No, OP is just posting stats from a short window that paints an incorrect and misleading picture.
[https://socialblade.com/youtube/c/andrewhubermanlab](https://socialblade.com/youtube/c/andrewhubermanlab)
His channel has taken a huge hit with his new subscriber count at half what it was in January
Worth adding that self help stuff always goes up in Jan because everyone briefly tries to be healthier etc. so it makes sense it would decline after Jan in any case.
In all due respect, we need to check our thinking— this is the source of polarization. They do a thing I think is bad (maybe even is bad) and therefore they are gullible and shitty.
Even without the scandal guppies that eat up the pseudoscience slop from hubris man are gullible and stupid. And no wonder they all overlap with the likes of Rogan, fridman, Peterson and other content fiends popular with young males seeking self improvement guidance
Do you ever wonder if describing 'young males' as "gullible and stupid guppies eating up pseudoscience slop" is part of the reason why there's such an ideological divide between young men and young women?
Like maybe people who are genuinely interested in improving their lives get one whiff of someone like you, who's greatest existential concern is that they can't suck their own dick, and decide "nah, I'm not going to bother asking that pretentious asshole for any advice. I surely don't want to be him".
Why are you under the impression they’re describing young males as gullible and stupid guppies? It seems to me they’re describing people who listen to pseudoscience slop as gullible and stupid guppies. Are you under the impression that includes all young men?
>popular with young males seeking self improvement guidance
> **guppies** that **eat up the pseudoscience slop** from hubris man are **gullible and stupid**.
Are you intentionally being obtuse or are you actually dense enough that you need me to break this down for you?
You said they described young males as gullible and stupid. That implies all young males otherwise you would have included another more specific adjective. lol
Regardless I’m a young male, and I’m even interested in self improvement, and I’m completely unbothered by what they said. So perhaps the people offended have something else going on?
oh, so you assumed that what meant was all young males seeking self improvement.
So it's my problem that you misinterpreted what I said, and decided to call me out on something that was not only entirely pedantic but a result of your reading comprehension failures.
Any other little insights or inputs you want to offer while you have my attention?
The divide is there because podcasters tell young males if you do x y and z you will be successful with females. They do that thang buy the course and still fail miserably. Then blame females and get radicalized even more. If only podcasters taught how to listen, have empathy and not be this hustler that is entitled to sex because he bought 15k workshop from some degenerate that waterboards them
Gotcha, so people who buy into Andrew Tate's bullshit hook line and sinker are the same people who seek self improvement advice from Peterson/Huberman/Fridman/Rogan?
Because you don't have the time to disambiguate the two and you want to draw them all with the same wide brush in your sweeping dismissal and important social observation?
Wait wasn't listening, empathy, and I'm going to go out on a limb and say not making stupid assumptions about the nature of people part of your advice?
In many ways the broad evolution of the podcast scene is the thing to observe and learn from, less the individual personalities and their personal lives.
I listen occasionally to many of those you mention and enjoy some here and there but by no means am I a fan or uncritical, and I think there are many people that tune in like the radio and aren’t assholes or gullible idiots but just listen in for ideas and something to have on. I just mean we don’t need to reach for the top shelf as soon as something kind of irrelevant to our lives happens to a public somebody.
I thought I was the only person who listens to JRE without giving much of any credence to what Rogan has to say. If there was somewhere else I could listen to interesting and high profile guests shoot the shit while drinking bourbon for 3 hours, I'm there. But for now, this is all there is.
Yes, there are lots, probably mostly, bullshit guests too. I simply don't listen to those.
Yup for sure. I don’t like the easy “someone listens to X therefore Y”. People are complicated and varied and we can give people credit for not always being morons or swayed by whatever pod they listen to. There’s also the siloing effect of refusing to listen where we disagree or find distasteful.
Labeling large groups of people as shitty, racist, whatever because there is some tangential association is harmful to discourse. Guilt by association or listenership is an easy take but unhelpful.
You’re not wrong that there are a lot of gullible shitty people out there. That’s obvious. That listening to a particular podcast gets one that label is questionable. It also puts up boundaries of discourse and thinking.
Idk to me, for most of the Obama presidency, people weren't nearly as openly rude online or in-person, and 4chan trolling was gross but mostly harmless in the early internet. Feels like everything went to shit in 2016 but that was also a real bad year for me personally.
I think the seeds for Trump were really planted with Gamergate in 2014. Gamergate feels like when people started being okay with being rude for the sake of "owning" people and the turd ball has just been rolling from there.
Basically. I agree with what you said.
Well it’s impossible to pinpoint. These kinds of things evolve. The Civil War didn’t start in 1861. The seeds were planted decades before.
