Uncovering Corruption From Spiritual Leaders & Health Experts | Scott Carney

[@hollydancergirl4]

I love how honest Dr. Mike is and how he challenges people's perspective respectfully. Thank you Doctor Mike for your content and respectful demeanor.

[@MudderToad]

Very demure, and mindful 🤣

[@Bumblebee_LITTLEONE_19]

@@MudderToad omg🤣😂very demure very mindful😂🤣

[@raidtheferry]

@@hollydancergirl4 yeah. So 'demure' 😅 okay

[@grizzlies15]

Just a heads up. Dr. Mike was also found to be spreading falsehoods. So it goes both ways.

[@meimoticon.0.791]

@@grizzlies15Was he spreading it with malicious intent..?

[@RyChOr2005]

Can't tell you how much I appreciate the ongoing push from Mike to normalize the phrase "I don't know" in the medical field.

[@Adam_K14]

i feel this because he's coming from ' the real world' he is doctor this isn't his main important thing (online guy) so theres no agenda or doesn't seem to be vs most these gurus or whatever expert they are "online guys camera tv guys' they need to be seen on social media on tv for there job there business there narrative this guy is a journalist ,fame clout ,viral is basically how they are successful. which means a dishonest agenda driven narrative, probably.... unlike like dr mike he's a medical doctor he has his patients he has outside 'the of the Internet' financial and moral reasons to be more genuine than these guys. who may have more of an agenda

[@Toasteater97]

I’m not a doctor, but I am a new nurse and I will tell my patients that I don’t know or am unsure but that I can try and figure it out for them.

[@addisonkennedy7111]

He literally did a Ted Talk on the subject, it's great if you haven't seen it

[@alexp7869]

As someone with extremely rare medical conditions that most people don’t know about including doctors, hearing a doctor say “I don’t know” has always made me so much more comfortable than when doctors have said they do know when they in fact obviously didn’t know at all what they were talking about. Saying I don’t know is the first step to learning and then knowing, no one knows everything no matter how amazing they are, and there’s nothing wrong with that and the stigma around professionals (especially people in the medical field) knowing absoloutly everything needs to be broken. It’s literally human not to know everything, if you knew everything the world would be a pretty boring place. 🤷🏻‍♀️

[@ruadrem]

Doctor Mike’s desire to avoid ad hominem arguments is admirable - wish all humans could be so civil!

[@kennyprice5017]

@@ruadrem this entire conversation was that lol

[@vermithor51ac]

Scott went to this interview like a housewife wanting to gossip about the neighbour's affair. I'm glad Dr. Mike acted like a real man and put this grifter in his place.

[@kennyprice5017]

@@vermithor51ac except the only housewife that actually deserved criticism is Sinclair for falsifying scientific data the rest of his critiques of Peter and Andrew were just personal attacks nothing to do with health and wellness lol

[@fernandosilva6295]

@@kennyprice5017 Huberman certainly has things to be criticized, but calling him a psychopath is just buffoonery

[@Galdring]

Absolutely. I think this trend among intellectuals to accuse those they disagree with of having diagnoses is very dangerous. For one thing, diagnoses are meant to help people, not stigmatize them.

[@mccardsfan]

"I feel like it is so hard to look for meaning in why other people are doing things. I feel like we're not even good at figuring this out for ourselves." - Dr. Mike making an amazing point. Really good conversation and Dr. Mike did a great job of challenging and defending without being a strawman.

[@pleasedontwatchthese9593]

Tbh I feel like Mike sounded offended. But I understand why, just before that the guest was saying fame was an illness and well make is famous. So Mike felt like he was being judged too generally. I think that's fair to point out Mike's part. Though I kind of also get the guests point speaking from a general perspective, tbh I do think the guest learned something from this in a good way.

[@ShilohShepherdmom]

Reminds me of a quote from Matt Haig. Under the heading of "Things that Won't Make You Happier: Waiting on people to understand you when they don't even understand themselves." I think this idea is equally liberating for both people being judged and those doing the judging. Reality check served.

[@AlexandraGutierrezD]

Dr. Mike should do a podcast with Legal Eagle about the ways in which recent Supreme Court decisions would get rid of health regulating non-partial governmental agencies or allow for the placement on non-experts in these roles and the impact it would likely have on the healthcare system!

[@victoriabarclay3556]

Excellent idea

[@katepeterson7544]

SO NEEDED!! He has a massive platform and people need to understand the threats to healthcare in this country coming down the pike if the American public (voters) don’t understand what’s truly at stake here.

[@alexduenas1535]

Great Idea, they already have done Collab's before,. hope he sees this

[@andreasrydstrom9112]

Wow, doctor Mike is doing a really good job of checking Carneys thinking without being rude and even then he's not satisfied with how he handled the interview. He deserves all the views and all the followers! :D

[@DoctorEyeHealth]

Oh this should be a good one! I personally don’t like the term influencer, I think of myself as an educator. But it’s a tough world on social media and while I don’t have a problem with health professionals working with industry (such as supplements for example), I do get frustrated by inflammatory or inflated health claims, especially when they don’t give warnings or recommend to see a local health professional first.

[@lucymaltez5336]

Thank you Dr. Mike for the interview. Very brave of you and I love that you pushed back while also listening respectfully. One reason I can't watch a full episode of Hubberman is his constant interruptions, oversharing, and having to always showcase his knowledge. Personally, I like how you give people the space to speak.

[@lokipokey]

Dr. Mike's fame seems to have inspired him toward the Spider-Man model: " with great power comes great responsibility." Because he's aware of the size of his following, he's even more careful to try to give accurate info. I really love this long form content with experts, even if they are not scientific experts.

[@Superhero-Motivation]

I love when I see that Spider-Man philosophy in people!

[@greenblue6935]

@@lokipokey lol he's brought by the pharmaceutical industry, remember he was recommending everyone go out and get the COVID jab! And now look what's happened, so called conspiracy theorists where right all along, and now young people are dying.

[@fryingpanvan]

I think the COVID controversy might have been a great push

[@lokipokey]

I think you mean a push in his caution about always trying to be as accurate as possible, not so much of a push toward his fame. He got that from his looks 🤣 and the "sexiest doctor" tag. But where I heard of him was from a medical source, MedPage Today. They're a great source of the latest info (and occasional misinfo debunking) on medicine. They provide links to his videos from time to time. Anyone can subscribe, but they cut off comments from people who can't prove their medical professional credentials.

