Is Andrew Huberman Ruining Your Morning Coffee?

[@hubermanlab]

Alas, you got it wrong. I never said to skip caffeine first thing in the morning in fact I take it right before early morning workouts. The point is that for people that experience a crash in the afternoon this is one variable they can experiment with…it relates to adenosine, caffeine sensitivity, and cortisol. This is covered in a few different HLP episodes. Clips can be a bit misleading. All the best, Andrew

[@jameshoffmann]

Thanks for watching and responding. I'm hoping you might be able to clarify this a little more for me. From your comment it appears that the advice is *only* for people who have afternoon crashes, but to quote your Daily Protocols pdf "Delay your caffeine intake by 90-120 minutes after waking to help avoid an afternoon crash". I understand you give the exercise caveat, but this is otherwise presented as broad advice for anyone, rather than those that suffer specific crashes. Interestingly, everyone who took part in the experiment did experience occasional afternoon crashes during the 30 day test. However, as the data showed, these had no correlation to your advice regarding caffeine timing.

[@FyerBear]

"Clips can be misleading" as he responds to a clip without the full context. Shoulda had a little more caffeine this morning my man ;)

[@bigmoneysniper221]

bruh the exact words from the video are "I purposely delay my caffeine intake" professional gaslighter right here T_T therapy isn't enough for you abandon career and give away ur wealth zero athletic achievements and you consistently give out faulty health advice

[@JimNortonsAlcoholism]

@@jameshoffmann Huberman is a Rogan bro science guy. Best to ignore him.

[@Kyarrix]

Hi Andrew. I am someone who used to subscribe and occasionally listen to your podcast. Over time, your affect and supreme confidence were off-putting. Likewise, the way you have treated women is abhorrent. I say this as a woman, as an attorney, as a judge and a person close to you in age. We also share a similar background. I understand that you won't care what I think. I am irrelevant to you, a voice on the internet. My unsubscribing will not affect your bottom line. Having a relative degree of wealth and fame (or notoriety) does not inoculate us from having to behave in a respectful decent way towards others. This should include women, even those who might have thrown themselves in your direction.

[@matteotestoni419]

“Be skeptical of simple mechanisms impacting complex outcomes” amen 🙏

[@KT-pv3kl]

the oxygen based metabolism has entered the stage....

[@matfax]

Why oversimplify coffee to caffeine? It contains much more. And there's also the endorphine kick simpliy by having a nice experience in the morning.

[@TalLikesThat]

I literally cheered out loud when he said that. So important, so underrated.

[@acoupleofschoes]

Dr. Ian Malcolm begs to differ.

[@jamespurchase4035]

Absolutely. This cannot be emphasised enough. The world is complex, human physiology is complex. Beware simple solutions and beware the vendors of simple solutions (I'm mostly thinking of politicins really). James and team, by their description, designed and performed a good experiment. Yes, low "n", but as they also admit (my interpretation) is that there are just so many variables when it comes to humans biology that the design of a perfect experiment than can only play with one variable, while holding all others constant or controlling for all other variables is a near impossibility. James and team have risen yet further in my estimation.

[@samuelvarga3223]

As a researcher, I cringe at the confidence with which Huberman gives advice on nearly every facet of life. Science is based on uncertainty, and most results ‘suggest’ or ‘indicate’ the existence of an effect, but effect sizes are important. Something that is statistically significant may be scientifically interesting but may bear no real-life significance.

[@letterstoandrada]

Yes, exactly this! That's why we learned in our second-year “Methodology of Scientific Research” class in med school that there is a huge difference between such things as a “statistical significance” and “clinical significance”. The way he talks about different results, especially in the later years of his podcast, makes you think that the significant results are definitely clinically significant as well. Well… many of them aren't. Some are, for sure, but there is a long way to go until we can be sure that it is significant enough that it will change our everyday life for the better. Edit: spelling error

[@YunisRajab]

Everyone wants a magic pill to solve their problems

[@emperorchopchop7726]

Agreed. I'm not a scientist or a reasearcher, but I've read enough pop-science to have learned that at best one person should only be able to speak confidently and authoritatively in a very narrow field of expertise...and even then, an honest researcher's language will typically be peppered with words and phrases that belie uncertainty. Over the top confidence is a huge red flag.

[@redstone5149]

Yet the sheep love to follow.

[@m_cabral]

As someone who has lived long enough to see 100 pop science life gurus come and go, I concur. Their 15 minutes come and go and eventually they Dr. Oz themselves into incredulity.

[@RoScoHutch]

This reminds me of one of my favorite quotes. “For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple and wrong.” H. L. Mencken

[@gingrichs]

LOL, Love it. I don't believe it's 100% true, but a good "rule of thumb" i think!

[@RGatGala]

10x harder to refute bullshit than to perpetuate it.

[@PH4RX]

@@gingrichs"Complex" just doesn’t mesh well with either "simple" or "clear". There are usually multiple more or less valid angles, constraints and often just local differences that need to be included in a complete answer that will make the result go above and beyond simple and clear.

[@smartugs1]

I’m also reminded of a famous Abraham Lincoln quote: “Don’t believe everything you see on the internet.”

[@MeriZee2703]

omg that's an amazing quote 🤣

[@dmarti47]

I’ve been practicing delaying caffeine intake for about 90 minutes after waking, and I prefer it over consuming it immediately after waking. My decision had nothing to do with afternoon crashes, but rather the following assumption: if I wait for my mind and body to wake up naturally before communing caffeine, then my mind will not associate caffeine intake with the process of waking. Hence, I take my morning coffee after I’ve gone out for a walk and then done my morning 60-minute exercise routine; and, indeed, my relationship with my morning coffee has grown healthier.

[@moaf2padventures757]

i agree and ive done the same (only an hour though, not as much willpower as you apparently lol). this is definitely a real effect, i think it has something to do with cortisol levels being high when you first wake up. if youre using caffeine for alertness it likely wont have any effect on that for your first hour being awake anyway. i certainly feel like i get a much greater caffeine response when waiting that first hour.

[@Axel_Andersen]

@@moaf2padventures757 I think you are falling into the same trap as AH, simple single 'solution' to complex cause and effect system. What you do may work for you (or it may not, maybe it is just your perception, cannot know) but this most like has very little to do with cortisol. Me, I drink coffee first thing in the morning, don't feel it does much to me but I like it. I then drink coffee all day long (it is about the only thing I drink, no water, no soda, a glass of milk with lunch) and I sleep well. If I sometimes experience an afternoon crash it has to do with a heavy lunch and sleep deprivation on the previous night. If someone experiences after lunch crashes then one should consider the possibility of diabetes or pre-diabetes or apnea, maybe try a CPAP.

[@moaf2padventures757]

​@@Axel_Andersen wait so i cant possibly know if what im doing "works for me" bc it may just be my perception. HOWEVER you are apparently very sure that: 1.) alertness benefits from caffeine in the morning have very little to do with cortisol levels (despite the fact that a lot of articles have been written suggesting theyre related). 2.) coffee doesnt do much to you. 3.) drinking coffee all day long doesnt affect your sleep. 4.) if you experience an afternoon crash it was definitely caused by a heavy lunch and sleep deprivation the previous night. and 5.) if other people experience after lunch crashes its probably diabetes or sleep apnea. got it.

[@Axel_Andersen]

@@moaf2padventures757 I don't think you got it as you got so aggressive for no reason. I was merely trying to say that we humans are not very reliable when observers. So studies or not re cortisol it is not sure if your coffee habits and alertness level and cortisol are linked. Maybe they are maybe they are not. Same with my coffee drinking. Maybe it affects me maybe it doesn't, I was just describing my habits and what I think it does or does not do to me. Also if you care to read with thought what I wrote about diabetes and sleep apnea you should understand just a suggestion to check those to conditions if you have those crashes. They are symptoms of those conditions that some people have and some don't. I typically do not have afternoon crashes but I do have been diagnosed with sleep apnea. I use CPAP every night since the dagnose and I have observed no change in myself, not better, not worse for it. Both diabetes and sleep apnea are conditions that should be treated so checking for them is just common sense.

