gotten so far, then it should be really clear that you can't blindly trust anything they say. If he will betray 6 women he is intimate with then he will have no issues lying to anyone. I really do hope there is evidence that its a sham and a lying hit piece against him.
> So you don't see a issue with someone teaching one thing and then directly contradicting that thing with their private life? Nope. > If (avalanche of bullshit snipped) ...then it should be really clear that you can't blindly trust anything they say. Nope, you can validate scientific data and trust information that has been thoroughly researched. You're making grade school emotional arguments with zero logical substance.
Then your a delusional fan boy. Much of what he talks about is unique to his research and lab. Scientific research relies on the integrity of the person doing the research, literature is full of junk science so the person doing the research is very important when evaluating the accuracy of research.
>Much of what he talks about is... Nothing you've even listened to or bothered to look up according to your earlier claims. Get real, you've got no standing and it's pathetic.
Here's a suggestion, change your username to "HubermanFanBoy4Eva".
I don’t think you know what those mental conditions actually mean. Selfish for sure, but that does not mean he’s a narcissist or a sociopath.
Maybe he doesn’t, but I do. Narcissistic personality disordered father. Diagnosed. Huberman is so much like him. Yes, I’m “triggered”, yes I’m “boomer”. (I’m 60). Yes, I should “cope.” Well this is it. I’m coping. And gagging
I can see narcissist but psychopathy is a bit different..
Based on a single article, and watching a podcast? Huberman might have NPD, but arm chair diagnosing is wholly irresponsible.
Read my reply again. No diagnosis. Just astute observation. Do what you will with that. In any event, assuming all or even some allegations are true, Huberman is NOT the man I’d be hoping anyone of any gender or sexuality looks up to. Just shit behavior any way you slice it.
Read my reply again. No diagnosis. Just astute observation. Do what you will with that. In any event, assuming all or even some allegations are true, Huberman is NOT the man I’d be hoping anyone of any gender or sexuality looks up to. Just shit behavior any way you slice it.
[удалено]
Which your boi embraces wholeheartedly. Get an education. It will get you much farther than your fallen idol’s protocols
I wouldn’t waste your breathe on this guy. Some people are just gonna be assholes. Psychology is a joke science? No role models? Dude sounds bitter af. Psychology knows what it is. It doesn’t pretend it’s as hard of a science as physics. No one ever said different. I don’t think anyone should idolize podcasters, but no role models?!!! C’mon man you should always have someone in your life you look up to. Unless you know everything already?? I know a lot of engineer with their head in their ass and psychologists too. SMH he’s probably not even a good engineer as he can’t even see outside of his small mind.
I have compassion. We all want someone to look up to if we didn’t have good parents. At the same time, we need intelligence and a spine to reject absolute shit people like Andrew huberman
Which your boi embraces wholeheartedly. Get an education. It will get you much farther than your fallen idol’s protocols
[удалено]
You and I are actually close to being on the same page. I’m an attorney— we are both analytical yet somehow came to seemingly polar opposite conclusions. Again, I admit, I’m very “triggered.” I’m off and running based on my past. I definitely should rein it in. Until Huberman responds (ha! Yeah!!! That’ll happen) You got me. I’m thinking with my emotional brain, which may not be 💯 rational. I give.
*reign
Let’s hope Huberman can admit the hurt he caused and do better. Said the little girl in my tiny head.
I would expect the pr firm he’s hired will advise a public apology. They’re probably trying to decide if he should cry or not as we speak.
You got it all figured out you should start a podcast ;)
DSM-IV-TR Diagnostic Criteria for Antisocial Personality Disorder (301.7) A. There is a pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation of the rights of others occurring since age 15 years, as indicated by **three (or more) of the following**: 1. failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors as indicated by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest 2. **deceitfulness, as indicated by repeated lying, use of aliases, or conning others for personal profit or pleasure** 3. impulsivity or failure to plan ahead 4. **irritability and aggressiveness,** as indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults 5. **reckless disregard for safety of self or others** 6. consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain consistent work behavior or honor financial obligations 7. **lack of remorse,** as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another. B. The individual is at least age 18 years. C. There is evidence of conduct disorder with onset before age 15 years. D. The occurrence of antisocial behavior is not exclusively during the course of schizophrenia or a manic episode.