[@greenblue6935]

@@lokipokey he hasn't apologised for pushing the clot shot on young healthy people, how many thousands of lives has he ruined?!

[@ch.k4580]

Dear Dr. Mike and the Checkup Podcast Team, Thank you for this incredible podcast episode with Scott. I have watched some of his videos, specifically those about Dr. Andrew Huberman. As a scientist myself, I always strive to stick to the data and avoid giving medical advice when communicating science to the public. For me, scientific integrity is key, and saying "I don't know" or "there is no data on this, so we need more research" is the most honest approach. Of course, people may get frustrated, but in the end, we cannot solve medical issues with just one experiment or in one go. There are so many nuances and perspectives to consider. Untangling these complex questions can take years, decades, or even a lifetime. I am learning from the expert himself! Thank you, Dr. Mike, for being critical and encouraging us to think more deeply about what we believe. In my opinion, you've done a great job, and I commend you for the disclaimer at the beginning of the episode and your thoughts at the end. I don’t think it was a problem that you couldn't fully address the scientific "inaccuracies" of science or medical communicators, as that would have been more appropriate for a scientist to cover. I’m looking forward to your next episode, especially the deep dive! Thanks again, and I wish you all the best.

[@pricklywiggles]

I am not a big fan of Huberman or Wim Hoff but Scott's language and overall approach to them in this episode just feels wrong and personal. I don't know what's happening behind the scenes there but he's the one that ends up sounding like a 'narcissist' talking about how he helped 'make them', a bit grandiose for a journalist. I'm glad Dr. Mike added the disclaimer at the beginning, it shows that at least in hindsight he had the self awareness to realize that something went off the rails here and that it doesn't fit the kind of integrity we've come to expect from the content in his interviews.

[@Rosalie-yn1bt]

This ^^ exactly you put my thoughts into words. This guys stories were so biased, he seems to know how to tell a good story to get a rise out of people

[@jml8409]

Agreed. If you attack Lex Fridman of all people… you’re invalidated in my eyes

[@shawnsanchez7105]

​@@jml8409 if you think Lex Friedman is exempt from criticism, you might want to reevaluate your own biases.

[@qqq111444]

He comes across and having his own skeletons and deflecting like mad

[@ayosam956]

so a journalist 😂😂😂​@@Rosalie-yn1bt

[@chamClowder]

Dr. Mike, thank you for being conscientious, consistent, careful, and corny.

[@KatieDeGo]

The essential 4 C's 😊

[@qqq111444]

Dr mikes facial expression throughout this cracked me up. His expression seem like he’s thinking “really?”

[@rachaelbickel575]

"too much of anything is bad!" Starting at the age of 2, I drove this into my son's brain. He is now 19 and I'm constantly reminding him of it. He also is constantly telling me how I was right in many situations because of it. And even when he slips up and has too much or something LOL he knows where he went wrong and corrects it.

[@tm3578-t5x]

Scott seems to me at least to have quite sweeping opinions about the medical field and online health industry without having a good enough grasp on how it actually works. To not know how double blind trials work but to cite a bunch of super specific studies seems baffling to me. Seems to indicate a questionable understanding of research in general. However this episode was very respectful and balanced from Mike. Thanks Mike

[@Lynore_Marie]

I have so much respect for Dr. Mike, taking on these questionable topics, and when pushing back, does so in a respectful way.

[@greatapeadventure]

This guy comes of as a guru decoding gurus

[@andreasrydstrom9112]

Meditation is a dangerous thing... ;D

[@dijon0810]

@@andreasrydstrom9112it sure can be lol

[@kristianperez7288]

“I made him famous” “I was the first__” “I am a smart guy” etc… doesn’t give me the right vibes.

[@joojoobss]

I’m only 11 mins in and heard a lot of the same things… he criticized Huberman as a grandiose narcissist yet within 11 mins this guy has already said things like…. “My grandfather was the first to perform X surgery”, “you can’t do this now because of my work” goodness……..

[@kerriecu2]

Red flag alert when he said that. 😮

[@sgcarney]

I attended his first public training session when there were only 2 other people there. I was the first American to write a feature about him. Wim credits me giving his first major exposure in his VICE and Yes Theory videos. I climbed Mt Kilimanjaro with him shirtless. I wrote a NYT bestselling book about Wim, and then did almost 300 interviews in mainstream media about him. SO yeah, I think I have a leg to stand on when saying I was pretty important to his rise.

[@bobbyj731]

Exactly what I'm hearing. He sounds like a BS artist.

[@ghfdsgfhs8ughjnv]

I read parts of his article on Wim Hoff and he often frames Wim Hoff's words extremely dishonestly. Stopped reading after that, and now seeing this as well makes me know to avoid him in the future.

[@katieniify]

Finally finished this video! It took me a while to get through the whole thing. I appreciated Dr. Mike’s little disclaimer at the end there, but I don’t think it’s his fault the conversation went off the rails. He tried asking the right questions but Scott kept spinning off in unexpected directions. I’m a scientist so I follow Dr. Mike’s mode of communication much more easily than I did Scott’s. Having read quite a few of those investigative pieces, my sense is that the writers are weaving a story for us (supported by facts, but a story nonetheless) and they use literary devices like suspense to keep us reading all the way to the end. Scott is clearly a story teller. Many times throughout the podcast, he admitted he didn’t know the specific details to support what he was saying. You don’t hear scientists talking like that. I point that out because it illustrates that the narrative story telling is the most important aspect of the communication for Scott. I found it a little disconcerting to watch the conversational volley between these two because their communication styles are so different. This podcast would make an excellent homework assignment for students studying communication or linguistics! Anyway, heads up to regular Dr. Mike viewers that this video is different from the ones we’re used to from his channel. It’s not a good or bad thing, but I had to break it up and only watch 10 or 15 minutes at a time because I kept losing the thread of what was going on and what the overarching points were. As always, keep doing what you do, Dr. Mike! Scientific literacy isn’t great in America, so it’s so awesome that you put the time in to educate people!

[@teachersusan3730]

Very well said. This guy talks and talks - when it comes to facts he admits he is not sure ….

[@dijon0810]

@@teachersusan3730only some of the medical ones since he himself didn’t finish the grad school

[@jondorr4011]

I've been saying this for a long time and ill continue to keep saying it. An individual can can have insights in things and fields they are not trained in, but one should really only be taking advice from a professional in said field. Seriously, a mechanic can have a telescope but that doesn't make him an astronomer.