[@Murmurrr]

@@Axel_Andersenyou’re saying a whole lot of nothing

[@disarmedpianist]

Hi James, I'm an epidemiologist with a background in neuroscience, i run statistics for a living on health issues. Been a fan of your videos and i'm also enjoying this one immensely. I absolutely agree with you on the observation regarding adenosine. I also disagree with the univariable outlook, which seems to be the selling point by Dr. Huberman. If the world is a simple exposure-to-outcome pathway, my job would have been much simpler :) but alas, it isn't. Confounders and effect modifiers call for a more complex consideration in the real world and I am so glad that you pointed it out. However, a few things in your video did grind my gears 😂 so here we go: 1. P-values don't mean anything if I don't know what test you ran to get them. It's not an absolute value, it's merely an indicator of how confident we are at (and you got this right) our observed outcome happening at random. In some cases, there's no need to even use p-values anymore, because if a p-value is used to show difference, then a difference only makes a difference if it makes a difference 🙃 But by looking at your first graph, i have a hard time understanding where did that p-value come from? Did you run a Chi-square? Or did you do a t-test to compare means? My guess was neither, because with 5-person sample, you would have a real hard time getting that Chi2 going, and you presented medians, so i assume you did not obtain means to compare them. I would have loved to see the means though, median is a way for me to see whether my data is skewed and helps me decide on what kind of statistical tests to run after seeing the distribution of my data. The median is not a good way to compare groups, unless you have the data skew issue. 2. All the subsequent graphs are highly problematic. Again there's the problem of not knowing what tests you ran, but i would go ahead and guess maybe spearman's r, the most basic kind of regression, was fitted. This simplified regression on its own has major issues, for the lack os capacity to control for various factors... But that aside... There's a major problem of heteroskedasticity, aka. you force-fitted a line in a cloud of data 😂 So again, while you did get a p-value

[@jakubkaras7380]

One of a few comments here that's actually trying to not by biased in any way and giving a valuable and constructive critique. I'm sure James will value your time to write this comment. If I should guess, James is aware of the problems using the p-value but he is trying to explain this topic to an audience that is interested mainly in coffee, he had to assume not a lot of knowledge of the majority of his audience and he decided to explain his results with the use of (in)famous p-value. Let's keep in mind that his video also can't have 1 hour because of the KZbin algorithm requirements. But really thanks for your comment, I love it! Btw testing this by an actually study with a larger sample doing by professionals would be great and I'm sure this is what we all want after watching this video. Have a great day!

[@lawrence4652]

Started typing comments on graphs and realised someone was making my point for me 😂

[@ronburgundy9712]

your comment is really insightful. i’m learning statistics and was wondering if i can bug you for questions about your comment: for heteroscedastic data such as the cloud james presented, what would be the way to normalize it? like would you add potential confounders until the data looks more line-like? also what might suggest that RCT affects whether the data is cloud-like? lastly i didn’t understand what you mean by a “difference only makes a difference if it makes a difference”, could you elaborate on this?

[@Freddylot]

Thanks for capturing my concerns with the data presentation in a much more eloquent way than I ever would! Saved me a lot of time and anxiety..

[@TheCodeTinkerer]

Great comment! I only have partial understanding and skill in statistics by education(logistics management/supply chain management), but understood very well what your comment set out to get across.

[@Steve-nu8xt]

The only person ruining my morning coffee is me

[@ruinerblodsinn6648]

I never know how my shots are going to turn out - just like my day

[@razzor8970]

Facts

[@Essem-H]

I haven't been able to nail the pour over. Fair enough it's only been 2 or 3 tries so far. I think I am gonna try a 2 pour method: 3x weight for the bloom. Wait 45 seconds then pour the rest. Gotta decide the ratio first, maybe 1:15 . Gonna try 20g or 15g.

[@Thermalions]

I get help from L'Or (and indirectly Nespresso). I aspire one day to take Jame's advice from the many videos I've watched.

[@lazzuuu21]

"let's tweak the grind size a bit" ahh trial

[@Felpshcx]

As a scientist, it's deeply satisfying to watch such a good demonstration and explanation of what science really is. I commented on another video, and I genuinely think you would make a great scientist. You should consider collaborating with researchers! Regarding the video, I agree that 5 people are not nearly enough for anything related to humans. Even events that happen to 1 in 1,000 people are significant in larger populations. Also, is very hard to achieve statistical significance, in humans, with a n of 5. About the correlation graphs, only the p-value was shown, which tells if the correlation is significant or not, but not if it is strong or weak. For that, you need the 'Rho' value (often called 'R') in Spearman correlations, for example. If R = 0, the line is perfectly horizontal. This means that you can have a p

[@sagerwraps9990]

I was also wondering about the Placebo effect? When they all usually drink coffee the body probably wouldve reacted the same if they consume caffeeine or not, since their body will think it is and react accordingly?

[@Tehdib]

This is an underrated comment.

[@Ermude10]

As someone who studied physics, I fully agree with this comment!

[@RGatGala]

Good points. What you are talking about is statistical significance vs clinical significance.

[@waylonwolf4908]

As a person who says I’m a scientist, I agree too.

[@LukasFischer2111]

It amazes me how society believes lies behind industry. I recently finished book called The 23 Former Doctor Truths by Lauren Clark. She explained her career thoughts perfectly

[@lukag3155]

I finished that book 2 weeks ago and I can say that is amazing book. Would also recommend it. She helped me with so many of new health routines and it was actually interesting to read what she revealed about Industry and how they manipulate society.

[@vija992]

Are these comments generated and liked by bots? I see this book recommended everywhere in YT on videos that have nothing to do with it

[@PauaP]

@@vija992100% 4.8k and not a lot of comments? Very sus.

[@smithplayspokemon]

@@vija992go to the website and you’ll get your answer. The webcam screams scam.

[@lanog40]

@@vija992It’s 100% bots. It’s good that you noticed this, I imagine not enough people can distinguish between real and artificial comments. Makes the internet feel extra cold and heartless

[@Neue-Johan]

20:17 Most important factor influencing my sleep; “do you have young children?” No amount of cafeïne can compensate for that.

[@wraith69]

I'll never forget having to get an energy drink on the way home from work just to survive the last 2 hours of my day getting my infant daughter to bed. That was a wild time.

[@JosiahDuenes]

@@wraith69that’s going to be me soon 😳

[@justaliltumbleweed]

@@JosiahDuenesbest of luck!

[@The_Monkey_King]

ROFL....115% true...currently 'holding our breath' through 1.5 YO

[@CertifiedSlamboy]

@@wraith69 Oh looks its me

[@kushagrachaturvedy2821]

As someone who deals with statistics in my day to day job, It feels so satisfying to see James, the guy who helped me discover my love for coffee, do a proper statistical experiment

[@Kedai610]

I feel like the small sample size probably kept those p-values pretty high. That said, it's 1000% better than almost any experiment I've seen on KZbin

[@csmcrckrs]

@@Kedai610 Exactly what I was thinking! The differences look pretty substantial to me, but he so strongly talks about them not being significant. I don't know how they analyzed the data (did they take each daily observation (5x30?) as one independent observation?), but with the p-values being so high, that must mean there's a LOT of variation in the data!

[@newtonswig]

100% this. Although as a stats nerd I was really curious what test they used on the caffeination vs slump metrics. Did they do the oversensitive and slightly dodgy ANOVA, or a robust but under sensitive Kruskal-Wallis?? Aware it’s pathetic, but I want to know for completeness.

[@dmallo]

I agree, except for the correlations. Just looking at the data, they may be strongly influenced by outliers, and James is referring to p-values as correlation strength (which is not right); the actual correlation values were missing from the plots. Also, I'd rather see the data and distribution shape, especially when sample sizes are this small (e.g., violin plots with the actual data overlayed on top).

[@mahoganywolf8843]

@@Kedai610 I’d love to see a power calculation to find out what kind of sample size they’d need to find a useful difference, but I realise that’s a level of nerd a bit beyond what we can reasonably expect from a popsci experiment on a coffee channel.

[@FunkyKikuchiyo]

I’m really glad you used Layne Norton’s talking point about mechanisms. That’s a logical fallacy that he’s good at spotting, and as I’ve gotten better at it, I’ve been able to assess weird internet claims a lot better. Not just for health and biology, but in everything.

[@colinfernandes3117]

As a coffee and science lover while also doing my in PhD building tools for fundamental neuroscience investigations. I saw the video. and obvious huberman pop science is usually offputting to any scientist - I also worry about youtubers stepping out of their field to "try" science. Really impressed (and unsurprised) that James has a firm base in building a study and a firm base to just be skeptical on everything. Better than some actual scientists I know trained at all these top schools. My respect for Hoffmann is now somehow even higher!

[@flightlessfish6776]

I’m just waiting for this to turn into Hames Joffmann morning routine “ First I make coffee then I make coffee then I make a bit more coffee”

[@lunasophia9002]

Don't do that. Don't do that.

[@terminallyonline5296]

Good on James for defending that parody account.