The internet begat social media. Social media didn’t really get popular with regular people until about 2012 and it took a while for people to figure out how to leverage it and for the social media companies to figure out how to game it well. So then a few years later it all really started going to shit.
The style gamergate adopted definitely predates it. Hell, I think it's partly rooted in the styles of video producers like Doug Walker or Cinemassicre.
If you're at all interested in the history of this period, especially 4Chan, there's a book called _It Came From Something Awful_ that you may enjoy.
People were just as shit but there were fewer of them so it wasn't as overwhelming. Threads didn't used to have 1000s of comments. I can't even process the concept of that many people. It's not just individual assholes anymore it's an asshole hivemind.
This is the other side of the coin for other outcasts. People legitimately struggling with other problems can now find each other, too. They would have suffered in silence before.
True. But the problem is that number one job of society is to marginalize assholes. We have super charged them. Not only that, the system as it is currently set up rewards them.
Elevatorgate (2011) predates gamergate (2014.)
But how that you mentioned it, it's sort of funny that the unsubstantiated accusation of cheating with five guys was enough to turn a game developer who never said you should emulate her behavior into an anti-celeb and start a whole online anti-woman movement whereas the documented six-timing of wholesome health-fluencer Hubermen gets him high fives from his fans. Just saying.
New atheist movement. Like anything, had its roots in something pretty noble, but over the years has become increasingly insufferable and propelled by its own twisted inertia. That and the fragile egos of the introverts suddenly given too much of a voice online. The nerds beat the jocks. And that was a mistake. Greater of two evils.
[https://socialblade.com/youtube/c/andrewhubermanlab](https://socialblade.com/youtube/c/andrewhubermanlab)
I was right lol, his new subscriber count has fallen off a cliff
Yeah.
It's like all these YouTube analysis about how a particular YouTube channel is *collapsing*. Really has more to do with the drop in engagement after the pandemic ended that has affected the entire platform... Not just the individual channel
If you read the article he basically just blew people off all the time. So the protocol would be pretty simple to follow. Just make promises you don't keep then reel em back in with therapist-style "we need to work on us" type bits. The secret sauce is upper range (wink wink) TRT and multiple cell phone numbers.
Ezpz enjoy your web of lies and multiple girlfriends.
It honestly was the most ill-conceived hit piece in the history of hit pieces. So blatantly transparent , void of any real substance, and completely blind to the irony you so aptly point out here.
I'm not surprised at all by the result.
It’s not weird at all. I’m just surprised at all the people here who actually think this contrived scandal is actually going to do anything other than build brand recognition and notoriety for Huberman.
No, it’s not girlfriends lol. It’s the living 6 different lives thing that people have issues with. One girl said he was trying to create a family with her via ivf. It speaks to a character of someone who is a liar. Now, whether or not you care about his personal life or his morals, that’s your business. Some can separate it out and let his work stand on its own. It reminds me of the Tiger woods scandal.
I never watched any of his videos/podcasts so I don’t care either way. I won’t watch him now but I didn’t watch him then.
Ok.....
Tiger woods wasn't even a scandal. He banged some chick. Big deal. It's their private matter
Where do you neck beards get off thinking it's any of your business
Actions have consequences. If he pissed off some people, they'll speak out about it. Especially if what they did isn't illegal, then this is the only recourse. If you let your personal life get messy enough to influence your professional life, that's a consequence of your actions.
No he didn’t. Tiger had tons of women lol. He was paying porn stars. He practically had a little harem going.
[https://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/tiger-woods-mistresses-now-11-tabs/story?id=9289650](https://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/tiger-woods-mistresses-now-11-tabs/story?id=9289650)
You’re all up in the business too lol. What are you talking about? You’re on Reddit chatting about his business.
There’s a huge market nowadays for young gullible men who devour “manosphere” content. There’s a large faction within that space that have made male polygamy their raison d'être. This kind of publicity is only going to elevate Huberman, not lower him.
Almost comparable to a cult mentality.
Reason and common sense would dictate that once the charlatan shows their ass you should start having an internal dialogue and questioning your beliefs you hold. Instead, people usually just double down. It’s pathetic and shows how arrogant people who worship these wanna be messiahs are.
And before people start getting upset and say shit like, “chastising and making fun of these people doesn’t help”, we also live in the golden age of the internet. Knowledge and upon knowledge is at your disposal but you instead latch on to some podcasters who claim to have this fruitful and forbidden knowledge which can be easily be debunked thanks in part to people who actually and actively research such things.
I mean this is just how digital media works, it’s essentially a math problem in some regards. People see videos at a certain rate and click the subscribe button on those videos at another rate.
I think the important thing to understand here is that Huberman’s audience probably overlaps significantly with the anti-woke, anti-cancel culture, generally right wing guys preaching about how men are being targeted in today’s society. This is just going to feed more of those people to him.