[@vinvin4884]

This is not exactly an apt analogy. When you are involved in the Sciences, whether that be through family medicine, neurobiology, ophthalmology or any other science, you develop and refine a set of interdisciplinary skills. These include, but are not limited to: - Proficiency in designing experiments, conducting research, and gathering relevant data from various sources, including scientific literature. - Skills in interpreting and analyzing quantitative and qualitative data, identifying patterns, and drawing meaningful conclusions. - Understanding of statistical methods, which are crucial for assessing the validity of studies, interpreting results, and evaluating the significance of data. - The capability to approach complex problems methodically, breaking them down into manageable parts, and developing evidence-based solutions. - A strong foundation in scientific concepts and terminology, enabling one to understand and engage with scientific literature across different fields. - Understanding how to design experiments and studies that minimize biases and errors, ensuring that results are reliable and reproducible. - Experience with evaluating the quality and reliability of research through peer review, assessing the methodology, data, and conclusions of scientific papers. These all become part of your "toolbox," and you are able to apply them to other disciplines in which you may not have formal training. With this in mind, your analogy would be more accurate if it went something like this: A mechanic has a set of skills (like the ability to break down the telescope into various parts, the ability to understand why different lenses produce different results) and knowledge of the fundamental scientific principles behind those skills. And while that doesn't make him an astronomer, it allows him to apply those scientific principles to different fields in order to more accurately understand research presented to him. In reality, this still isn't a good analogy, because the gap between a mechanic and an astronomer is vastly greater than the difference between someone trained in neurobiology and someone trained in a different medical science. Huberman doesn't claim to be an expert in ANY of the fields in which his guests are trained. He simply filters the data presented to him by these "experts," through the scientific training he has received. This isn't a stretch. There is also a rich history of scientists making discoveries in fields in which they received little to no formal training: Gregor Mendel was a monk who was trained in physics and mathematics but not biology. He went on to discovery of the basic principles of heredity, which became the foundation of modern genetics. Henrietta Swan Leavitt did not receive formal astronomical training like her peers and yet she discovered the relationship between the luminosity and period of Cepheid variable stars, which became a key method for measuring cosmic distances. Michael Ventris was an architect by training, not a linguist. He successfully deciphered Linear B, an ancient script used by the Mycenaean civilization, which was one of the earliest forms of Greek. John Harrison was a self-taught carpenter and clockmaker. He solved the problem of calculating longitude at sea by inventing the marine chronometer, a breakthrough that had a profound impact on navigation. There are SOO many more examples: significant contributions to science can come from those who are not formally trained in the specific field of their discoveries, showcasing the importance of transferable skills, curiosity, and interdisciplinary thinking.

[@TheSwauzz]

And what if that mechanic has poured hours and hours, dedicating weeks and months, maybe even years of his time learning about astronomy, and directly references experts. Things are not so clear cut anymore. Your view is very old school and not in line with modern access to information. The emphasis on someone being an expert is not nearly as important as it used to be because so much information is out there for anyone to learn. You no longer have to attend a university to be just as educated, if not more educated, than someone with a degree. Being able to discern who is unbiased and truthful, or who is being selective with their statements, or who has a personal agenda is way more important these days. Because you will never be able to stop the information train now. Obviously, certain careers are an exception, mainly ones where most learning is done practically. But, for example, I've been learning about medicine for 20+ years now through my own issues and also my personal interest, and I keep up with and challenge my doctors' knowledge all the time.

[@jondorr4011]

@@TheSwauzz I would say that the mechanic knows more about astronomy than I do. That doesn't mean I'm going to give anything he says about astronomy more credence than someone who has a degree in the subject. You are right in that we do live in an age with unprecedented access to information, however that doesn't mean that a person actually understands the material fully which is why we have schools. Now you may have been learning about medicine for a long time and you may have a very good understanding about your own medical issues, but I'm still not going to you for medical advice.

[@abunlover]

@@TheSwauzz I think that's what is colloquially called "knowing enough to be dangerous". You know enough to be able to have intelligent conversations on topics, ask thoughtful and challenging questions of experts, to find good resources. The dangerous part of that philosophy, however, can be sounding more knowledgable than you are, convincing others, or even yourself, you are qualified to provide advice. It's fantastic that you have learned as much as you have, can advocate for yourself with your doctors and health. But that amount of knowledge does make it imperative to recognize your own limits when it comes to sharing that knowledge with others. As they touched on in the video, some of the influencers spreading misinformation, genuinely may believe what they say and believe in their own knowledge. Credentials aren't everything, but they are important, especially today BECAUSE of the availability of information. How does that mechanic know the experts they're referencing are experts? How did the mechanic verify the information they've spent years studying? What materials were they studying? How old was the information? Have they kept up with the newest information coming out like experts actively working in the field do?

[@therabbithat]

@@vinvin4884 I think Huberman is a really good example of how this is not the case. He regularly misunderstands studies, either he misunderstands them or doesn't read them? And when his misunderstandings are correct by experts he ignores them

[@lexiegutierrez3843]

My favorite Dr. Mike interviews are the ones where he and the other person don't agree on everything. I don't think this is a bad episode. Scott's an investigative journalist, not a doctor, so it was interesting seeing how he weaves together numerous pieces of information about a person / case to reach his decision. I do think it leans toward conspiracy at some points; I'm much more inline with Dr. Mike's mindset, but it was interesting.

[@DoctorEyeHealth]

SO happy you mentioned antibiotics are used way too often for conjunctivitis!! Thank you 🎉

[@bilezmom11]

I agree with your epilogue. I was very unimpressed with a man who purports to be a fact checker and turns to you and says you should check the statements he is espousing. He begins by stating he has no medical training and then proceeds to diagnose people. I have never heard of this man before and I am very unimpressed with his lack of professionalism. Ironically, he displayed the very behavior he denigrates. His comments were opinions that he did not support with facts or the education to preach. His closing comment even included a pitch for his heath guru sales.

[@m420-nd1if]

I saw an interesting interview 😂

[@ItsJennNotJenny]

Exactly this

[@werewolfcountry]

There's nothing wrong with saying "This needs double checking" during a casual talk like this one. I would be more worried if someone were too sure of themselves. I think people are asking for too much from what is clearly an unedited discussion. Most of Dr Mike's usual videos can be edited.