[@Chris.4345]

Smoke two joints before I smoke two joints and then I smoke two more

[@julien.2573]

"I don't feel like an addict" 16:29

[@DJProPlusMax]

Yes!

[@TySy3955]

Thank GOODNESS you provide the nuance that Huberman explicitly avoids providing. As a scientist, it pains me that Huberman has as much sway that he does.

[@Spyhermit]

It sounds like Huberman has a similar problem to many podcasters/youtubers. After they get done talking about their area of expertise it's the occasional update on the field rather than a ton of interesting things to see, and so they start branching out, sometimes to their detriment.

[@estefencosta1835]

What's annoying is you know Huberman knows better, but he does it anyhow to promote his own brand, income, prominence, etc.

[@Thetache]

Huberman knows if you tell people they can fix a problem in their life with one small simple change then a huge amount of people will click and generate income for him, they used to be called "snake oil" salesmen then morphed into the diet industry. Easy cheap fixes always sell even though they never work as people will take the easy route and convince themselves it will work despite huge evidence to the contrary.

[@TySy3955]

⁠definitely premeditated

[@YouTubedarek]

On a more recent podcast (I think it was with Lex Friedman), Huberman talks about how he was surprised how much this one piece of info exploded in popularity. He also elaborated (and I thought he said this originally too) that waiting for caffeine to limit the afternoon crash is only for people experiencing hard afternoon crashes; it wasn't meant as a blanket statement for everyone. He also talks about alternative options like spending some time in the morning in direct sunlight on your face but that's not possible for everyone.

[@CarletonTorpin]

People who sell simple answers make me skeptical; truth is complicated and nuanced. The world needs good scientists, and James and his team did good science. :)

[@KT-pv3kl]

simple doesnt exclude complexity. nuance is only important in detail on the grand scope of things many things operate on remarkably simple mechanisms.

[@dettenavn7652]

The issue health podcasters have - you can sum up good health advice in less than an hour, and then you're left with some niche things and that won't sustain a weekly podcast.

[@matroxman11]

I can tell immediately just by how overconfident and definitive huberman is when making these statements, that he’s a salesman first and a doctor (of biology) second. I’m sure he’s smart I’m sure he’s well educated but the most important fact in science is that we cannot “prove” anything, we can generate data to support hypothesis but every person is different and we don’t know anything for certain.

[@AlexanderNash]

@@matroxman11 Yeah he's absolutely an entertainer first and a scientist second

[@RHt09]

@@AlexanderNash Sounds like you have a political axe to grind with Huberman and, if I had to guess, it's because you're on the political left and have been told to hate him recently.

[@Dernachtmachen]

I think the best part of the video, was you noting that there is no quick fixes in life and that humans are complicated complex creatures. What works for one human may not work for the another. James, best advice I've heard all week.

[@TheToobNube]

This video is not just about the topic in the title. It’s an excellent example of how we receive information, how to process it, how to draw conclusions.

[@tylerdevore6520]

Very true! I was not expecting this from James. But, he absolutely crushed it. I'm super impressed with the data driven way he presented it open for critiques, and his response to Dr. Huberman. I am disappointed with Dr. Huberman's response to this video, but maybe we'll see a response again later to James's follow-up. Hopefully this opens up everyone's eyes to vette and verify information, rather than taking it at face value blindly.

[@scottcampbell96]

“ We are weird and complex meat bags”. I think we have the Hames Joffmann video title.

[@Sally4th_]

Together with the hair slick this *really* needs the HJ treatment :)

[@wompus_king]

The WHAT?

[@wompus_king]

Oh. Hames Joffman.

[@m420-nd1if]

Actually we are jelly filled skinbags held up by bone scaffolding. The more you know

[@ViewerDiscretionAdvise]

T-Shirt when?

[@AdamDrew]

JH: He's the most...widespread science communicator on the internet. Me: He's Hank Green?

[@kaukospots]

Hank Green was certainly the first person I thought of, over this other person I've never heard of

[@needmorebeans]

Hey Michael, Vsauce here

[@konekotron]

Micheal of V Sauce, Hank Green, Kyle Hill… but this other person I’ve never heard of.

[@carterz9343]

I also thought of Hank Green. However, im an avid podcast listener and definitely know Andrew Huberman. Andrew certainly has more accademic credentials and is a lot more specialized than Hank. **but** Andrew seems to attract the toxic "hack your brain" "maximum efficiency" tech bro audience. While he knows the science, he often states inferences based on data as if they are categorically true. Which is exactly what happened in this video, and also why I think Hank/Scishow are way better at accurately communicating science im a non-biased way

[@Solinaru]

Hank is a high quality science communicator, not a widespread one unfortunately. :( whoever this dude is gives me JRE-ancient-aliens vibes 🤕

[@scottparry3614]

As a long time fan, I think this is the best video you've ever made. Endless hacks with a dusting of 'science' have become pervasive and persuasive. Be ever wary of those that speak with Huberman's level of confidence in so many disparate fields - follow people who are uncertain, most true experts caveat everything and clearly state the limits of their knowledge or their data.

[@Thermalions]

Nice to see the team. Thanks Team for all the videos.

[@anonymusmuggle]

That "argument" at 05:01 ist such a good example. There's a German caffeine-based anti hair loss product named Alpecin, and this basically is how they did their marketing. Their statements were banned in UK due to not being scientifically substantiated 😂

[@FA1ALERR0R]

caffeine actually does have evidence for preventing hair loss when applied topically due to improving blood flow to the follicles.

[@Solinaru]

"This is no time to be making new enemies or denying the chance of luxurious hair" ~ Voltaire on his death bed with a cup of coffee by his side I think

[@mgfcf]

Love the casual display of proper scientific methods! We do not deserve you and your team, James. You are being way too honest, reasonable and scientifically grounded for this day and age.

[@betternotsayit]

Here is exactly opposite. This is the example of false claims from experimental data. James here mixes 'not finding' correlation and 'proving that there is no correlation', he did the first one, he just found nothing from a statistical point of view. But with his personal bias, he interpreted it as the second one, which is a bad science

[@YoshiShinkawa]

How refreshing to read the comments to your experiment! Intelligent, thoughtful and humble discussion inviting the audience to explore the different possibilities. Thank you to you and your team and to your audience.

[@NomenNescio99]

James Hoffman, the coffee lover that lectures the Stanford doctor, successfully. It was a great video, very interesting!

[@NoHope_]

Something i think people need to learn is just because there is a research paper on a single topic doesn't mean that that the results of that experiment are completely accurate, there needs to be multiple studies on a topic, that come to the same conclusion, for it to be even remotely considered "viable" or worth your time to adapt. What Andrew's podcast does, at the best of times, is speak about "cutting edge" (or in better words, unproven) science that sounds good but often times is later disproved but his listeners take it as if its come from gods mouth.

[@Secretlyanothername]

Hubrisman acts like everything he says is the strongest science possible. It usually turns out they did something with 8 male rats, but he starts talking about people and applying it to everyone...

[@xdonnix]

Bingo.

[@TheJohn8765]

Huberman is highly qualified to speak on neuroscience related to optical processing. Everything else is.... *less* qualified. He's not an expert on everything and with how fractured and intensely specific other areas of science are (including other portions of neuroscience), take anything Huberman says with a large pile of salt-- he makes awfully specific recommendations well outside of his expertise. That should raise red flags. A lot of red flags.

[@ramsy66]

I enjoy listening to his podcasts because the way he speaks really pulls you in and you feel like you're listening to a guru in whatever subject he's talking about. What has happened though, which is the same thing that happened with all of these types of channels I've engaged with, is that his guidance stopped feeling helpful after the initial excitement faded. That excitement was just a feeling of relief and joy that he's shared wisdom that is like a light-bulb moment where you go "that's what I've been missing this whole time!" I don't think he's intentionally being mis-leading or trying to make anyone feel anything they shouldn't. He's just a very good orator and has gained an audience talking about things that he finds interesting. I still like listening to him talk, but I'm very weary about engaging with any of his podcasts anymore, because I know that my brain will inevitably latch onto one of his ideas and it will sting when I learn that it hasn't fixed all of my life's problems.

[@Diarhehe]

Its also worth mentioning that out of all the experiments in the world, the most important one is the one you conduct on yourself when trying out something new.