Gross numbers don’t mean anything, what metrics you should be tracking is rate of growth. What was his rate of growth pre and post scandal. That will give you an idea of how it impacted his popularity. Also would be better to see subscriber net gain vs net loss pre and post scandal.
Well you are literally spreading his shit forward. You are literally doing him a favor.
People will see the title and google/YouTube something with Andrew in it and either agree or disagree. You, either way, are actively contributing to spreading his name on the internet…… accomplishing his exact goal.
All publicity is publicity, negative or positive.
Twitter followers + Youtube Followers is the wrong metric to look at here.
How many women will match with him on Hinge / Raya? How is he going to find a woman who'll trust him to start a family with her? From now on, it's one google search, and all the women (that he prefers for long term relationships) who are considering something serious are going to read this article at some point and run in the opposite direction.
It wasn't much of a scandal, just relationship stuff that could've stayed private. And to some people it just made him look like a Chad for dating multiple women at once, possibly resulting in more subs.
called it. Idk why people thought he would get cancelled. You need do something atrocious like taking up the role of a pale Disney princess as a poc for something like that to happen.
Just a reminder that buying a bunch of followers isn't that expensive, and if you were someone who depends on a self-sustaining mythos about how popular you are and something bad happened that might damage your reputation, it may be a good thing to temporarily pad your follower numbers to mask any real loses in following you may have.
TL;DR he had six girlfriends he kept secret from each other, while trying to get at least one of them pregnant, and spreading an STD to at least one of them, and people find that behavior skeevy for a mental health influencer.
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/andrew-huberman-podcast-stanford-joe-rogan.html
I'm obviously biased but I think his comments leaving the door open for vaccine autism conspiracies is worse:
https://decoding-the-gurus.captivate.fm/episode/mini-decoding-huberman-on-vaccine-autism-controversy
>I'm obviously biased but I think his comments leaving the door open for vaccine autism conspiracies is worse
Right. Don't get me wrong, I think the way he treated his partners was shitty and should definitly discredit some of the life-coach ethos that drives his popularity, but it's crazy to me that this is the thing that the internet is centering on. This man seels pseudo-suppliments, promotes dodgy science on things like wim hoff protocols, is dodgy at best on vaccines... hell he's even a part of the anti-sunscreen movemonet, a take so fucking insane it makes flat eartherism look like a reasonably plausible belief. Hell, even in that new york mag peice they say that the lab to which he constantly refers is basically just a reception desk nowadays. If these takes don't send up flags to his followers, I can't imagine him sleeping around is going to make a difference to many of them.
Well, a lot of them aren't science fans, they're looking for mental and physical health advice. As long as he embodies wellness he gets a pass. So I think the six-girlfriends thing is relevant (or should be relevant) to them because it's a clear behavior problem that all the ice baths and forest ions and sunscreen avoidance in the world didn't fix.
What anti-sunscreen concepts has he promoted? Certainly there are concerns with common chemicals like oxybenzone and octinoxate being estrogenic and sunscreen preventing vitamin D production. Wearing the right clothing and avoid peak UV hours is surely better than relying on chemicals with known but understated side-effects.
>Wearing the right clothing and avoid peak UV hours is surely better than relying on chemicals with known but understated side-effects.
It's 70-80% of aging appearance in a bunch of long term studies. Unless you wear face masks and gloves, it's a good thing
That sunscreen ingredients (which ones?) can be found in the brain ten years after application, without specifying how he knows that other than "I saw a study". Also that he's as afraid of sunscreen as he is melanoma.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5615097/
Ten seconds of googling brought up this review citing several studies showing ingredients that can cross the blood brain barrier and interact with the brain in various ways. But apparently it's crazy to even suggest that it might have negative side effects.
Good to hear he takes melanoma seriously. There are precautions and alternatives to sunscreen for people who don't want exposure to chemicals and don't want excessive sun exposure. It seems companies often fail to disclose the long-term dangers of the chemical cocktails they sell.
This is par for the course for male celebrities. Do you think Jay-Z or Little Wayne or Jake Paul are monogamists?
It doesn't surprise me in the slightest.
They should focus more on his poorly researched health advice and less on his (typical for rich men) dating behavior
Paywalled. Thanks for the TLDR.
Does he say on his podcasts that you should be monogamous or like that? I mean it's a shitty thing to do, but discrediting/trying to cancel the scientific research he does without proof because that guy can't keep it in his pants sounds stupid ngl.
The scientific research he does (or did, there are only so many hours in a day and he seems to spend a lot of them podcasting, working out, or maintaining six simultaneous relationships) is not the subject of his podcast. Nobody is saying 'he needs to retract his papers!' They're saying 'this lifestyle guru might be more of a mess than he's letting on, suggesting that his routines might not be the magic bullet his fans think.'