[@l.g.8028]

Dr. Mike, don’t apologize, this was an enjoyable interview, both of you have different backgrounds and experiences and both are very passionate and with good points of view. We the audience, must watch and listen, and should do our own research and analysis before jumping into any conclusions in regard of the videos we watch, books we read and so on. I think your guest had a wonderful time, we all heard new things, to me, it was the conversation between two intelligent men.

[@marianacostea]

I have to commend Dr. Mike for being able to sit through this conversation and not straight-up tell this dude off. He called the most rational people I know on social media all Psychopaths. Plus... he has a lot of medical opinions for someone who has no medical background. It's because of these kinds of conversations that I am just now starting to watch Dr. Mike's videos on health things, while I've been watching Huberman and Friedman and those other "psychopaths" since 2022.

[@halimakoug7424]

I love how Dr. Mike takes the time and effort to make these podcasts and how honest and respectful he is when challenging people's ideas. thx :)

[@LillaTwiggy]

Don’t know who Scott is, but I’m sure not going to pursue any other content from him.

[@CosmicDialect]

For real though wtf..its like if TMZ was a person

[@zuu1701]

Why?

[@mitchellbell248]

When he referred to an industry of skulduggery as people digging up graves, he lost me. He's a journalist his one job is to use words well to tell stories, he should probably know how to use words in their correct contexts

[@kabob21]

I’m subscribed to his channel, his content is actually really good. Judge him by his content, not vibes

[@Huamantanga11]

​@@kabob21Right?

[@Burgman22]

This is the first I have seen Scott Carney. First impression is he almost seems like an anti influencer but not in a good way. Like he knows a little about a lot but is not an expert in anything. In this interview he is cherry picking some innocuous and some harmful but irrelevant information to push his agenda. I am going to go down a bit of a rabbit hole but first impression is that he is not any better than the influencers he is speaking out against.

[@JH-lz4dh]

Yep

[@janevawter9297]

Precisely.

[@sanamo86]

Exactly dr Mike asks him a scientific questions nd he responds with Rafiki quotes

[@gagegraen877]

I found this guest to be.. frustrating. I love that Dr. Mike defined a gossip journalist with parameters this guy clearly displayed the whole interview, and he responded by saying there is functionality no difference between that and investigative. I'm not sure what happened more, him speaking to something with complete authority, or him reminding us that he is not an authority on these subjects.

[@heloramos82]

@@Burgman22 when the whole AH controversy started I found his page because I wanted to understand what was happening. I made a comment he didn't like which was basically that maybe Andrew is not a good boyfriend but it doesn't mean he is a bad scientist. He accused me of not being a woman, of making comments from a fake profile and then my comments disapeared.... He is just bitter AH didn't care about him, part of his argument agaist AH is that once they would go on a hiking trip that should last the entire weekend but Andrew had to work so it just lasted a couple hours....

[@timmorgan3164]

I understand where this conversation is going, but from my perspective I started listening to people like Andrew huberman and Peter attia. Andrew huberman series with Andy galpin really helped me in the areas of nutrition and resistance training at 48 years old through what I've learned on these shows I've lost over 40 lb lowered my cholesterol and increase my skeletal muscle. My joints Don't hurt anymore and I feel fantastic. All of that through actual scientific backed approaches I learned on the shows that are being demonized here. I think ice baths are for crazy people but most sports teams have an ice bath in their gym so I take that kind of thing with the grain of salt.

[@john12mclaughlin]

This is probably the best discussion on health influencers I've ever listened to. Dr. Mike and Scott have such a balanced and thoughtful approach to the topic.

[@aprilchavez6040]

I’ve never listened to Andrew Huberman for his personality, I watched it for the scientific data he presents, questions & input that he always explains is personal.

[@AnnaLorris]

This is great. If you want to learn some eye-opening truths about health industry "Health and Beauty Mastery" is a must-read.

[@ChrisPaqueta]

I heard about that

[@FireOElijahMC]

Truly a good book

[@raidtheferry]

I just LOVE how _'demure'_ he is!! 🥰😍🤩☺

[@romankoller7150]

Bot

[@girlabouttown9294]

This guy is fluffy AF. Very confident but totally winging it

[@FrancyneFoxman]

Just heard the last 15 minutes or so .....Dr Mike, I think you handled yourself and the interview very well as it got quite dicey, at times, particularly at the end. Whew! All the best to Scott Carney. I think this interview will 'break him open' in a way he hasn't been before. Albeit possibly quite painful for him, many blessings will ensue. 🙏💕

[@Mary-tj5qx]

Dr. Mike is friggin' brilliant. So much integrity. A rare thing.

[@MrWillTruman]

It would be really interesting having Huberman on the podcast. I think it would be fair and we will see a very good conversation.

[@psyaviah]

Thanks for being actively retrospective and including this into your podcast. It's a great example to let people see that process. It's one of the biggest reasons I listen to this podcast, because of these introspective moments, being reflective, being reminded of the process of critical thinking (and how hard it can be).

[@SikDubzz]

This dude is oblivious… he’s doing everything he’s criticizing while he’s criticizing it. That’s crazy

[@pleasedontwatchthese9593]

What do you mean by that? I actually found him reasonably and willing to learn mistakes. I like this better than two people agreeing on everything or both people walking away learning nothing.

[@momekh]

@@SikDubzz yes I noticed that too

[@momekh]

@@pleasedontwatchthese9593 quite a few examples... He makes a big claim about being a truth seeker and then casually admits that his sources are at best heresy. He mentions how wimhoff method removed his "raging illness" then still calls all of his work a grift. And to the comment's point, he criticises people making money while selling his books that make him money. His journalism is equal to going after his friends. He says that these grifters all say that they are doing it for the greater good and how hypocritical that is, then goes on to say exactly that with his seeking of the truth and all that.

[@mohammadnoorani6342]

@@momekh exactly, I've watched couple of huberman's videos, although you can't garentee the content 100% but you can appreciate the effort he puts in, unlike those who react to tiktoks

[@Debbie338]

@@momekhHuberman is a quack. He’s been debunked by science many times.

[@juanmanuelalmirabauta9526]

Thanks Dr. Mike this probably was a very challenging interview. You are such a good educator.

[@missbrains7281]

Not sure why so many negative comments…it is just a conversation, with questions and answers and he Always prefaces his answers with information. It looks like an intelligent conversation. Again, not sure what people are freaking out about.