[@jordanmiller42]

I want a "Weird and Complex Coffee Meatbag" shirt

[@domatherton7726]

This is a brilliant video! Investigations like this are so interesting because you can just keep thinking of other correlations to track. I’d love to know some of the context about the 5 subjects. Obviously you work for a coffee KZbin channel: are you all heavy coffee drinkers? How much of a change in routine is this for each of you? Do you regularly drink decaffeinated in general? Then you could look at: maybe delaying the coffee is only effective if that’s your only coffee of the day. Or maybe it’s totally unrelated to coffee and it is to do with having a little mid-morning ritual (e.g making a coffee) which sets you up well for the afternoon. Maybe not having caffeine first thing would prevent a crash, but because your body isn’t accustomed to decaffeinated coffee you are then having some other negative effects due to this!

[@erezra]

Best science channel that is not a science channel! Life is more complicated than a single mechanism. Watched this while drinking my morning coffee :)

[@darrylmarko3221]

I'm sipping hot coffee from my Ember right now!

[@Alisdairharden]

James Hoffman is a better science communicator than any influencer.

[@smirbelbirbel]

There are many good ones that are on par, unfortunately they're often less popular. Layne Norton is very good, the Green Brothers, Eric Helms, Mike Israetel (when it comes to exercise science), Omar Isuf, ...

[@rogerbosman2126]

Perhaps, but also he's a hack

[@kluneberg8952]

oh no your favorite influencer disagrees with another influencer. "only my influencer is correct"

[@user-yv6xw7ns3o]

​@@rogerbosman2126In the spirit of clear explanations, you could do better than ad hominem remarks.

[@Alisdairharden]

@@kluneberg8952 maybe influencer is the wrong word because I suppose James is an influencer. The difference I think is that James’s channel manages to be mainly about coffee. And I think it doesn’t matter a great deal what you think of him. Some portion of it is about him and his personality and the way he slurps coffee. But I’m here because I want information about coffee. You do feel with Hubes that he had been captured by the role he plays in the hearts of his listeners, you still get information about things from him, but it’s tilted a little away from that as the main game. Perhaps because his is a self help podcast and science is a bit out of its depth to help in a lot of areas. Science for coffee is about the ruthless pursuit of better flavour and more delight. And there is a shorter cycle between input and output. If the life advice turns out to be bad you won’t know for perhaps years, where as if your coffee method sucks you ruin my morning and I know straight away. Hubes ends up being a science story teller and a practioner of science inspired wisdom in his podcast even if his day job is in more rigorous science

[@dennischiapello7243]

It is absolutely devastating, that an educated non-scientist can school a credentialed neuroscientist in the basics of scientific method, experimental design and, by extension, ethics. However, Huberman's air of confidence and his smoldering good looks deliver a measure of credibility that is off the charts. Perhaps a meta-analysis could tease out this variable. (Don't be cowed, James. You hold your own in the looks department.) 😊

[@floorpizza8074]

"...in the basics of scientific method, experimental design and, by extension, ethics." Oh, you mean those annoying little trivialities that get in the way of making fat stacks of cash? Pshaw, who needs 'em? I'm sure Huberman is well versed in scientific method, experimental design and ethics. They just don't make him money.

[@BooBaddyBig]

n=5 is not a real study you can rely on. n=50 at absolute bare minimum.

[@itmeurdad]

James is very much a practicing scientist, in fact, everyone is to some degree. Science is the method, not the "knowledge."

[@daisychain8011]

Not to forget the adenosine fueled full head of hair 🔥

[@bloomtom]

The scientific process takes work but grifting is easy. Be wary of people who tag their opinions as science without experiment and specific evidence to back it up. Also be wary of experiments and evidence which have not been reproduced, especially if the author touts their data as facts.

[@ubercorey]

Thank you James for continually adding value to the collective whole. Truely.

[@EtruskenRaider]

We really should have a long discussion of “coffee as ritual.” For some it’s walking up to your favorite shop and ordering. For others it’s making some at home. The ritual aspect is so key to getting that boost of serotonin in the morning. I know that when I take that first sip and I’ve made it right, that I get an immediate psychological response.

[@constanterratic4252]

Definitely! The pleasant coffee aroma and the first sip is all I need to get going really.

[@JasonBunting]

You can't remove the effect of the observer's consciousness from the experiment

[@thegriffinnews]

This! I can't drink coffee anymore bc IBS, but I get a very specific zing when I make my morning hot drink perfectly.

[@EtruskenRaider]

@@JasonBunting right that’s essentially my point. I’m just kinda curious about everyone’s coffee ritual and the effect the act of making coffee itself has on the person.

[@tristanmills4948]

Yes. I've heard (cannot cite) that the ritual of making coffee prompts long term coffee drinkers to raise adenosine levels in anticipation of the caffeine hit to come.

[@ivandenev1104]

I love the fact that you did actual statistical tests, not just report the averages! Very admirable

[@josephlunderville3195]

I just want to call attention to the absolute consistent perfection of the video edits around here -- the way the hair swipe holds in the video with the audio proceeding with the monologue is just chef's kiss beautiful

[@PaulMichael1084]

I like this video for many reasons. Firstly it's James and I've never been bored with one of his videos. Secondly it is the kind of insanely deep dive into the geeky details that I wish I had the time and resources to do. Thirdly for how open and upfront James is about Andrew, right down to pinning the comment from Andrew. I also give a shout out to Kyarrix for her comment. Well thought out, well written. Gets the poitn across, while still managing to be polite and respectful. I aspire to be more like her and James in my everyday life.

[@HenryPiffpaff]

Having studied nutrition science I can only say "Amen!" to your overall conclusion on simple, mechanistic explanations! Thank you. Very good video.

[@koobs4549]

It reminds me of people who insist that eating local honey cures allergies, despite bee pollen not being the kind of pollen that causes those allergic reactions. The kind of pollen that does, (tree & grass) isn’t pollinated by bees. Bees don’t need to pollinate grass & trees, because those allergens are released into the air by those plants, which is why you have allergies. 😂

[@Crafty_Chops]

Thank you James. Never watched Dr Huberman. I wake up at 6am, first coffee at 6:30 and another at 8:30. Never have an afternoon crash.

[@kanguruster]

Same. Not that I would know for sure; the crash would probably happen in the middle of my siesta.

[@devildante9]

As someone for who caffeine has little to no effect, all this talk about crashes is kinda funny, I would HATE having to change when I have a nice mug of tea or coffee based on the time of day instead of whenever the fuck I feel like having coffee.

[@slothc]

Only time I have an afternoon crash is if I overeat or if it's leg/squat day in the gym.

[@skrymerU]

That's because coffee has to little caffeine in it to have any effect. So drink coffee when ever you want, it will not make any difference.

[@Gabu_Dono]

I always have afternoon crashes. That didn't change after starting to drink coffee, but the crashes did become milder. I drink an various times 8:00 -14:00. Timing doesn't matter, except if i drink a large amount directly before my crash time at 14:30 -16:30.

[@juzzapm3252]

I think one of the reason so many people distrust REAL creditable doctors is because they don’t often give concise answers and it’s because - as the studies show- oftentimes the information is rarely conclusive.

[@johnbrobston1334]

If by "doctors" you mean MDs, they are in a difficult situation. They have a sick person in front of them who needs to be treated and there may not be an established, effective treatment for whatever they have. In some cases there aren't even clearly established diagnostic criteria. So they have to do the best they can with what they've got and sometimes the best they can is not the right solution or not enough.

[@seyurisu]

This is true. I would consume a lot of content similar to Hubermann's, and collected many actionable advices, and knowledge presented in easy to understand and straightforward ways. But when I went to see my actual doctors, I was always disappointed by their lack of advice, tools, and general answers to my questions. Whilst I used to think they were "outdated" and "uninterested" in my search for answers, I now realise they would rather say nothing, unless important, rather than stand by yet-to-be-proved ideas.

[@plwadodveeefdv]

@@johnbrobston1334 yeah, even a smart mechanic might struggle to diagnose a complex issue with your vehicle and resort to throwing parts at it. with computers you usually start with power cycling... but doctors have it tough. you usually can't swap parts on people, and power cycling is generally frowned upon

[@weregretohio7728]

It's the same way people no longer understand what journalism is but hate "journalism." Our concept of reality has been damaged by this sort of junk, this anti-intellectual Internet entertainment the few can exploit for profit. People think they're experts because they listened to Joe Rogan or their friend's uncle's cousin on Facebook and facts and evidence mean nothing anymore. It's all profit.

[@Mozenator]

I'd love to see a follow up collab with both you, Andrew, and some other third party. The potential here for combining forces on a future project is immense!