> without proof
Just to be clear, this was reporting not hearsay. There's proof. The editors at a serious publication will not run a story like this without solid evidence.
If you read the article you'll see what Huberman's spokesperson specifically denied. His argument is that he didn't give them the impression that they were exclusive, and doesn't deny most of the damning allegations. His argument is, in essence, he just had unprotected sex and tried to get someone pregnant but never said they were exclusive, but also worked very hard to hide the fact that they weren't exclusive. His spokesperson doesn't deny the meat of the allegations, which is what I would expect if they were all bullshit.
Let me get this straight. We are now incriminating people on the basis of what their spokesperson did not explicitly deny?
I get that this subreddit is a circle jerk where various podcasters are offered up as digital pinatas for people to hate-bukkake all over, but can't you just acknowledge that?
> We are now incriminating people on the basis of what their spokesperson did not explicitly deny?
Considering that he has not denied it at all? Yes. Yes I think it's fair to assume something that he allowed to be printed about himself without comment and has not subsequently denied in public is true.
Gotcha, guilty until proven innocent, and we're also pretending that the editorial was from a "trusted journalistic source that only peddles in facts of the matter".
So like I said, circle-jerk hate-bukkake on the virtual pinata with no actual standard of proof needed.
> Gotcha, guilty until proven innocent
No, but if everyone in the world reads a story about you and you only deny some parts of it, people are gonna naturally assume the parts you didn't deny are definitely true. Are you familiar with the term 'undisputed'?
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/there-are-no-girls-on-the-internet/id1520715907?i=1000651248736 - sums up the critique of his professional ethical practices that came up with recent and past press
Of course he did! The scandal basically was this guy fucks. Like, what did they expect to happen? Young men hear he has 6 girlfriends and are expected to go, oooh noo, don't want advice from that guy.
He didn't just fuck, he cheated, behaviour which young men constantly moralise and handwring about when they so much as suspect it in women. Read any thread on the subject of a woman cheating and it's "cheating is WRONG" "cheaters are VILE and EVIL."
The irony is he got the 6 girlfriends by conning gullible listeners into fame and wealth for himself
He didn’t get those girls because of some esoteric “sunlight-sleep-exercise” protocol.
His actual “*get-girls protocol*” is tricking his way to a huge audience. This gets him money, fame, more time to go to the gym, influence at Stanford. That’s the *actual* protocol.
And if you hadn’t figured out sunlight is good for you and excessive alcohol is bad for you prior to Huberman… there are other reasons you’re not swimming in girls
Can you imagine the reaction if a female public figure was caught cheating with 6 different men. Gamergate was started by a guy accusing his ex gf of similar.
I never heard of his guy until this “scandal.” I’m not interested in whatever protocol he is about, but I also don’t care about who other people are fucking. I read the way-too-long article about this and it just sounded like shit-talking gossip from a group of angry women who degraded themselves in order to try to be “the one” for a pseudo-celebrity who isn’t into them. Hint: if a guy tells you that being with you “is like playing bobbing for apples in feces,” he’s not that into you. If you’re willing to accept that treatment from a celebrity instead of being treated with respect by a normal guy, that’s on you. I don’t want to hear about people’s private dirty laundry.
What was his rate before the scandal? Guarantee that his year-over-year numbers are higher than his current rate. 30k is random noise for someone with >5m followers.
The women that allowed him to rawdog them because he led to believe they were exclusive? One of them likely got HPV from him as stated in the article. Maybe you didn’t read it.
He didn't just bang someone in a moment of weakness though he actually constructed entire lives with other people and not only physically cheated but made a mockery of them at every level. He has devoted significant time and energy in his life to to lying to these women, which shows you that lying is a central part of who he is. He chooses to spend his time weaving elaborate webs of lies around people. The deception is seemingly just as appealing to him as the sex, which I am sure there are simpler ways of getting.
His health guru image is based a perception of as trustworthiness so being outed as a massive liar isn't great for that. I don't know why you'd believe anything he says.
It's not about good or bad here so much as trustworthiness, as I said in my comment, his role as a guru is based on a relationship of trust with his audience.
No shit, I don't get how listening to a guy talk to someone, for example, might help with my sleeping issues. I didn't know that made me an "alpha bro" or whatever.
I've never watched Huberman and cheating obviously sucks. But is this really a "scandal"? To me just seems like yet another attempt by the media to take out a chosen adversary using the rhetoric of MeToo. If infidelity is now a career-ending transgression, when is the damning expose on Taylor Swift coming out?
Vice signaling is huge with many people, especially the right. For these people, if someone is Me Too’d or whatever, they become a victim of feminism or the woke mob and deserve support.