[@TheRyt123]

Genuinely learn so much from Doctor Mike's videos ✔️✅

[@manucsharma]

Mutual interest can lead to mutual delusions.

[@0m13]

In Indian tradition, meditation is not a "commodity" that is handed out like candy to just about anyone; the scriptures talk at great lengths about the pitfalls of the spiritual path including possibility of psychosis. Traditionally, meditation techniques were taught and practiced under the tutelage of an experienced master who has gone through all the experiences themselves and reached the ultimate state. "Guru Parampara" (literally translating to "Tradition or Lineage of Gurus") is an integral component of spiritual practice. In addition, there are supplementary practices governing to strengthen the body, mind and emotions to handle the rigors of advanced practices; the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali list them succinctly.

[@the11382]

I have no doubt that the practices exist, but I have seen too little emphasis on the body-mind connection. In rare cases, the body is handwaved away as transient.

[@ItsJennNotJenny]

I think that Scott wants to be an expert on some of these subjects and is outside of his scope in this conversation. I think Dr. Mike was respectful and was pushing back which was absolutely necessary. I appreciate the disclaimer at the beginning, which gave me a better assessment on the dialog displayed. Scott also comes off as gossipy which is against what Dr. Mike is about. Kudos to Dr. Mike..

[@tomsmithtomsmith]

I really appreciate Dr Mike's thoughtful and intelligent responses to Scott's statements and accusations. Scott was complaining that these gurus take a bit of science they find and make something bigger out of it..... without even directly saying so, Mike played the role of an unbiased mirror that showed Scott that he was being biased and doing the same tactics these gurus use. Scott not having much to his arguments other than the whole 'I saw something online - I dont know a lot about it but, based on that , you cant really trust my former friends" --- and he just keeps circling back to "and then theres the Huberman sex scandal." ..... and just when it would grow irritating and intolerable, Mike would reframe things and pose great questions back to Scott.. well done.

[@akjessicad]

As a Journalist, putting yourself in your piece complete with name calling like "narcissist" and "psychopath" screams personal drama. I can't stop thinking about something Scott said in the beginning of this video when talking about Wim Hof. He repeated takes credit for Wim's fame, "I made him famous". Dude went there more than once. This drips with jealousy and ego. This is something I picked up on many times when Scott speaks about Huberman and Wim. If you want to be a respected journalist you'll report the facts, free from opinion or it becomes your personal thing. And podcasters are not Journalist.

[@kellyalves756]

Yeah, just state what happened without interpretation.

[@ItsJennNotJenny]

Also the fact that he didn't have his facts straight when talking about these topics.

[@hkr667]

"I'm not a psychologist so I can't diagnose narcissism, but he's totally a huge narcissist. But I'm a journalist that follows ethics."

[@FrancyneFoxman]

He appears to be self aware, willing to accept accountability, hear another's point of view and open to evolving. Better than most.

[@ViCT0RiA6]

Dr. Mikes interviews are the only ones i enthusiastically always watch from start to finish without skipping through

[@puntrikayuktasevi9550]

Your podcast is invigorating and eye-opening. As a Buddhist, what happened to the woman after she thought she's enlightened happens sometimes. Dr. Mike's point on pre-existing mental conditions is one thing. Also, misconceptions about enlightenment without proper guidance and unhealthy coping mechanisms to the pursuit of enlightenment as a way to escape are 2 important factors.

[@belindamarcus5438]

I really appreciate your transparency, honesty, and evidence based informational approach!! As a fellow physician trying to pass on helpful and accurate information to my patients, our medical system needs what you do!

[@Kausha_likes]

This might not have been the conversation Dr.Mike wanted, but I found it so relatable as a Philosophical discussion between the Sceptic and the Jaded. 🖤

[@werewolfcountry]

Yes I believe the reactions to this conversation were slightly hyperbolic considering this man is a journalist. He speaks eloquently and is passionate about what he reads but I wouldn’t expect him to have the methodology of an MD!

[@sissi1520]

I do Wim Hof breathing method using his 'App' for over 2 years and I never skipped a day! I do 8 rounds in the morning and 8 rounds at night. I have asthma and this is a game changer for me! This method cleared the mucus in my lungs.

[@therabbithat]

of course, just don't do it in water.

[@jamesengland7461]

Dr. Mike, my observation is that you're in your role as a doctor, with the goal of treating every patient without judgment, and with the goal of raising the level of mental health awareness and accuracy. You don't make value judgment on medical or mental health patients, and that's what is right and ethical for your profession. You want to make sure that there has been a proper exam process with a mental health professional with regard to any diagnoses. Scott is in a different realm, and is under no ethical obligation to protect those he investigates, nor a medical- level of obligation to properly diagnose mental illness, as is also the case with the general public. While he or I may conclude someone is a psychopath, our label should not be meant as a pejorative or insult, but as a warning that this person exhibits certain traits which should caution others against dealing intimately with them. We're not the professional tasked with treatment of this person, so any clinical diagnosis is not only beyond our purview, but none of our business, but our purpose isn't clinical anyway. On the other hand, while you may treat every patient, you would be remiss if you didn't make evaluations of patients, whether they may be neglected or abused, abusing others, trying to obtain narcotics or other drugs, or a danger to you or your coworkers. You would take the necessary steps within your role to deal with those conditions. I think you did make progress with Scott in redirecting his thoughts towards fame being a risk factor rather than a mental illness, and towards him making more clinically accurate statements in the future. Your profession is interested in a patient's medical history, occupational and living conditions with regards to informing treatment; Scott's is interested in history of pattern of behavior, damage AND benefit that may have resulted, and evaluating whether this person is a danger to others in the future. Analogous, within limits.

[@sgcarney]

well-said.

[@naveera3461]

wonderful comment. i think you are one of the only people whose comment i have read so far who actually has a nuanced understanding of this podcast episode. thank you for using critical thinking skills, unlike some others lol

[@jamesengland7461]

@@naveera3461 thank you; that's very kind!

[@jamesengland7461]

@@sgcarney thank you! I really enjoyed listening to you.