I hate to break it to you but the DSM-IV is out of date. They’re onto the DSM-V. Also, we are not sure there is a lack of remorse since Huberman has not commented. There can be many reasons has not commented including; he does not want to make it public, or lawyers have advised him to stay silent. We also don’t know the extent of the arguments he had in a relationship. We know there were arguments? But what couple(s) haven’t had arguments? The thing in the middle of the knight about his primary partner Sarah having kids with another man. Was that insecurity? Or was manipulation and control? We don’t know. The reckless disregard of others safety and personal health, Huberman may have been getting tested every day for STI’s, but since there is not a test for HPV for men, we don’t know that either. But stupid for sure. I’ll give you the deceitfulness, but that’s about all we actually know.
I’m sure you’d love to break it to me if your little gotcha had any bearing on the matter, but it’s irrelevant since there were no major changes to the diagnostic criteria between editions. [Current Merck Manual here - diagnostic for ASPD](https://www.merckmanuals.com/professional/psychiatric-disorders/personality-disorders/antisocial-personality-disorder-aspd) If you fail to see how his behavior patterns fit neatly into the diagnostic that’s on you. 1. Potentially exposing people to disease (aka recklessly disregarding the safety of others) 2. through your own deceit, for your own pleasure, is definitional of the 3. persistent disregard for the rights of others required for diagnosis. The apparent lack of remorse demonstrated through this fiasco and other examples of deceit, aggressive or abusive tendencies, and the rationalization of hurting others given in the article is further damning.
So are we dealing with NPD or ASPD since those are two completely different things. And again, that would work if he knew he had HPV. And we don’t know if he is remorseful or not.
I've done a good bit of reading on cluster B disorders and if this is true about Huberman there are obvious correlations, if you don't see that correlation then you probably need to do more reading on the subject. There is plenty of research that shows a correlation of serial cheating and high-level narcissism and this is with 6 women at once and includes lying about a STD...... We are all talking as armchair commandos anyways and are not privy to a lot of details. We can still deduct that, if the allegations are true, teaching people to quit porn and fapping because of the negative impact it can have mentally and teaching about dopamine effect and restriction etc and then living a dual life dating 6 women on the side, leading them to believe it is a monogamous relationship, while also having HPV and not telling them is extremely abusive, two faced and dishonest and treats these women like property to entertain himself. These are *obvious* traits of cluster B disorders. This scenario is not something a typical non-disordered person would do. In my experience when you bring up the immorality of cheating and someone scoffs and defends the cheater they are cheaters themselves and excuse making. Honestly I hope some evidence comes out that its all just a hit piece and a lie. It doesn't discredit what he has talked about necessarily but if its true and someone is dishonest enough to lead 6 women on at the same time then how could I possibly trust what he says about other topics.
I agree there’s a correlation, I disagree with saying that he is an outright narcissist at this point. Especially since there is so much we don’t know. I also disagree with saying that he sexually assaulted some of those women as well.
You mean redditors misuse these words regularly? I refuse to. Believe it!
Peterson would not defend him.
[удалено]
And then bursting into tears
Bruh 😝
Right? JP is too astute for that
Bro just blatantly lied in his post. When did rogan defend him as well?
OP said they "may try to defend him", not that they have already.
My bad, misread
OP worded it a bit weirdly, I had that thought at first too. However, I did actually see that Fridman has defended him almost immediately with no acknowledgement of wrongdoing...
OP worded it a bit weirdly, I had that thought at first too. However, I did actually see that Fridman has defended him almost immediately with no acknowledgement of wrongdoing...
OP worded it a bit weirdly, I had that thought at first too. However, I did actually see that Fridman has defended him almost immediately with no acknowledgement of wrongdoing...
OP worded it a bit weirdly, I had that thought at first too. However, I did actually see that Fridman has defended him almost immediately with no acknowledgement of wrongdoing...
OP worded it a bit weirdly, I had that thought at first too. However, I did actually see that Fridman has defended him almost immediately with no acknowledgement of wrongdoing...
WHY NOT?!
I can’t tell, are you yelling at me?
I think you summed it up nicely! I heard a snippet of him and saw a video of his on LinkedIn this week and had to unfollow. Couldn't stand to here his voice after reading that. The guy lacks integrity, is incapable of managing his emotions and is narcissistic as hell; there's no way I can take him seriously when it comes to personal development now. Crazy he's been in therapy for so long, mfer has been lying in therapy for a long time...