[@monochromios]

I have been medically caffeine deprived because of my insomnia. It resulted in reducing my sleep hours from 5 to 2. My logopedist suggested that I use a white noise machine at night: I sleep 7/8 hours per night, with no medicines and drinking 2 coffees per day. I am more than convinced that generalizations do not work: everyone of us is made different, and each of us reacts differently to different substances. This is the problem with "general science" and general medical treatments: they are based on a medium common scientific sense. But each one of us is unique. Very interesting episode. Thank you for sharing

[@Krytern]

Yeah this is why when you go to a doctor with an illness you'll sometimes try 2 or 3 different treatments until one works, because everything doesn't work for everyone

[@Disastrous_Macaron]

Yes. People also metabolise caffeine differently. Slower, faster or anything in between, due to genetics.

[@thebob5240]

Yup for me personally i try and avoid Caffeine for the most part as i find while it does work i get a REALLY bad crash once it where's off regardless of when i take it. So usually i relegate it to making it the last hour of a really long drive or finishing up an important paper at night something like that. but for you it seems its almost the opposite each of us are different the best we can do is find the most common answer and use it and adjust if it turns out someone is not in that median average.

[@ShrewdWarrior]

I drink my first coffee at 6:45am. I don't have a crash in the afternoon. The only thing that completely eliminated afternoon crashes was radically reducing carb/sugar intake.

[@FritsWent]

I don't understand why more people are not talking about this. It turns out consuming less sugar and carbs was the root cause of my fatigue. For 40 years of my life, I drank two to four 250 ml cups of coffee per day. That has been a constant. What changed was reduction of sugar and carbs and overall increase of consumption of nutrition from real food. (not processed or fast) I am in my 60s. I no longer experience metabolic fatigue as I did during my 20s, 30s, 40s, and my 50s. Everybody in my life thought my daily fatigue was due to cannabis. Everybody was wrong; including me. Today, I use more Cannabis than ever before. If you may have an endo-cannabinoid deficiency then you need to find the particular cannabis strain with the terpene profile that addresses your specific therapeutic needs. The strains vary considerably. Bottom line is repeated insulin spiking causes fatigue. Eat more fat, protein, and vegetable-based micro-nutrients. As for James' experiment where he is putting a good slug of diary into each coffee drink, that will likely ruin the experiment. That will generate an insulin response. My most recent reduction in sugar intake was not using Half & Half. I start drinking coffee black in 2024. For many years I had gotten into the habit of using Half & Half for more than a decade while improving my nutritional intake with paleo/Mediterranean. I sleep very well at night by not consuming coffee for at least 8 hours before sleep. I've never been diabetic so I have not made a major shift in my life. I consider reducing sugar and carb intake to be a minor adjustment. And it has been life changing in terms of absolute removal of fatigue from my daily experience. Bread, Pasta, and Alcohol is sugar. Remember, your brain is the only part of you that wants the sweet. Your body doesn't need it like you think it does. It is not energy. You can go deeper into this carbohydrate rabbit hole by reading about insulin resistance of the brain. aka Type 3.

[@FritsWent]

Additionally, Andrew Huberman 's advice to drink only water first after waking up is a positive behavior for me. Holding off on coffee for as long as possible (like 30 min to 1 hour) and flashing your eyes with raw sunlight. Makes me feel better.

[@neyaneya5554]

It prevents crashes for me, everyone's body is different.

[@BensCoffeeRants]

Exactly what I was thinking, it's more likely the high carb high sugar breakfast.

[@macehead]

5:17 we were all thinking it James

[@AMPProf]

Sho is james?

[@AMPProf]

whoe

[@limsalalafells]

Now everyone with thick hair and coffee drinkers spreads the rumor with confirmation bias.

[@bongoh2607]

"Clearly ridiculous!... Or is it?" 😂

[@bjornsundin5820]

​@@AMPProf James is the person who is most prominent in this KZbin video

[@jacobflisberg4296]

This is just delightful. You saw a question, you put in the proper time and effort to answer it the best you could. Thanks to you and the team!

[@kracher08]

This is great -- a masterclass in experimental design that meticulously debunks a shaky hypothesis. That said, I hope it's OK to point out some issues in 14:03-20:25? A low p-value like 0.002 doesn't mean there's a "strong correlation". All these correlations in fact look very weak, and are probably not worth disussing. It looks like the significant p-values are largely due to a small number of outlier data points. Suggestions to improve: - When measuring the strength of an effect, use an effect size. For instance, at 14:28, how much of the variation in reaction time is explained by sleep quality? (This is the "R square value") - The data have outliers and boundary effects. Do a more robust analysis than a linear correlation, such as a rank correlation. This may well show that none of these correlations are statistically significant. Is the data publicly available? I would love to give this to my students for re-analysis :)

[@gingrichs]

I noticed the outliers in the charts too. I'm not a statistician but I do recall from stats class something about eliminating certain outiers when determining line of best fit.

[@kracher08]

​@@gingrichs Outliers in the tails of the data (like the top right datapoint in 18:33) have more influence on the regression line than "central" data points. These are sometimes removed, but this can be frowned upon (as there is no objective definition of an "outlier"). A better alternative would be to repeat the same analysis using a robust method, for example computing the correlation on rank-transformed data (smallest value -> 1, second smallest -> 2, and so on; a.k.a. Spearman correlation). Such methods can be less powerful, but make fewer assumptions. Checking that your conclusions still hold with a robust method is a form of sensitivity analysis. I wonder if the data shown here would survive that

[@plwadodveeefdv]

he said he's not making the data publicly available due to privacy concerns for the team

[@danguee1]

@@kracher08 Thanks for your insight. As a lay person - though I do have a Masters in technology, so have been exposed to statistics in passing - the way that data gets treated by 'influencers' troubles me. And even when I look up the *_actual studies_* - feel uncomfortable that I actually understand what's going on.....

[@brunnob3]

I hadno idea who Huberman was before this and I'm so very glad I got to know about him here before anywhere else, because by the way he responded to the video we can infer (as he did with the caffeine thing) that he is not a person who cares about science, just about being right.

[@MegaChickenPunch]

Link it please

[@brunnob3]

@@MegaChickenPunch it's the fixed comment!

[@SomethingSomethingComplete]

What was it about his response that made you feel that way? I didn't think his response was bad tbh. You can search his most popular clips on the matter, and you'll see that he says explicitly, "IF you experience afternoon crashes," or "Many people experience..." It's not like he's a vegan saying, "You're 100% going to get cancer if you eat meat." He's explaining that if afternoon crashes are a problem for you, here is what worked for him and the mechanisms(arguable). If it was something potentially dangerous like going on the carnivore diet, I'd agree with the negative comments, but it's just delaying caffeine. Do it or don't do it; it won't harm you.

[@plwadodveeefdv]

@@SomethingSomethingComplete it's easy to cherry pick this single piece of advice and say "it won't harm you", but the dude is this way about everything. inferring and extrapolating from single studies or even animal studies and then giving health and lifestyle advice to people based on those extremely tenuous grounds. that plus his large following makes him disingenuous at best, dangerous at worst

[@SomethingSomethingComplete]

@@plwadodveeefdv I wouldn't call talking about what this video is about, "Cherry picking," but I wasn't aware of any dangerous practices he gives advice about. Do you happen to remember any at the top of your head? And having a large following doesn't make him any more disingenuous than any other snake oil salesman. If he is doing what you're saying, I agree that it is dangerous, I just haven't come across it.

[@waelabdelrhman1419]

Morning coffee represents 90% of the whole day joy. With all due respect to the Adenosin receptors 😅😅

[@gingrichs]

Truth!

[@mkf628]

Say no to adenosine.

[@ringelrose]

Very interesting video! In some people, there is a connection between an increase in glucose spikes and coffee consumption. (Not for everyone) This can also be a cause of a dip in energy in the afternoon. Also whether the coffee is drunk with milk or black and what the breakfast looks like. I have fewer low points when I drink I drink black coffee in the morning. The time when I drink coffee does not play a big role, but the amount of coffee I drink during the day determines whether I sleep well.

[@herrgrau]

One of these days I wrote in a discussion concerning something completely different: "As always, the only thing we can be sure of in the end, is that people with simple answers to complex questions are always wrong, and either idiots or selling something." I know it's not good style to quote oneself, but in this single instance I'll propably repeat it until I die. As a medical doctor and perpetual sufferer of misinterpretion of data, I very much thank you for this video. This is everything right with the Internet and makes clear the reason for your success in business as well as as a content creator.

[@antonomaseapophasis5142]

Everyday I wait 24 hours before watching a Huberman video. This has improved the quality of my sleep and my PVT scores.