[@isa.sharif]

This is one of the best comments that do Mr Scott Carney justice I really liked this whole episode; not all discussions end with all sides agreeing on everything, and I don't even consider that they had "too much" conflict, it's just that the aspects that the journalist investigates and works on intersect with the physician's, but are not identical to them A journalist giving his opinion and analysis of the facts to make predictions, and to approach future events with a different attitude, is not much different from a medical doctor changing his approach and plan of management, even going against some typical protocols, if he noticed an unusual pattern that doesn't add up, e.g. diagnosing malingering, factitious, or drug seeking behavior And even though everyone claims (and usually aspires) to always "follow the science" and "give others the benefit of the doubt", they (and we) always have some prejudgments and biases that are difficult (albeit not impossible) to change

[@ulyssesgamingtv-digitronex8924]

1:01:00 I really like the parts where Dr. Mike and Scott Carney give perspective and make it clear where they are coming from when they are elaborating on a subject! That can’t be forgotten if you want to get as close to the facts as possible, and to pause when trying to rationalize to decide whether something is promising.

[@DonaldAMisc]

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it." ~ Upton Sinclair 🙌

[@knowmoreknowless]

also difficult if a man's identity depends on it.

[@katieniify]

“Truth wrapped in a lie.” Wow - a nuanced understanding and explanation of reality. That’s why I like watching Dr. Mike! He explains things simply but doesn’t dumb it down for us.

[@julesniner1766]

I have to be honest, I started watching Dr Mike after a short finding him adorably attractive. Became a subscriber due to his thinking and communication to the viewers. Always interesting to see what is produced next. I also would like to add that my mother is one of those patients now, where if her Dr tells her to watch for the side effects, she "develops" them.

[@chiara7886]

I Just want to say thank you to Dr Mike Thank you so much for everything you do I'm so grateful for all your work It is invaluable Especially for people who didn't have access to certain levels of education and never had a chance to be in certain spaces Hearing you speak has helped me and is helping me so much understand so many crucial things And it's not just about learning the "what", but also the "how" How we think How we approach things How we talk about things And that, makes all the difference So, once again, THANK YOU DR MIKE ❤

[@catherineeASMR]

Dr. Mike is such a patient man I could never

[@rita.leichenko]

Привет, Майк! Хочу выразить свое восхищение твоим каналом и сказать, что он обучает меня и развивает в отношении медицины. Я из Украины, сейчас я студентка университета Абердин на факультете Клинической нутрициологии (final year of my Masters degree). Меня интересует абсолютно любой вопрос по здоровью и медицине. Твои видео часто помогают мне расширить мой кругозор и понять некоторые нюансы системы здравоохранения, а так же, то, как пациенты себя чувствуют в тех или иных ситуациях! Спасибо! Продолжай в том же духе 😊

[@JustMeJeff17]

Mike talks about how he didn't managed to keep the conversation focused on the medical side of things but it's not his fault Scott is a journalist and at the end of the day he wants to make headlines I think what we can take from this is that he is more interested into finding dirt in someone's past to open our eyes and make us question their credibility which could make us think twice before buying snake oil

[@estleyshikongo147]

I love how smart Dr Mike is and how he would let people have verbal diarrhea thinking they are smart or saying factual stuff by the way he pays attention but I know he actually sits there and zones out looking at how stupid they are and now the world would see too😂😂😂😊☺️☺️

[@victoria256r]

The fact that nobody talks about censored book called The 23 Former Doctor Truths by Lauren Clark really gets to me. Always loved people like Lauren, they open our eyes

[@evarossi6]

thanks for sharing that

[@athmaid]

This comment reads like a straight up ad. You getting paid for this? Edit: it's straight up a bot. KZbin, get your act together!

[@dobber43]

​@@athmaidweird bot tho it's promoted similar book titles with different authors

[@jh6845]

Censored??? I think not

[@enzobishop7764]

I love that they left that ending 2:20:15 - it really comes back to what they were talking about dehumanizing people as public figures. Even though he is still in front of the camera - it made me reflect and see him truly as a person who possibly took a few takes to do that. I put extra thought into my gratitude to him and the team that make this important channel and platform possible.

[@momofmanda]

I'm glad this conversation is happening. Everyone you mentioned, I followed them for a little while. Not hook, line, and sinker, and not to the point of buying their merch, but trying to take some notes to make some application. But after a while, I began to see a pattern: They begin to talk faster and faster. They use bigger words. I'm not sure if maybe they are subtly competing with each other (if both are doctors) or maybe to just one-up in their own heads their interview from last week. I can't tell if their good results are parenthetical or have been proven 80% of the time. Their field of expertise begins to be all-encompassing, as if to prove that their point is a universal truth. At some point, they are verbally strutting their stuff instead of trying to HELP anybody. They are no longer talking to us. I no longer click if it's Huberman or Attia on the thumbnail. I also no longer follow those who put all their money on one cure, and then a year later explain why they did it wrong, Saladino for example.

[@gratitudemodestyhonesty]

One of the absolute best episodes Had not heard of Scott before but this conversation was insanely insightful and reflected a lot of what I already suspected about the health influencer space

[@mikey1220]

The point about Peter Attias disclosures doesn’t make sense. That’s the whole point of disclosing his endorsements Many times he prefaces things by offering other alternatives or that it’s not necessary. Doctor Mikes point about not demonizing financial model was spot on. It’s not enough to discredit what Attia does

[@jakubchrobry3701]

Dr. Attia has no evidence that 2.2 g/kg/day of protein is benefitial for long-term health and longevity. He's very open about eating 7-10 venison jerky sticks per day, which he sells. If someone has good evidence for what they are selling, you're right, but Dr. Attia does not.

[@Riptide-rw7wp]

I really liked this interview! It really boils down to holding peoples actions and behaviors as the basis for judging character. At the end of the day "actions speak louder than words"

[@TB-rx1ue]

As someone who fell into the human potential movement, I flipping love this podcast. I’ll start to tune it all out… and focus on the little things ♥️ I wondered why my MD spouse didn’t care for the health influencers like I did. This video helped me see my spouse’s position better. Thank you.

[@Xiphos94]

This is honestly one of the only medical "influencers" I listen to. Dr. Mike and Dr. K have been two very impactful content creators for me and I thank them for their honesty and integrity

[@HenriqueAcquaviva]

Here in Brazil a case that happened 20 years ago opened the Pandora's box of organ's mafia. A young boy suffered a major injury to his brain and the mafia doctors harvested his organs while he was still alive in coma. They also charged the parents for all the costs of removing the organs and other horrible things. Police later discovered the hospital was built nearby a freeway due to the proximity to car accidentes and the higher chances of brain death in those cases. That case created lots of protocols for organ donations that didn't exist before.