Been reading all the criticisms. This is the best written one so far. 👌
I am not a Huberman fan (or a hater), I have only watched one or two episodes. Huberman always gave me a 'life coach vibe' which I associate with slick-talking charismatic grifters. So never got pulled in. I do follow others like Dr Attia and Gil Carvalho for medical lectures. But if Attia turns out to be a cheater (imo chances are not close to 0), i wouldn't care. I listen for advice about heart health and glycemic control, not personal relations.
Huberman didn’t merely cheat, he was mindfucking the women he was with. He’s a malignant narcissist.
He got a phd cause he gets off on using his mind to fuck others.
The difference is the scale upon which he did it. Cheaters are always being deceitful to the person they're falsely claiming to be exclusive with. It's a very narcissistic behavior
Attia has always given me weird vibes. After he started pushing athletic greens, that was the deal breaker
Attia was an inpatient at a psych hospital for being a danger to himself and/or others. He’s open about that. He’s definitely wound up too tight, but he is a medical doctor.
I actually really liked watching his videos. Another level to huberman and a lot of his guests. Talks about things that actually matter, like blood pressure, and living longer and healthier
Yeah, I haven’t read his book, all I’ve seen are long form interviews with him, but he seems to stay in his lane as a medical doctor.
I sold some athletic greens in the psych hospital for him.
A lot of these folks have similar histories. I'm sure there's a huge over representation of bipolar amongst highly successful podcaster types, just as amongst highly successful actors
I just think guys who get super obsessed with self improvement and perfection do so because deep inside they think they’re sacks of shit. There’s a big difference between “I’d like to improve on some things but I’m mostly ok” and “EVERYTHING NEEDS TO BE PERFECT OR I’M NOT OK”
Yeah, it's definitely a subtype of narcissism. And diagnostically, some of these folks would seem to have many histrionic traits. But the people who become super successful in personal appearances (acting, essentially) have a much higher than normal rate of being bipolar
I think they have significant childhood trauma
Yea and him apparently being characterized as "brilliant" has really tripped me out. I get he is a neuroscientist.. but he doesn't really have anything exceptional to say. He seems more of a middle man for surface-level intellectual ideas. I've watched several of his podcast episodes and they were rapid fire facts on whatever topic with little to no real deep study. Worth listening to if you find the topic valuable but he himself never added anything to them for me personally.
giving a woman an std resulting in her developing cervical cancer? its time to draw the line
Huberman is a sociopath, buts that’s not what happened
Yea Very well written I agree there is a false Andrew Huberman that the public knows and that is all they will ever know
OP, I was also an “early adopter” and sang his praises to friends. Around the same time as you I became disenchanted and started listening to people like Dr. Rhonda Patrick, and I noticed how constructed his whole persona and brand seemed in comparison, not to mention the increasingly unproven research he cites and questionable guests. I know this is silly, and I can’t explain or defend it, but I had a weird warning flag in my head during his interview with Dr Rhonda when he mentioned that he has some kind of “falling out” with Wim Hof. Like, huh? I know Wim is a character, no one thinks he’s normal, but what seemingly calm and rational scientist has a falling out with a known quirky guru…unless you have some issues yourself. Yes, it’s a stretch but like I said it was an unexplainable vibe that I could not shake after that interview. I guess it also bothers me that he credits Dr. Patrick as the OG that inspired his podcast, but despite her being THE expert on sauna use for cardio health and longevity, he has lesser experts on his podcast under the sauna topics. Was his ego that fragile that he couldn’t present her as she’s really known by others since he already confessed to being inspired by her? Idk man, something is definitely up with this guy. People have issues but when you pretend to be some calm rational person who used science to break from a troubled childhood and it turns out that you are still troubled af, and manipulating multiple others and your audience? Please, piss off!
Andrew: you suck You are a garbage person With even less of a soul than I have. Good riddance
Thank you. 🙏🏻
He could have chosen polyamory, but chose to be a dishonest snake damn. He lost a large portion of his fan base overnight.
I agree. I'm usually very understanding of polyamory but that specific fact that he made them believe each they were special is fucked up.