[@MegaChickenPunch]

How about you just stop watching that absolute quack crapshow

[@KingdomOfDimensions]

​@@MegaChickenPunch Every 60 seconds a minute passes in Africa

[@MosheFeder]

😂😂😂

[@josephp2229]

ALaS YoU gOt iT WrONg… what a highly enlightening way of promoting discourse for everyone’s benefit.

[@Pilsnerp1c]

Never heard of the guy before today. Went and perused his stuff. I get major Internet Guru whiffs from his content, and that is rarely a good thing. I'm all for trusting science, but I think his brand of content that has him consistently producing short form videos and giving broad, prescriptive advice is antithetical to the scientific method which is frequently arduous and inconclusive. He's a click above "Lose 10 lbs with this 1 weird trick doctors hate" and the Dr. Oz's of the world, in my opinion. Pretty disappointing.

[@chasedooley6237]

⁠@@Pilsnerp1che’s just another Jordan Peterson/Sam Harris/Neil Degrasse Tyson type of “expert.” They know it all, everything and anything. They’re completely big-headed; they’re no more a scientist in a true sense of that title than calling the sky orange. They fall into the modern category of snake oil salesmen - intellectual charlatans using their pedigree to sell their audience shit and lifestyle hacks they don’t need. People get so after these types of guys, I use to be the same. Nowadays I try not to let just anyone tell me how to live my life, and I think I’m better for it

[@mkf628]

rather shakespearean

[@Whatever_works]

You hit the nail on the complete head of caffeine consumption specifically coffee. For me I can have a 6 oz of coffee 3 hours before bed and sleep like a dream. However if I don’t have coffee in the morning then I know I am going to struggle with anxiety and tiredness. It is ritualistic that coffee gives me a better mood to face life in general and therefore I will drink it when I want however I please. Thank you and the team for putting this content together!!!

[@OldManTim]

4:52 I need a Weird Coffee Complex Meatbag shirt now.

[@moshpotato]

I used to regularly have afternoon crashes. Like, I would predictably nap at 2pm for anywhere from 1-3 hours. Changing my caffeine intake, timing of caffeine intake, or sleeping habits made no difference. I legit slept 2-5 pm and 8:30 pm to 8 am every day. Turned out I was super neurodivergent and undiagnosed. Once medicated and stabilized, I no longer have afternoon crashes no matter what time I have my morning coffee. And when I do, it is usually directly correlated to poor sleep or stress.

[@cachi-7878]

@5:17, I bursted into laughter as I was waiting for him to point to his hair. 😂

[@sewgood568]

I not only enjoyed this, I LOVED it ❤ I have ME/CFS and am completely fed up with being presented with simple 1 factor solutions to a medically complex illness. Your explanation of what you were doing, why and the limitations of the problem, the process and the results was brilliant. I trained as an engineer and my 1st question is always define the problem, followed by define the limitations. Thank you James

[@neyaneya5554]

I've had severe CFS for 8 years now. Reducing caffeine in general helped me a ton. I get it's extremely annoying when things are constantly thrown at you taking advantage of our hopes in getting better. But if anything with CFS you know there's no cure, and a dozen little changes make a world of difference for making this more livable. Skipping caffeine in the morning doesn't cost you money, there's literally no harm in trying it.

[@muneebahmad7860]

Never expected a james hoffman/layne norton crossover

[@locustsun]

This is my problem with podcasts/social media and the "new science". It takes a lot of these inferences and references papers with good information, but the coagulation leads to a new hypothesis rather than an a factual statement. People forget that when you make a scientific statement, it needs to be EXACTLY as presented in a study rather than an extrapolation of said study or a coagulation of many studies. I've been quoted many papers that just use the headline and the paper actually disproves what the person is telling me. A good rule of thumb is: if many people are FINDING this in their scientific studies, it's most probably right. If it's someone telling me about other's studies leading to something, it's likely wrong without supporting support with citation. Social media tells me that blind following is common now and you should be more introspective about what you believe or how you go about believing something.

[@georgeindestructible]

When you consume caffeine, it competes with adenosine by binding to adenosine receptors in the brain, particularly the A1 and A2A receptors. Caffeine doesn't stop the production of adenosine (!!!) it simply blocks its ability to bind to these receptors, thus it remains nearby unless you happen to sleep (during the day for whatever reason) which gets rid of some of it depending on how much you've slept among other factors. As a result, the inhibitory effects of adenosine are temporarily masked, making you feel more alert and awake. However, adenosine continues to accumulate in the brain's extracellular space while caffeine is blocking its receptors. When the effects of caffeine wear off, either because it's metabolized and cleared from your system or because it is displaced from the receptors, thus the accumulated adenosine quickly binds to its receptors. This sudden influx of adenosine can cause a "caffeine crash," leading to feelings of drowsiness, fatigue, and decreased alertness. This is why the crash can feel intense, your brain is suddenly hit with the "full force" of the adenosine that was building up during the time caffeine was active. This is a natural response to the temporary blockade of adenosine signaling by caffeine. A number of reasons some people are less affected can vary by a number of factors, such as CYP1A2 Gene, caffeine tolerance, dosage amount and timing, individual sensitivity especially neurochemical differences, sleep quality and deprivation, even psychological expectations and perception of the expected outcome.

[@janelange9156]

This is great. A hypothesis is all well and good, but without data to back it it up, it's just a hypothesis. Having been a complete caffeine addict who had to go cold turkey for annoying medical reasons, I can say that once I got off caffeine, my sleep quality seems to have improved and my mornings are better. I also like your point about multiple mechanisms likely being at play: I suspect that caffeine may excacerbate blood sugar swings, and that hypoglycemia may play into the "crash" as much as adenosine. It would be interesting to see blood sugar data as well!

[@i22321]

The James Hoffman-Layne Norton cross reference was not one I would have ever predicted, but it continues to validate intelligent, high quality communicaters will always find each other 🙏🏽

[@Talentedtadpole]

I was put off Layne Norton by the shouty thumbnails with his moobs and the bro fluencer health vibe. Wondering if his content might be ok.

[@adribones]

@@Talentedtadpolelayne’s content is often (but not always), good, but the shouty bits, can definitely be exhausting.

[@i22321]

@@Talentedtadpole his strong suit is definitely not high tier video production or scripts like that of James and some others in the coffee space , but if you don't mind the straight-up guy-and-a-camera format, I'd recommend giving him a shot. He's a very competent researcher and powerlifter, does a great job of keeping up to date and explaining nuances of the recent literature, but lays out his reasoning with citations, which allows you to reflect on his take as you please or apply the skill reading more on your own. The Friday reaction vids are more for giggles once in awhile for me (and where most yelling occurs) - I usually stick to the educational vids where he covers new papers

[@arjundubhashi1]

I think Layne is the antithesis of Huberman. He relies more on consensus than single studies + extrapolation. I usually listen to him only on podcasts as he’s less confrontational.

[@craigice9635]

Layme Norton.

[@kcStranger]

If you ever revisit this, I would love to see an experiment where you drink either decaf/caffeinated upon waking, then drink the opposite ~2 hours later. That way, total caffeine intake by 2-3 hours in would be fairly consistent. That said, I'd be shocked if the results were anything other than "no discernable difference."

[@danielchin8073]

I was thinking the same for most of the video. The statement was "delay" which would mean the caffeine intake still happens. But I think the results as presented by James are still valid.A

[@juliankoch9005]

Working as a postdoc in cellular signaling at the moment, I’d wish everything would be simple. Cellular pathways are multi-layered, have feedback-loops and failsafe-mechanisms and are super complex to control. And it becomes exponentially more complicated looking at a whole organism. Props to James for this very nice video 😊

[@miasswim]

I am impressed by you and the community you have gathered, who question so-called "facts" from "authority" figures in pursuit of truth and understanding.

[@ivyannanet]

This video is the prime example of why I love this channel.

[@stevenoconnor7364]

I haven't specifically re-watched the Huberman Lab episode relevant to this issue, so I stand to be corrected, but I recall the more crucial issue at hand with the time of caffeine intake was the timing of spiking cortisol and regular caffeine ingestion, specifically relevant to your time of waking. The body's natural cortisol release (necessary for alertness and waking) becomes dependent on the caffeine hit. People who habitually take caffeine every day immediately after waking disrupt their body's capacity to produce a sufficient cortisol spike endogenously (naturally) to facilitate waking and thus experience a "zombie" like state until they get coffee.