[@teachersusan3730]

How horrible 😮

[@Grysham]

Interestingly, having just come from Hubermans episode about ice baths and cold therapy, I feel that Scott's sumarising of his position was hugely off. Huberman doesn't emphasise shivering or cold therapy specifically for weight loss, but mentions that the termogenesis can increase metabolism which in turn will use more energy. However he's also pretty clear that this thermo genesis is pretty small and certainly no substitute for normal weoght loss protocols. Hearing that part and then hearing him criticise Huberman without any specific evidence in his critique of his work made it seem like his thoughts on this werelargely coming from a personal place. He seems to have fallen out with him and now paints him as negatively as possible, even diagnosing him with narcissistic personality disorder, which is hugely unprofessional. Glad Mike put in some caveats about this in there.

[@sandrex1978]

Yes, I was confused about that. I watch Huberman and doesn't say ice bath is for weight loss. We should take all these opinions with a grain of salt, jealousy and envy going around.

[@gaBetibu]

. . . wow, Dr M, I can't help but be highly impressed by how you handled this whole interview...I believe he had many valid points, & when his words had "a hint" of harshness or overly biased, you, very tactfully toned it down . . . overall, I found this interview riveting even tho it may not be your usual type of interviews . . . God Bless You Both for the courage to speak your views, regardless of the normal potential for public backlash... 😌

[@c.c.2763]

I’d love to see a conversation between Doctor Mike and Peter Attia. I was unaware of his view on him until the opening of this video. I’m curious given the fact that Peter is an M.D. Not saying all things he says can be agreed with because he’s a doctor, but both being in the medical field, I think it would be a fascinating conversation.

[@SG-01K]

I'm glad to see a different perspective on the information available publicly these day's. It's easy to get caught in waves.

[@TheSwauzz]

Great conversation. I can hear the passion in his voice for his research investigations as well as just for people. He seems like he really cares. I do strongly recommend you become more aware of how prevalent different trafficking rings are across the US. Keep in mind that children involved in human trafficking are often not reported as missing, especially if they were already marginalized, such as those in the foster care system. And it's even less reported for older children because it is assumed they are runaways. This is becoming a bigger and bigger problem all the time, especially with the handling of the border over the last 8 years or so. Every few months, some sort of human/sex/child trafficking system is either being investigated or interrupted here in Houston, TX. It's incredible how bold many of these criminal rings are becoming. Very, very bad things do happen and are happening here in the US, but I think many Americans would rather ignore that reality.

[@monicagrorud2225]

Well said. Trust no one.

[@FrancyneFoxman]

I got a lot out of this conversation. Yes, Mr. Carney showed his humanness and also had some interesting things to say. I don't imagine it's easy going on a podcast and getting it 'all right.' Not dissimilar to being in the world. 🙏

[@christineoneill2360]

I follow Scott Carney and greatly appreciate his work. Individual's behavior is more insightful to me than debating whether they are really "bad" people - their behavior is.

[@GracieTricks]

Best interview I've seen (since that one that ruined Reagan lol) I just fell onto this vid and haven't seen either of you before. Funny bc I am (I feel) on the recovering side of BPD but the 'quiet' type. I struggled w being honest petrified of confrontation so watching you both refuse to shrink for a greater good here has inspired me whilst still poking a little at my trauma/old habit. I'm hooked. Will be following you both from here. Thank you 🙏

[@sgcarney]

Thanks so much for having me on the show! This was a really interesting conversation to have and you made me think about a few things in different ways.

[@forgottenskys.]

Only 39 likes??

[@dc-ir3ow]

Wonder why

[@PinkThing-m5j]

Yay- as an organ transplant survivor THIS IS EXACTLY what i didn't want to listen to bright and early, or anytime - dude your welcome 4:39 omg stop Too too much And as a survivor - who got hers legally - I don't appreciate this narrative at all Why don't you discourage this? How about a story on how rejection occurs and what that looks like? How ugly it is when they DON'T match?!

[@PinkThing-m5j]

​@@dc-ir3owit's too much

[@RealJonzuk]

@@PinkThing-m5j get outta here russian bot, if your not than sorry you went through that but i dont see how this video was too much, if you dont go into detail or explain things fully people wont be able to understand whats happening and how serious it is

[@APP_Education]

I work in healthcare. Dr Attia doesn't see the same types of patients I do. Mine are more like Dr Mike's it sounds like. Having said that, Attia has a great channel, he evolves with the studies. His crowd seems like they come in more fitness focused to begin with which is great. There are plenty of medical providers who don't serve the same patient demo as Dr Mike, but that really shouldn't be a criticism.

[@the-scorpio]

It’s a very interesting conversation 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 And it’s a very brave act to talk about it!!

[@peggynally2937]

THIS (Wim Hof) story is EXACTLY the reason I SOP FOLLOWING people eventually. EVERYONE starts off "pure" and then it's all about $$$$$

[@MarioReyesSAP]

Very good episode Dr Mike, thank you very much for helping the community by providing this excellent quality content. As always with good guests with diverse perspectives, with the respectful way of questioning that characterizes this KZbin channel. I don't know if it exists, but it would be interesting if you interviewed a former FBI agent who has investigated criminal situations in the health industry in general.

[@daya529]

that "middle" thing really hit me, one of the reasons i stopped taking medications for my depression and anxiety is that i just felt like a zombie; no positives no negatives just bleh in the middle and i just didn't understand how that truly helps - felt like a zombie plateau band-aid. i mean i get how like its better than being depressed but i felt like i had no real emotions i was just there, and thats not very good either.

[@gigifreefreed501]

It would have been interesting to have Dr. Huberman on this show at the same time to defend himself. Thank you. For Mike for being such a fair interviewer.

[@kaileee-t3v]

This guy is like “I’m a highly talented journalist” his source, “I knew a guy who knew a guy, anyway…”

[@kelleydrn3965]

And don't forget his request to reference-check Wikipedia😂😂

[@dijon0810]

@@kelleydrn3965for specific medical data that he wasn’t 100% sure of

[@Shabana-hv9ic]

Two amazing men in one podcast. This was so eye opening as someone who follows both Huberman and Peter Attia. Much respect to Dr.Mike who sees patients from all income brackets. And thank you Scott for your journalism.