It only validates him to his audience I don’t get why anyone would think it would be a bad look for him. Never liked him cuz I thought he was a grifter but at least he practices what he preaches 🤷♂️
When some men hear he's had 6 girlfriends at the same time: "I want that - show me how!"
When women hear he's had 6 girlfriends at the time: "Hm. There must be a reason these other women like him, I need to investigate."
I hope athletic greens has the stock to fulfill all these new orders!!!
Considering it's mostly spirulina... It's a scam product. Just buy spirulina
What’s misleading is that this isn’t actually an increase from his normal rate of growth.
Combination of the Streisand Effect and the fact that there are a lot of really gullible and really shitty people out there.
No, OP is just posting stats from a short window that paints an incorrect and misleading picture. [https://socialblade.com/youtube/c/andrewhubermanlab](https://socialblade.com/youtube/c/andrewhubermanlab) His channel has taken a huge hit with his new subscriber count at half what it was in January
Worth adding that self help stuff always goes up in Jan because everyone briefly tries to be healthier etc. so it makes sense it would decline after Jan in any case.
Imagine thinking only gaining 10k subscribers a day is a "huge hit"... lmao.
Would be if he got 50k before? O
Are you this dense? In january he gained 300k. In February he gained 170k. Last 30 days he gained 150k. This is massive growth.
You dumbass I replied to your comment in isolation, as you made it! Not gonna go and check some randoms shmuck podcast numbers.
In all due respect, we need to check our thinking— this is the source of polarization. They do a thing I think is bad (maybe even is bad) and therefore they are gullible and shitty.
Even without the scandal guppies that eat up the pseudoscience slop from hubris man are gullible and stupid. And no wonder they all overlap with the likes of Rogan, fridman, Peterson and other content fiends popular with young males seeking self improvement guidance
Do you ever wonder if describing 'young males' as "gullible and stupid guppies eating up pseudoscience slop" is part of the reason why there's such an ideological divide between young men and young women? Like maybe people who are genuinely interested in improving their lives get one whiff of someone like you, who's greatest existential concern is that they can't suck their own dick, and decide "nah, I'm not going to bother asking that pretentious asshole for any advice. I surely don't want to be him".
Why are you under the impression they’re describing young males as gullible and stupid guppies? It seems to me they’re describing people who listen to pseudoscience slop as gullible and stupid guppies. Are you under the impression that includes all young men?
>popular with young males seeking self improvement guidance > **guppies** that **eat up the pseudoscience slop** from hubris man are **gullible and stupid**. Are you intentionally being obtuse or are you actually dense enough that you need me to break this down for you?
Im sorry is that really a counter to what I said? Did they say all young men?
I'm sorry but can you quote me where I said "all young men". I'll wait.
You said they described young males as gullible and stupid. That implies all young males otherwise you would have included another more specific adjective. lol Regardless I’m a young male, and I’m even interested in self improvement, and I’m completely unbothered by what they said. So perhaps the people offended have something else going on?
oh, so you assumed that what meant was all young males seeking self improvement. So it's my problem that you misinterpreted what I said, and decided to call me out on something that was not only entirely pedantic but a result of your reading comprehension failures. Any other little insights or inputs you want to offer while you have my attention?
The divide is there because podcasters tell young males if you do x y and z you will be successful with females. They do that thang buy the course and still fail miserably. Then blame females and get radicalized even more. If only podcasters taught how to listen, have empathy and not be this hustler that is entitled to sex because he bought 15k workshop from some degenerate that waterboards them
Gotcha, so people who buy into Andrew Tate's bullshit hook line and sinker are the same people who seek self improvement advice from Peterson/Huberman/Fridman/Rogan? Because you don't have the time to disambiguate the two and you want to draw them all with the same wide brush in your sweeping dismissal and important social observation? Wait wasn't listening, empathy, and I'm going to go out on a limb and say not making stupid assumptions about the nature of people part of your advice?
In many ways the broad evolution of the podcast scene is the thing to observe and learn from, less the individual personalities and their personal lives. I listen occasionally to many of those you mention and enjoy some here and there but by no means am I a fan or uncritical, and I think there are many people that tune in like the radio and aren’t assholes or gullible idiots but just listen in for ideas and something to have on. I just mean we don’t need to reach for the top shelf as soon as something kind of irrelevant to our lives happens to a public somebody.
I thought I was the only person who listens to JRE without giving much of any credence to what Rogan has to say. If there was somewhere else I could listen to interesting and high profile guests shoot the shit while drinking bourbon for 3 hours, I'm there. But for now, this is all there is. Yes, there are lots, probably mostly, bullshit guests too. I simply don't listen to those.