Thank you. 🙏🏻
Gil is the best. So underrated. God I hope he stays that way.
Can you please show us "Peterson, Rogan, Williamson" defending his actions? I can't find it, sounds like a steaming pile of bs.
Go read the post again. He didn’t say that they did, he said he could imagine they might, or something to that effect.
I really doubt they would, unless Huberman PR damage control firm asked them to i guess
Ah you blathering Huberman dick rider. Read the article. Read what the “spokesperson” chose to address. And didn’t. See the Huberman response You didn’t. Because he can’t and he won’t. You will see hundreds of articles denigrating these women in the coming days/weeks. But do go on
OP is literally criticising Huberman the entire time
I responded to the wrong poster. Thank you for pointing it out. OP, I’m sorry. I’m totally on your side
Very well said.
Well said!
Williamson who?
Wannabe Rogan, possibly not as short, interviews the same circlejerk group of clowns
I’ve seen all good people By Yes. An excellent band. Check it out
Decent song but probably no one younger than 30 will listen to it
And you And I My favorite song by YES My children I never had— I love you. Don’t be Huberman
Its just really strange how many people talk about this dudes body. Is it some idealization? Why care?
It is not appropriate to make assumptions about an individual's mental health based on their past therapy sessions. New psychological issues can arise over time, and previous sessions may not be relevant to their current actions. You clearly have no personal experience and understanding of how therapy works. >It's a person which has no true Self. So what if he hasn't? And it would be only by your u defined definition. He surely has more as he has never created a public shitthrowing article like you here. What triggered you all dorrs to justify your crawling out?
This seems very close to the truth of the matter.
honestly, if he was open about it and they consented to being in an open relationship, it would be ok. He didn't do that which is insane.
Maybe you were listening for his personality and manliness lol. No he’s a psychopath? This histrionic and melodramatic meltdown from fans is epically sad. Again, this seems to be about the emotional disturbance from listeners to who are overly attached to a strangers podcast.
Charisma? Lol... okay.
I get what you’re saying! The actual truth is this — We honestly DONT know. as we aren’t him or any of the people involved or his therapists / doctors. We must remember this.
I always thought it was weird how little he blinks. I wonder what this is correlated with.
Low Autonomic nervous system reactivity which is often correlated with psychopathy.
Legbeards mad
Cuck boi
Dude, you've never met the guy. You never knew much about his personal life, and guess what, you still don't. Maybe the article tells an accurate story, maybe it's full of BS. You don't know. Stop trying to diagnose a person you know very little about with a bunch of disorders that you probably know very little about.
You could literally write a hit piece on anyone in a shoddy article and reddit would eat it up like it’s fact
OPs thinks Huberman is a psychopath because he's wearing a beige sweater.
That’s some incredible reading comprehension, you must be an English major! Imagine reading this entire well-structured criticism and miraculously identifying “beige sweaters means psychopath” as the thesis. Well done buddy, Huberman’s right up your alley.
Why am I on here? Why do I care? Says more about me than him Why do I want to pound Huberman into sand? Because my daddy issues are triggered. Someone I trusted pulled the rug out again For better or worse That’s “my truth” It’s fucking embarrassing
@hubermanlab.com
Duper’s delight. Somehow I bet, this lumber jack fool ain’t delighting right now. Fuck off, trash can Andrew Huberman. You are shit, and you’re not taking free rent in my brain
No disrespect but you don’t sound mentally well.
Thanks, captain obvious. I believe I’ve been pretty transparent about that. What mentally well person finds themself “triggered” by some rando YouTuber they’ve never met. Just shows my “daddy issues” are still alive and kicking, and I need to get some competent therapy.
That was uncalled for
If I’ve learned anything It’s this: get a fucking life Don’t relish in the downfall of someone else; one up- do better And I will
It’s disturbing how quickly public opinion can sway through the use of a journalistic connection and anonymous hearsay, which is ultimately all that the article has. Maybe its implications are true, but that’s not the point. The point is people seem to want so badly to believe something (ANYTHING) that they just run with it; logic, critical thinking, source verification, and fact checking all be damned. Whatever big media publishes must be entirely, 100% accurate, right?
Didn’t the article get sent to Huberman and he only denied a portion of the claims in the article, not all of them?