[@lisagreen4956]

Oh my gosh I could listen to them for days! I really liked this episode, thank you Dr. Mike!

[@lorphic777]

This is a bold conversation.

[@persaunna]

What an interesting interview. I didn't know many of the people or studies or even methods mentioned. Thank you for bringing new concepts for me to explore. @sgcarney what I understood and gleaned from what you are saying is to apply moderation and a bit of skepticism when looking for care of oneself, whether its medical, spiritual, physical, etc., not just in the actual mechanics but in who teaches it, and how.

[@TheSwauzz]

I really respect Dr. Mike's approach to situations with a focus on nuance, but there is a point where a person has 100% broken trust. There must be a line that we draw where if someone crosses it, you must write them off completely. It's an acceptable truth that no one is all bad, but that's also a non-statement. A cartel leader will love his family and dog, but he still facilitates the murder of countless people. So to me, who cares if he loves his family and dog? It just doesn't matter. Giving the benefit of doubt is a noble way to look at things, but in certain situations, it's also naive. In this modern climate where influence is so incredibly effective, you can essentially control an entire population (which we've seen firsthand) if the right people at the right time say the right things. We are witnessing how much more effective grifters, liars, compulsive moneymakers, false hope bringers and even more innocuous snake oil salesman are in this modern age where anyone, and I mean ANYONE (looking at you, inmates), can have a platform. Preying upon vulnerable people has been happening forever, but not at the rate it is happening now. It is absolutely imperative that we not only expect, but demand, better from influencers, leaders and other people in positions of authority or power. We should be demanding honesty, humility and consistency.

[@dirtbagdeacon]

I agree. I am not sure why people are getting so mad at this guy. If someone is trying to scam or con me, and it's known that this person has a pattern of behavior that raises red flags, then I want to know about that. In the realm of health, scams, grifts, and cons can literally kill and maim people. Why shouldn't we be looking at them and their claims with a critical eye? Why is making a moral judgment about a person bad if they've literally done bad things over and over? Maybe I'm just a big meanie, but if a person betrays my trust, earning it back is going to take time and energy on their part. I'm not going to let them victimize me over and over in order to fulfill some bizarre goal of truth-seeing nobility. Not only does it harm me, it harms the other person by not putting boundaries on their harmful behavior.

[@twistedfocus]

Respectfully, that seems to be all about your feelings about what is being said, or just the people themselves. The guest gives no real evidence that Huberman or Attia are wrong about anything, he just seems to not like them. Also, feelings. Feel how you like about people, but I think Humberman and Attia are well cited when it comes to their medical theories. Them telling the truth in a *tone* you don’t like is NOT a good reason to discount it, or to pile on the idea that it’s, even further, scamming. Attia might have a god complex, but you don’t want to hear the [possible, admittedly] truth from him? This seems more like anti-fame activism than any sort of debunking. Also, this guy isn’t a Phd or a medical doctor, unlike the people he’s trashing. Also, if they have a history of “triggering” people, thats an indicator that they are a good teacher, not a grifter. Making you think about new things shouldn’t be a negative. The “modern” response to new information has suddenly been to be “triggered” instead of informed.

[@jenniewilliams1668]

I think this is an important conversation and, yes, too much personal relationship and not enough science. I'd be much more interested in further about how scientific information and clinical care interact, what the path is from "a scientific paper came out" to implementing in the clinical world with patients, or whether universities like Stanford and Harvard are implicated in unethical practices. I don't care much about people's private lives when they're actions aren't illegal. I'm a Huberman watcher,I have Attia's book and I buy Bryan Johnson's products. I'm just an RN and I use the phrase "I don't know" a lot. I try to go to the source - but reading the papers- who has time and energy for that. I want to rely on people who share that truth uncovering, fact checking drive. Thanks Dr Mike!!!

[@FunderDuck]

34:57 I’m conflicted on whether the potential risks involved in controlled breathing, as one example, should discount the entire practice or just contextualize it. Nearly every sport, hobby, and pastime people participate in carries some degree of risk in certain circumstances. There can be a lot of variability in whether an exercise is universally harmful, require acclimation or training, is not optimal, etc. Take boxing as an example, or scuba diving, or mountain climbing; the benefits some people strive towards may come with consequences. As long as the potential risks are understood and the potential benefits aren’t wildly overstated.

[@bananascoaster1243]

All things have risks, and we can quantify these risks. That said, humans often are personally bad at judging a lot of different types of risks. Social effects, enhanced perceived benefits, etc.

[@nicolawinter8764]

Although I can't relate to everything Carney says, I think he's got some valid points throughout the interview.

[@raidtheferry]

This was great. Mike, I see what you mean with the disclaimer of this going the _wrong way_ but man I think we're a little smarter than you're giving us credit for. Whike this guy had some good tidbits, we're *not* buying into the bullshit.

[@laurgall]

I cannot listen to this man say “I did this, I started that” one more time. Holy cow I’ve never respected someone less

[@Lynore_Marie]

I have so much respect for Dr. Mike, taking on these questionable topics, and when pushing back, does so in a respectful, and compassionate way. I agree with what you said about the body can heal itself, and how the mind and body are so connected. I’d love if you could do an episode on that, specifically inflammation, or autoimmunity.

[@heatheryoung5778]

Dr. Mike handled this well. This was more of a therapy session. 😂 I sincerely hope Scott learned something. I wouldn’t trust a single thing he says. I hope he gets more help and that the followers on his gossip column don’t adopt his sneaky personality traits. People who want to make money aren’t bad. Selling something that doesn’t hurt people, isn’t bad. Interviewers that allow people with different opinion speak freely, isn’t bad. Lex Friedman is not bad. I encourage you to watch him. Andrew Huberman has the most disclaimers, warnings, risk factors, lists weakness in studies, lists many reasons things won’t work for you, warns against many unhealthy but popular things, always says you should talk to your doctor first…. And isn’t bad.

[@SueBates]

I'm glad he is naming names.

[@astrammd]

♡ Dr. Mike - "B+.... what does that grade represent?" Excellent demonstration critical thinking as always.

[@kimsdharma]

I am so confused. I'd probably be less confused if I knew of 90% of the people Scott Carney tries to namedrop. Sofa king confused. He broke up with his friend and put his ex-friend on blast, is that the general idea?

[@ryangolden3243]

Pretty much lol he wants to use huberman to become well known so bad

[@dijon0810]

@@ryangolden3243he’s already well known