[@Xeno8086]

This was a rather good study, and the surprising part is not being able to tell the difference between decaf and regular coffee even after drinking it. I think people just get used to caffeine and it becomes less effective in altering alertness over time. Its almost like nicotine where smoking cigarettes doesn't change the mood, its more of a habit. Most of the crashes I see amongst people is due to improper eating habits that cause a blood sugar crash that is very noticeable.

[@MarkEichin]

pretty sure the "added dairy" he mentioned is enough to mask the difference fairly effectively, also drinking it hot...

[@ricewarrior007]

I didn’t know James had so much insight into scientific outcomes and experimental design and I love this!

[@jibblehardicardi3827]

"sharks are attracted to ice-cream" Statistically shark attacks are more likely during periods of high ice cream sales. I never-ever go into the sea carrying an ice cream.

[@gycobden]

Correlation, not causation! Shark attacks go do increase in the same period ice cream sales go up, but guess when that is: summer! Because of the weather people buy more ice cream, and also, more people are swimming at beaches where potential shark attacks can happen. So rest assured taking your ice cream into the water is perfectly safe, but I wouldn't suggest going into super shark infested waters either way 😅

[@loganmedia1142]

@@gycobden Yes, that is exactly what the person to whom you responded said.

[@jibblehardicardi3827]

@@gycobdenexactly, it's one of the examples I used with students when I was a teacher

[@MichelleYred40]

What about the newly studied cocaine sharks 🦈? Would you consider avoiding certain oceans?

[@dh7314]

@@gycobdenyes, we know. You just explained what the op said 😂

[@Frutfive5]

Great video, i loved that you didn’t shy away from showing the data and p-values. Some might not understand a p-value or what it means, but to many it shows your teams cares about the accuracy of the science.

[@tomvandongen8075]

I now want to see a James Hoffman, Layne Norton and Dr. Mike workout/coffee collaboration

[@finestPlugins]

Which Dr. Mike? I'd say both. 😎

[@tomvandongen8075]

​@@finestPlugins100%!

[@tomvandongen8075]

​@@finestPlugins also I think you mean Doctor Mike™️

[@EmyrDerfel]

@@finestPlugins Pe-whoop!

[@DavidDoncheck]

I watch and appreciate the channel because I like coffee. But I like and respect well done science also. It’s encouraging anytime I see scientific experiments engaged with optimism AND skepticism. Science can teach us wonderful useful things, but almost never in the neat tidy way they are presented in sound bites. I think it’s something like a magic trick to present a statistical trial in a compelling way in a KZbin video. Well done

[@GodBlessCanada]

Huberman.... The king of increasing your quality of life by 2%, while simultaneously decreasing it by 10%, because you're worrying about every facet of your life instead of just enjoying it.

[@bigeye7480]

No ones forcing you to do his routine. He gives advice, and if you see that something could be applicable to you then you can follow it. Pick and choose.

[@Krytern]

​@bigeye7480 The problem is he makes health claims without even checking if it actually works, and makes money from it

[@bigeye7480]

@@Krytern he links all the research articles he sources from. As for HIS daily routines, as far as I can tell he sends you a PDF of it for free.

[@Yuliia.sergeeva]

Totally agree. Sometimes enjoying what is theoretically not good for you can be actually good for you in terms of mental health and that thing that some people call… JOY? 😅

[@Sk0lzky]

GodBlessCanada, the king of "self improvement bad because some people get obsessed or anxious because of it"

[@haythamabdel-qader6934]

James is better at data analysis and interpretation than the bunch of them internet science dweebs.

[@KT-pv3kl]

what data? a sample size of n=5 XD? has he even provided the margin of error in his "analysis"? or should I rather call it anecdotal word of mouth?

[@matfax]

This just shows that your status doesn't determine your skills and competence. But it also shows that the algorithmic overlords prefer oversimplifications, just as the audience. They like the black and white thinking.

[@matfax]

@@KT-pv3kl If you look at the charts, you will notice the error/deviations. A sample size of 5 is not far from what's used in Phase 1 trials. It depends on your power calculations and assumptions on how big the effect will be. If you estimate a vast effect, you don't need a large sample at all. Unless you have some reason to believe that ethnicity plays a role, it's still representative.

[@eypandabear7483]

@@KT-pv3kl It’s a whole lot better than the data on whose basis the original advice was given, which was none whatsoever. And bear in mind that the claimed benefit was for subjective daily wellbeing, not some sort of hidden health outcome that unfolds over 10 years. My point being: even if the effect is real, if it is so tiny that only a large study can separate it from noise, it is clearly irrelevant in everyday life.

[@wangusthewalrus5923]

Thank you so much honestly for calling Huberman out. Far too many people do not know that he is not as well respected in the scientific community as he is by the general public. He is a complete snake oil salesman and it is wonderful when big influencers like yourself have the guts to point it out and generally inform people that they need to be more critical when taking advice

[@chrismonroe4855]

This is a gem. It gives generally good advice on how to digest popular 'science' (avoid being seduced by easy answers) as well as dissecting the particular, highly complicated matter of mood as related to caffeine. It also appears to reveal Huberman, through his own responses, as a classic gaslighter. I think James is really onto something with testing the ritual v. chemical value of coffee in one's routine. Bravo for honesty, humility, transparency.

[@Danafc]

It's great to see these common generalizations being challenged! Fantastic video. I wanted to add a bit of nuance to the discussion on small sample sizes. It’s not just that we should be less confident in the results because the sample size is small-the impact of a small sample size is actually reflected in the p-value. In other words, if you had a larger group of people with the exact same range of scores, the results might have been statistically significant. To put it another way, in order to achieve statistical significance with a small sample size (like a group of five people), the differences between scores would need to be very large and consistent. Since such large differences are rare, it’s harder to achieve statistical significance with smaller samples.

[@Saminvent05]

Wanted to comment the same myself. I'd be pretty surprised to see statistical significance, especially on subjective measures, for a sample size of 5 people. Furthermore, the scoring system itself, how much "dynamic range" there is essentially which would lead to how different scores can be - such as perceived tiredness, if you had 1-10 where 10 is that you're 36h sleep deprived, hallucinating etc. then clearly you'll only have 1-2 points maximum variation on most normal days at roughly the same time of day. Because it's subjective though, it's almost impossible to say your tiredness is 7.25 for example with any level of certainty. All this being said, looking at the actual data I think there's a clear and large (non-statistically-significant) effect of caffeine vs no caffeine and while it's entirely possible it happened by chance, it is interesting enough that it would warrant a large trial, with many more people. That being said, I would expect there are probably many studies out there on caffeine pill vs placebo on whether caffeine reduces tiredness and that's getting away from the point of this study which was around morning caffeine immediately after waking. Also that wasn't mentioned but Huberman's explanation on the delayed caffeine was that apparently you keep clearing out the last of the adenosine in the first hour or so after waking, not in the last hour or so of sleep, bit surprised that was missed in this video. Personally I think the majority of any effect is due to a delayed crash to "home time" 5-6pm when people are wrapping up their work day, maybe energised by the prospect of leaving work and would have potential to mask a crash or be a better time for it to happen than during work hours.

[@kayanf]

Chemist here, and wow, we have to work so hard to isolate and observe a single mechanism happening, can you imagine if the human body could just do it for no reason? Regarding the caffeine affecting sleep, there's a theory that comes to mind for me: if all things are equal and caffeine consumption changes, maybe there's a negative effect, but when I'm on caffeine I feel more productive, I need less time between tasks, so I get more done, and then end my day more tired. We're not reactors just letting reactions happen inside us, there's always a lot more going on!

[@bigfatdynamo246]

Love to min-max my entire life like I'm doing a completely joyless video game speedrun. That's not a deeply depressing way to live at all.

[@bernard832]

At least you get to clip through walls.

[@ragefarmer]

I looped back around and minimized tedium.

[@erikzarts]

Yeah, I think the people who preach stuff like that, same as David Goggins and the like just simply love the challenges and pushing through the pain. There's nothng wrong with that but taking advice from them for most people is just unnecessary or incompatible at the very least.

[@Matt-pc9vw]

That's the cost of maintaining the energy required to manipulate 10 different girlfriends simultaneously.

[@Neenerella333]

​@Matt-pc9vw Ugh. I'm an extroverted lady person and that sounds exhausting. 😅

[@aaron_ong]

Perhaps my favorite Hoffman video among his catalog of GOAT content. This is why you are the only Patreon I support

[@Kraaketaer]

Great to see you looking into this! Whole I'm not in Huberman's audience I know a few people who are, and at the same time I've been hearing a few examples recently of where he's giving just plain wrong advice and seems to be falling prey to the all-too-familiar "I'm an expert in one field, so my takes on other things must be equally good" fallacy. Great to see a good quality response like this from you! Also, while I have frequent afternoon crashes, there's no way I'm skipping my morning coffee. I refuse to believe that would do anything good whatsoever.