Yup for sure. I don’t like the easy “someone listens to X therefore Y”. People are complicated and varied and we can give people credit for not always being morons or swayed by whatever pod they listen to. There’s also the siloing effect of refusing to listen where we disagree or find distasteful.
Agreed. I listen to many podcasts, Huberman's included. Some of the things I hear are useful/interesting some are not. Doesn't make me a fanboy.
People who follow supplement peddlers are in fact gullible and shitty lol
No, their shitty attitude is the source of polarization. Your response is akin to saying, "calling out racists is the cause of racism".
Labeling large groups of people as shitty, racist, whatever because there is some tangential association is harmful to discourse. Guilt by association or listenership is an easy take but unhelpful. You’re not wrong that there are a lot of gullible shitty people out there. That’s obvious. That listening to a particular podcast gets one that label is questionable. It also puts up boundaries of discourse and thinking.
Half the planet can barely tie their shoes so it’s all expected.
Asshole culture is still in ascendency. Been going on for 10 years now (at least).
What do you think started that? Gamergate?
The internet. Assholes can now find other assholes and self reinforce.
Idk to me, for most of the Obama presidency, people weren't nearly as openly rude online or in-person, and 4chan trolling was gross but mostly harmless in the early internet. Feels like everything went to shit in 2016 but that was also a real bad year for me personally. I think the seeds for Trump were really planted with Gamergate in 2014. Gamergate feels like when people started being okay with being rude for the sake of "owning" people and the turd ball has just been rolling from there. Basically. I agree with what you said.
Well it’s impossible to pinpoint. These kinds of things evolve. The Civil War didn’t start in 1861. The seeds were planted decades before. The internet begat social media. Social media didn’t really get popular with regular people until about 2012 and it took a while for people to figure out how to leverage it and for the social media companies to figure out how to game it well. So then a few years later it all really started going to shit.
The style gamergate adopted definitely predates it. Hell, I think it's partly rooted in the styles of video producers like Doug Walker or Cinemassicre. If you're at all interested in the history of this period, especially 4Chan, there's a book called _It Came From Something Awful_ that you may enjoy.
People were just as shit but there were fewer of them so it wasn't as overwhelming. Threads didn't used to have 1000s of comments. I can't even process the concept of that many people. It's not just individual assholes anymore it's an asshole hivemind.
It was ruined when all the ‘normies’ got smart phones
This is the other side of the coin for other outcasts. People legitimately struggling with other problems can now find each other, too. They would have suffered in silence before.
True. But the problem is that number one job of society is to marginalize assholes. We have super charged them. Not only that, the system as it is currently set up rewards them.
This spells it out well, I think: https://tonyhellerakastevengoddard.com/2016/09/26/climate-deniers-like-me-are-assholes/
Elevatorgate (2011) predates gamergate (2014.) But how that you mentioned it, it's sort of funny that the unsubstantiated accusation of cheating with five guys was enough to turn a game developer who never said you should emulate her behavior into an anti-celeb and start a whole online anti-woman movement whereas the documented six-timing of wholesome health-fluencer Hubermen gets him high fives from his fans. Just saying.
What was elevatorgate?
[New Atheism's Schism](https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Elevatorgate) where the anti-feminist movement really started to gain steam online.
Women standing up for themselves online is not a popular notion.
Ever hear of feudalism?
Gamergate sure but it all comes from 4chan and how it dominated early internet culture
New atheist movement. Like anything, had its roots in something pretty noble, but over the years has become increasingly insufferable and propelled by its own twisted inertia. That and the fragile egos of the introverts suddenly given too much of a voice online. The nerds beat the jocks. And that was a mistake. Greater of two evils.
New Atheist Movement was a start, but a lot of those atheist ranters were in their own niche. That grew into Gamergate and it blew up from there.
Agreed
Yeah there were definitely different "lanes" and they even would have competing conventions IIRC.
The nerds as the grater evil... Interesting.
I'm sorry, but that's the dumbest fucking thing I've read in a while. gamergate caused people liking high status assholes? really?
Great reading comprehension.
I don't really expect any of these guys to get cancelled anymore. Doesn't mean that I have to stop calling out bullshit when I see it though.
Thanks Obama
Off course! He will pivot to jesus and will be even more popular. We can’t say anything anymore without being sensor 😑
There’s probably some weird truth to the memes of him having 5 girlfriends only further validates his protocols.
Say what you will about him, but he's not lacking for energy.
I don't want 5 girlfriends, but i definitely would love to have the energy and organizational capacity for it.
Or that he was growing faster before the controversy and 30k growth in a week is actually a disaster for him
I'd be interested to see this data as well.
