Ep 270 Scientific Retractions Aren’t Working

[@StephenMarkTurner]

I am grateful for Huberman's episodes on alcohol and cannabis, as they helped me break a 50 year addiction to both. But I also quickly realized that he was morphing into a celebrity (the Q&A episodes that revealed that he considered himself to be an expert in many things). I stopped consuming his material pretty soon after.

[@krky86]

i watched one of the earlier episodes on fat loss after the algorithm kept it in my recommended for a while. after that i added the channel in a browser addon blocklist so it doesn't get recommended anymore, because every thumbnail in my recommends populated by huberman and such instead of cats and dogs videos is a mistake that requires swift action.

[@Right_in2]

His interviews with others are great, he asks good questions

[@devlin76]

Great episode! 5 Stars for everyone who is trying to be a little more like Dr. Eric Trexler.

[@pimpleonureye]

Huberman fans in SHAMBLES after this MONSTER episode.

[@figis8597]

5 stars for the casual double bicep at 1:08:34 from Dr.Helms

[@fairykun]

these meta science convos r my fav!! I need a whole episode (or series of them) all about stastics and modeling from trex that would be so awesome 🤩

[@joelphillips4468]

Agreed. We’re in the minority tho ahaha

[@fairykun]

@@joelphillips4468 true 😔😢 i do research in the field of indoor air quality so I love to apply what i learn from these podcasts to my work !!

[@Anassomou]

Saga is actually the plural form. Singular is "sagum" 😂 (I'll retract that next week)

[@TheRationalLifter]

Need a publication that reports on the papers validity with a nice score from -10 to 10. Negative scores should be reserved for the truly cynical papers. As time goes on there can even be a readjustment of old scores showing papers getting downgraded as their processes get out of date (hopefully signalling to new papers to use more up to date processes). Of course the problem with this idea is who would pay for it

[@fairykun]

also the idea for peer review is sooo good I would love to see academic publishing work towards something like that !!!!

[@michaelwilensky9134]

Trexler's idea for quantitative publication review is bold. I think it's a great idea, and I'm interested in implementing it (at least in a little pond to see how it'd go).

[@joshhall470]

Retraction correction insurrection

[@danieljuson8365]

Love the dry humor

[@csmcrckrs]

I have been reading Andrew Gelman's blog (on statistics, junk science, retractions, etc.) for a long time now and I have been listening to Iron Culture since its beginning. Would have never thought that these 2 would cross paths some day! Great episode!

[@joel5956]

Because so many people receive their science information through science communicators, it is important that science communicators present the research without antagonistic tones. Like if your format is a skit that is basically "Science-based Chad does behavior A while simpleton Bro Joe does behavior B", then you are less likely to be open and transparent when new research comes out that supports "Bro Joe." And even if that science communicator does update their stance and highlights that it is something new that contradicts their previous information, they've already done damage by fueling the "Science vs Anti-science" narrative.

[@Coachahmadreza]

Thank you. Legit critique: Most evidence-based podcasts are too long. As a PhD student and a nerd, I struggle to watch them regularly.

[@d3rpn1nj47]

Just listen to them at 4x speed with a Chrome extension

[@Jamesbsingleton]

I actually had to double check my spotify to see if I accidentally skipped ahead when it didnt take 45 minutes to get to the topic. Very interesting this happens when one specific host is absent

[@Yupppi]

How dares Dr. Eric Trexler imply that peer review is not unmistakable highest standard to publishing science? You say that something having been peer reviewed could be frankly downright disastrous research? Looking forward to Iron Culture requesting the retraction of all the reviews that rated the show under 5 stars next week.

[@kban77]

First