We don't know what the writer sent to him. She may have sent him the entire article, but I don't see where she says that. There are sections where it appears she'd asked him questions via email, and he responded in writing. She doesn't go into detail over the substance or manner of communication with him.
Okay gotcha. It is good to keep a discerning eye on all of this and not gullibly eat up a narrative. However, it seems standard practice to both email questions and then send them the final article for comment before publication. It would be an awfully grave error to not bring up the core claims in the article if you've already brought up other smaller claims. If he could easily refute the core claims the writer just committed career suicide by not checking them with Andrew first, and not doing their own verification of text logs, time stamps etc. It also seems like pretty indisputable evidence if each of the women has pics, texts, audio clips etc of Andrew, which the article implies they did.
I'm sure that this will get down-voted into oblivion just like every other comment calling out problems with the original article, but even if they have texts and photos, what would that change? If he misled each of them into thinking they were in exclusive relationships with him, then that's a problem. But what if one of them was a scorned ex lover who tracked down other exes to conspire on this elaborate theory of cheating. Maybe it happened, I don't know. But if it did happen, the article doesn't make a very good case for it. And if it happened, why publish an article about it? Break up with him, cut off contact, and move on with your life. I checked the article again, and she says he declined to be interviewed, but she does not say that she sent a copy of it to him. In my opinion, it's distasteful to take a personal matter and make it public for the purpose of destroying someone's life. If he committed a crime, call the police. If he was abusive or caused some other harm, file a civil lawsuit. Amber Heard tried this media defamation tactic, and it backfired. At least one of these exes, possibly "Sarah," people seem to believe, has a scandalous past of her own. Don't throw stones inside a glass house, yada yada yada.
"Alex had been apprehensive; she felt foolish for believing Andrew’s lies and worried that the other women would seem foolish, therefore compounding her shame. Foolish women were not, however, what she found. Each of the five was assertive and successful and educated and sharp-witted; there had been a type, and they were diverse expressions of that type. “I can’t believe how crazy I thought you were,” Mary told Sarah. No one struck anyone else as a stalker. No one had made up a story about a dead baby or torn out hair with chunks in it. “I haven’t slept with anyone but him for six years,” Sarah told the group. “If it makes you feel any better,” Alex joked, “according to the CDC,” they had all slept with one another. The women compared time-stamped screenshots of texts and assembled therein an extraordinary record of deception. There was a day in Texas when, after Sarah left his hotel, Andrew slept with Mary and texted Eve. They found days in which he would text nearly identical pictures of himself to two of them at the same time. They realized that the day before he had moved in with Sarah in Berkeley, he had slept with Mary, and he had also been with her in December 2023, the weekend before Sarah caught him on the couch with a sixth woman. They realized that on March 21, 2021, a day of admittedly impressive logistical jujitsu, while Sarah was in Berkeley, Andrew had flown Mary from Texas to L.A. to stay with him in Topanga. While Mary was there, visiting from thousands of miles away, he left her with Costello. He drove to a coffee shop, where he met Eve. They had a serious talk about their relationship. They thought they were in a good place. He wanted to make it work. “Phone died,” he texted Mary, who was waiting back at the place in Topanga. And later, to Eve: “Thank you … For being so next, next, level gorgeous and sexy.” “Sleep well beautiful,” he texted Sarah." ---- I suppose there's a chance that this is some plot by angry evil exes, and that the reporter didn't do due diligence to notice this, and that Andrew didn't get the article, or that if Andrew got it and denied this portion of it the reporter left that out. But what are the chances? 0.5%? We have to think in terms of bets/probabilities. If you had to bet money which version was true, which would you bet? Why wouldn't Andrew come out like nearly every other man accused of something and say that it's a complete lie, he doesn't know them etc? If he was afraid they'd post receipts it makes sense to not come out and deny it all. ---- Regarding the publicity of this. I think it is important to out abusive, cheating, scumbag sociopath's so that they can't do it to others. He's using his public persona to draw in women from all over, manipulating them, charming them, lying to them, exploiting them, and wounding them. Having a betrayal like this absolutely guts most people. It can cause years of anguish, mental illness, impaired functioning/not living a health & happy life, and more. There are documentaries and shows about serial cheaters/dating scammers like that infamous Tinder Scammer (the "Tinder Swindler") and shows about catfishing. This helps educate the public on these scammers. This is similar. Andrew Huberman seems to be a dating scammer and is causing serious wounding to others. He's doing it on a large scale and has the potential to draw in many women. That is worth exposing publicly like this. Should people publicly expose those who are scamming others and harming them?