[@Krytern]

It would help with your caffeine addiction. That's one way it could help.

[@Kraaketaer]

@@Krytern Did you reply to the wrong comment? I don't see how that reply applies to what i said at all

[@Krytern]

@Kraaketaer You said "I refuse to believe that would do anything good whatsoever" it's literally the last thing you wrote, so I said it could help your caffeine addiction. That's actually very typical behaviour for an alcoholic or drug addict, when you mention their addiction "That has nothing to do with what om saying!" Usually along those lines.

[@Kraaketaer]

@@Krytern Wow, there are some logical leaps you're entirely blind to here. Is the type of caffeine addiction one might get from consuming a couple of mugs of coffee a day bad? If so, how? What negative outcomes does such an addiction lead to? I can see none of any significance, at least for me. It seems like you're positing that not being mildly addicted to caffeine is good in and of itself, but that only applies if the addiction actually has negative effects. Otherwise it's an entirely neutral thing.

[@Krytern]

@Kraaketaer I should of made more clear what I meant because you seme to think I'm accusing you of being an addict shaking in corner waiting for his next cup of coffee. I just mean it can help some, in different ways. For me personally, after I got used to not relying on a coffee to wake me up, I'm naturally full of energy much earlier on the day now. I don't think not feeling great before you drink a chemical is a good thing. Being dependent on a chemical you naturally don't need, isn't a good thing. That's just for me though keep enjoying your morning coffee I'm not going to try to tell you not to, I just disagree that cutting out morning coffee doesn't "do anything good whatsoever". Getting rid of dependancy of a chemical, is a good thing.

[@prit04]

The p value not approaching statistical significance is more likely a function of small sample size rather than there NOT being a difference. It’s very possible that not drinking caffeine is contributing to more fatigue and decreased PVT scores. But it is overall reassuring that a small sample of caffeine dependent people didn’t feel a remarkable difference!

[@plwadodveeefdv]

the fact that the decaf scores were better at median and overall points in the other direction though. in this case, at least, there's no correlation, but I still wouldn't build a hypothesis that shows the opposite of what the data showed

[@Metalmachine18]

James describing Layne Norton 'getting very angry' is exactly what I needed today

[@DevinDTV]

An apt question, tested with an adequate experiment, and analyzed with sufficient rigor, and some common sense/logical thinking. And the presentation didn't get bogged down with unnecessary details. You earned a sub.

[@thedanalcantara]

Watching this while brewing my afternoon coffee

[@pimacanyon6208]

to take care of your afternoon crash, right?

[@thehalfa95]

I was really confused for a sec because what do you mean afternoon coffee? It's morning! Then I remembered that the time isn't the same everywhere in the world. I suppose I need my morning coffee!

[@Claire-f]

I love that you used Layne Norton. He’s one of the few people I trust on the internet

[@Secretlyanothername]

Layne is good

[@mkf628]

does he personally know a navy seal, have a protocol for breathing, sleeping and farting and lift tho?

[@Claire-f]

@@mkf628 Sorry Layne, cant be a verified biochemist without a peer reviewed farting protocol

[@mkf628]

@@Claire-f alas, thought so.

[@jaunedroite]

Never heard of him before, but as a scientist myself he gives me a lot of red flags. There's a certain type of scientist who think that just because there are experts in one very specific subject, they are entitled to talk about _everything_ as an expert. But they do this without the actual scientific approach and care that one would expect. My superficial impression is that Huberman falls into this category as well.

[@jerrypearl1427]

Great video James, thank you for all the effort by you and your team. Love the quote “be careful of simple mechanisms impacting complex outcomes”. Makes so much sense. 👌👍

[@MrCathrys]

Hi James, love the content! I teach good experimental practices at university in Switzerland. I just want to raise the point that a p>0.05 does NOT signify there is no difference between the two groups - it means the difference is so small we cannot conclude the difference is significant. It unfortunately means, by itself, that the study is inconclusive. This is mostly due to the sample size being truly small. There might be ways to get around it, but it does not support either way. I hope it helps - again, I absolutely loved the heck out of this!

[@josephdesantis2986]

But I’d assume he’s using some sort of repeated measures anova. I’d think even with five, if they are all taking 30 samples that should be an adequate amount of power, no?

[@MrCathrys]

@@josephdesantis2986 even if it was 15 measures x block, that helps.. however rmAnova (or even better multilevel models) are not equipped for testing "no difference" scenarios. You need either equivalence testing or Bayesian stats to provide evidence of the null. Here, they don't do that, so the only conclusion is they cannot conclude there are sig. differences

[@gabrielscott239]

The "and I hope you have a great day..." never gets old.

[@stevenmqcueen7576]

One of your best videos, James. Indeed, one of the best videos I’ve seen in quite some time.

[@SasCologne]

Interesting video! Perhaps in the future consider not using red/green for graphs as that's the most common colourblindness. There are various color palettes for graphs that avoid this issue. I know the text is there but why not choose two different colours that still get the point across :)

[@biffin9039]

Huberman has a totally different reason for delaying morning coffee from what I've heard from other doctors and health aficionados. Others say an immediate morning cup may reduce your body's ability to wake naturally, which can make your groggy morning worse. I completely agree that it's all very complicated and ultimately is probably a very minor effect. Just get more sleep guys.

[@w0nd3rlu573r]

I've been consuming internet science for over 20 years. Thank you for exposing me to this person, of which I have never heard before, and will never be interested to learn from.

[@u_j134s]

Really love you James. I don't watch every video but the quality is always top notch when I do. You should post on your secondary channel too, it's been a year!

[@pmbrig]

When you do an experiment and get a P-value of 0.05, that means that there a 5% chance the result was due to chance alone. Turning this around, this means that 1 out of 20 studies with a "significant result" is actually due to chance. I was taught that this was why you should never believe one study until it is replicated, ideally more than once. And that's before you get into whether a statistically significant study is clinically significant. Which includes the question of how large the effect size is - a variable may be well established to correlate with an outcome, but there is a big difference between an effect at the level of 3% vs. 45%. And if there is a 15% chance of significant side effects, then a 45% chance of good outcome may be worth the risk, while a 3% chance may not. P-values are commonly misunderstood.

[@incredible_general]

This is definitely a misinterpretation of p-values. I suggest treating p-values as just a measure of strength of evidence against the null hypothesis (in the case of this video the null is that effect is zero)

[@jsmit9484]

Andrew Huberman spreads a lot of good information, but he also spreads a lot of misinformation and speculation. He cites a lot of articles that are barely peer reviewed and are are hard to replicate. His logic is solid, but logic often doesn't hold up in practice.

[@kein370]

Sophistry🤔

[@pimacanyon6208]

@@johnnysilverhand1733 ah yes, the ONLY people who are allowed to read about and discuss science are REAL SCIENTISTS!

[@Matt-pc9vw]

​@@johnnysilverhand1733 Then I guess a youtuber barista just BTFO'd huberman in his own field of "expertise." Pretty sad, lol

[@spuckuk7039]

@@johnnysilverhand1733 You really don't know his history lol

[@m_cabral]

Sounds like Science Joe Rogan.

[@alancash6420]

Here we see the coffee guy doing a far better and more nuanced explanation of the science than most of the online science explainers. As Wheatus correctly stated, i'm just a complex meatbag baby, like you.

[@josephjankowski1153]

I really love the fact that you made the effort to test this recommendation, James. It's always great to see some real experimental data. Though, I think the fact that the total caffeine intake differed so much between the days where your subjects had decaf or not in the morning added a confounding variable to this study. The intent is delay caffeine intake for the first 90-120 minutes, not reduce overall caffeine intake, but that seems like it was the unintended effect. Thanks for at least being totally transparent about that. Of course, designing a study where you can delay intake and keep it totally blind would be more difficult. Personally, I'm not a fan of Huberman, but I heard about this advice, and I had implemented it into my own routine to see if it works. As someone who is sensitive to caffeine, and struggles with afternoon crashes a lot, I actually found it makes a big difference in reducing my afternoon crashes. Of course, that is all anecdotal, and I'm just one person, but I would hesitate to make people think that this method doesn't work at all, just based on the results of this one study. In the end, I think people should just try it for themselves and see if it works for them or not. It's not like it's harmful advice or difficult to do, and it costs literally nothing. I don't mean to be too critical, though. Absolutely love seeing this content!