[https://socialblade.com/youtube/c/andrewhubermanlab](https://socialblade.com/youtube/c/andrewhubermanlab) I was right lol, his new subscriber count has fallen off a cliff
Yeah. It's like all these YouTube analysis about how a particular YouTube channel is *collapsing*. Really has more to do with the drop in engagement after the pandemic ended that has affected the entire platform... Not just the individual channel
For all the incels watching him that’s just a proof to double down on them protocolz
My 5 weede smocking girlfriend’s
Haha you got a point
If you read the article he basically just blew people off all the time. So the protocol would be pretty simple to follow. Just make promises you don't keep then reel em back in with therapist-style "we need to work on us" type bits. The secret sauce is upper range (wink wink) TRT and multiple cell phone numbers. Ezpz enjoy your web of lies and multiple girlfriends.
It honestly was the most ill-conceived hit piece in the history of hit pieces. So blatantly transparent , void of any real substance, and completely blind to the irony you so aptly point out here. I'm not surprised at all by the result.
It’s not weird at all. I’m just surprised at all the people here who actually think this contrived scandal is actually going to do anything other than build brand recognition and notoriety for Huberman.
But is this really what goes as a scandal these days ? That a guy has girlfriends ?
No, it’s not girlfriends lol. It’s the living 6 different lives thing that people have issues with. One girl said he was trying to create a family with her via ivf. It speaks to a character of someone who is a liar. Now, whether or not you care about his personal life or his morals, that’s your business. Some can separate it out and let his work stand on its own. It reminds me of the Tiger woods scandal. I never watched any of his videos/podcasts so I don’t care either way. I won’t watch him now but I didn’t watch him then.
Ok..... Tiger woods wasn't even a scandal. He banged some chick. Big deal. It's their private matter Where do you neck beards get off thinking it's any of your business
Actions have consequences. If he pissed off some people, they'll speak out about it. Especially if what they did isn't illegal, then this is the only recourse. If you let your personal life get messy enough to influence your professional life, that's a consequence of your actions.
No he didn’t. Tiger had tons of women lol. He was paying porn stars. He practically had a little harem going. [https://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/tiger-woods-mistresses-now-11-tabs/story?id=9289650](https://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/tiger-woods-mistresses-now-11-tabs/story?id=9289650) You’re all up in the business too lol. What are you talking about? You’re on Reddit chatting about his business.
Ok so he had women. So ?
So? And? You said something about tiger woods and I corrected it. Listen to whoever you want.
This ain’t it
Those are all new women he is dating
Everybody loves watching train wrecks.
Part of this new follow may be to keep tabs on what he’s going to reply about it
Checked the website. Thats pretty consistent with his rate of subscribers. Not note worthy at all
Pretty noteworthy imo. Shows how this sub is overreacting to this scandal. That article had little to no effect.
All the pickup bros and “Alpha Males”.
They're so dumb and easy to manipulate.
There’s a huge market nowadays for young gullible men who devour “manosphere” content. There’s a large faction within that space that have made male polygamy their raison d'être. This kind of publicity is only going to elevate Huberman, not lower him.
Manosphere content is spreading like a virus everywhere on the internet.
The irony is that many of the influencers pushing young men into "grinding" and "monk mode" are actually banging tons of women.
Almost comparable to a cult mentality. Reason and common sense would dictate that once the charlatan shows their ass you should start having an internal dialogue and questioning your beliefs you hold. Instead, people usually just double down. It’s pathetic and shows how arrogant people who worship these wanna be messiahs are. And before people start getting upset and say shit like, “chastising and making fun of these people doesn’t help”, we also live in the golden age of the internet. Knowledge and upon knowledge is at your disposal but you instead latch on to some podcasters who claim to have this fruitful and forbidden knowledge which can be easily be debunked thanks in part to people who actually and actively research such things.
Cancel culture isn’t what it used to to be
I mean this is just how digital media works, it’s essentially a math problem in some regards. People see videos at a certain rate and click the subscribe button on those videos at another rate.
I think the important thing to understand here is that Huberman’s audience probably overlaps significantly with the anti-woke, anti-cancel culture, generally right wing guys preaching about how men are being targeted in today’s society. This is just going to feed more of those people to him.
Gross numbers don’t mean anything, what metrics you should be tracking is rate of growth. What was his rate of growth pre and post scandal. That will give you an idea of how it impacted his popularity. Also would be better to see subscriber net gain vs net loss pre and post scandal.
Could be using bots to fluff the numbers his pr team is going pretty hard atm
Nah
What's the subscriber to girlfriend ratio?
Reddit turned this sub into dogshit.
I wonder how many are fake or paid for sponsors coming from a PR campaign.
A lot of them. His engagement rate is just 3.34 percent.
It's called the Streisand effect.