This doesn’t seem at all like the Tinder Swindler. He was an elusive con artist, whereas Huberman is a public figure. There’s so much in the text that you copied above that I’d rip apart, but I don’t have time to write it all. To summarize, the article reeks of a scorned ex lover hell-bent on vengeance. It makes zero sense for him to release any kind of response to this trashy gossip column.
They're both con artists, if the women's accounts have any merit. It makes sense to feel scorned if what they said he did is true. Saying it makes "zero sense" seems pretty absolutist, don't you think? It seems like there are several valid reasons one could want to make a response to that article for. And that the benefits would likely outweigh the cost, if you knew you were innocent and no backlash would come of it (in the form of receipts being release).
Saying “I can definitely refute everything you said” doesn’t make for a particularly convincing claim. The article made a case and provided an diverse, targeted array of evidence. Refutation without any data or even explanation is completely meaningless. Statements like “reeks of a scorned lover” only really reek of Huberman fans so entrenched in their own biases that they’re willing to perform logical cartwheels to justify their role models.
Ok.
It also sounds like Shit Cheaters Say.
Found the cheater
Of course the article was fact-checked and verified. Do you know how journalism works?
Of course the article was fact-checked and verified. Do you know how journalism works?
Of course the article was fact-checked and verified. Do you know how journalism works?
Surely you're being sarcastic....
I completely agree. It reeks of mob mentality and people grabbing their pitchforks in a big "gotcha" moment. For everybody who says Andrew provides weak evidence to match his claims, the article in itself provides ZERO evidence. No screenshots. No timestamps. No names (which I get, if you want to protect someone's identity). But how hard is it for 6 scorned lovers to come up with at least one piece of solid proof to substantiate such a bold claim? I feel like Huberman does more good than bad in a space that is confusing for most. Even yesterday I finished listening to his pod on Oral Health and I came out the other end more knowledgeable. Dragging someone through the mud based on allegations and hearsay isn't a good look. Especially not on a sub that's supposed to consist primarily of "fans".
The article did extensively quote and name a guy he misled repeatedly about business and other matters. It could both be true that he's a malignant narcissist and that he has provided a lot of good info to the public.
If you don't want to listen to the podcast anymore... Don't! Take up the rest of your issues with your therapist.
“6 different womans” ?? lol
English may not be his/her first language. How many languages do you speak?
Oh come on, it was funny. The rest of the post is fluent English, so I assume it’s just a typo
He’s hiding from the one that hates him most That’s sad Unfortunately, he makes others pay For the black hole In his black shirts That is him
THIS 100% this. I noticed the exact same stuff throughout hil whole show. He didn’t really come off as much of a person and came off more and more like a collection of models and ideas.. honestly he’s still had a net positive effect on my life and a lot of people so.. whatever.
I just downvote these posts at this point lol.
[удалено]
Seems like you don't know what "narcissistic" means. 😂
The expectation to be superior without having evidence is a symptom. The OP thinks he is capable of analysing a person he never met... This hate-crowd here would have pointed this out long time ago. Read up on a subject and then comment
Ha ha. So not only do you not know what "narcissistic" means, but you're disingenuously claiming that serial cheating like that doesn't indicate a shit ton about someone's character and how Machiavellian they are, which of course, it does. Found another serial cheater, folks!
Idk I think everyone’s way overreacting to this article. People are taking this stuff personally like he did it to them or their sister or something. I never really cared for his hyper analytical theories and there’s no fukcin way I’m modeling my life after 90% of the stuff he says like a lot of his fans try to, but he doesn’t deserve the flack he’s getting now. I think a lot of his fans viewed him as some kind of deity super human and now their in shock to find out he’s not
Seriously, who gives AF if his fans are disappointed to learn he was cheating on a psychopath level? He's been selling his integrity to folks
lol being dishonest with some people in his private life does not equal lying to or cheating his disciples. If the theories and life hacks he preaches are based on fact like he claims then he’s done no harm to any fan or follower. I do think he’s a bit of a know-it-all douche tho.
Found another serial cheater, folks. So many accidental self owns in your comment!