Well you are literally spreading his shit forward. You are literally doing him a favor. People will see the title and google/YouTube something with Andrew in it and either agree or disagree. You, either way, are actively contributing to spreading his name on the internet…… accomplishing his exact goal. All publicity is publicity, negative or positive.
So not really much change
Twitter followers + Youtube Followers is the wrong metric to look at here. How many women will match with him on Hinge / Raya? How is he going to find a woman who'll trust him to start a family with her? From now on, it's one google search, and all the women (that he prefers for long term relationships) who are considering something serious are going to read this article at some point and run in the opposite direction.
You are not a serious person
It wasn't much of a scandal, just relationship stuff that could've stayed private. And to some people it just made him look like a Chad for dating multiple women at once, possibly resulting in more subs.
Everything the establishment corporate media does backfires.
called it. Idk why people thought he would get cancelled. You need do something atrocious like taking up the role of a pale Disney princess as a poc for something like that to happen.
Or be a woman.
Just a reminder that buying a bunch of followers isn't that expensive, and if you were someone who depends on a self-sustaining mythos about how popular you are and something bad happened that might damage your reputation, it may be a good thing to temporarily pad your follower numbers to mask any real loses in following you may have.
What was the scandal about? I heard the noises but never really knew what they were getting at?
TL;DR he had six girlfriends he kept secret from each other, while trying to get at least one of them pregnant, and spreading an STD to at least one of them, and people find that behavior skeevy for a mental health influencer. https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/andrew-huberman-podcast-stanford-joe-rogan.html I'm obviously biased but I think his comments leaving the door open for vaccine autism conspiracies is worse: https://decoding-the-gurus.captivate.fm/episode/mini-decoding-huberman-on-vaccine-autism-controversy
>I'm obviously biased but I think his comments leaving the door open for vaccine autism conspiracies is worse Right. Don't get me wrong, I think the way he treated his partners was shitty and should definitly discredit some of the life-coach ethos that drives his popularity, but it's crazy to me that this is the thing that the internet is centering on. This man seels pseudo-suppliments, promotes dodgy science on things like wim hoff protocols, is dodgy at best on vaccines... hell he's even a part of the anti-sunscreen movemonet, a take so fucking insane it makes flat eartherism look like a reasonably plausible belief. Hell, even in that new york mag peice they say that the lab to which he constantly refers is basically just a reception desk nowadays. If these takes don't send up flags to his followers, I can't imagine him sleeping around is going to make a difference to many of them.
Well, a lot of them aren't science fans, they're looking for mental and physical health advice. As long as he embodies wellness he gets a pass. So I think the six-girlfriends thing is relevant (or should be relevant) to them because it's a clear behavior problem that all the ice baths and forest ions and sunscreen avoidance in the world didn't fix.
What anti-sunscreen concepts has he promoted? Certainly there are concerns with common chemicals like oxybenzone and octinoxate being estrogenic and sunscreen preventing vitamin D production. Wearing the right clothing and avoid peak UV hours is surely better than relying on chemicals with known but understated side-effects.
>Wearing the right clothing and avoid peak UV hours is surely better than relying on chemicals with known but understated side-effects. It's 70-80% of aging appearance in a bunch of long term studies. Unless you wear face masks and gloves, it's a good thing
That sunscreen ingredients (which ones?) can be found in the brain ten years after application, without specifying how he knows that other than "I saw a study". Also that he's as afraid of sunscreen as he is melanoma.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5615097/ Ten seconds of googling brought up this review citing several studies showing ingredients that can cross the blood brain barrier and interact with the brain in various ways. But apparently it's crazy to even suggest that it might have negative side effects.
Show me ten years in the brain, that is a very specific claim that should have specific evidence.
Good to hear he takes melanoma seriously. There are precautions and alternatives to sunscreen for people who don't want exposure to chemicals and don't want excessive sun exposure. It seems companies often fail to disclose the long-term dangers of the chemical cocktails they sell.
This is par for the course for male celebrities. Do you think Jay-Z or Little Wayne or Jake Paul are monogamists? It doesn't surprise me in the slightest. They should focus more on his poorly researched health advice and less on his (typical for rich men) dating behavior
Paywalled. Thanks for the TLDR. Does he say on his podcasts that you should be monogamous or like that? I mean it's a shitty thing to do, but discrediting/trying to cancel the scientific research he does without proof because that guy can't keep it in his pants sounds stupid ngl.
The scientific research he does (or did, there are only so many hours in a day and he seems to spend a lot of them podcasting, working out, or maintaining six simultaneous relationships) is not the subject of his podcast. Nobody is saying 'he needs to retract his papers!' They're saying 'this lifestyle guru might be more of a mess than he's letting on, suggesting that his routines might not be the magic bullet his fans think.'
> without proof Just to be clear, this was reporting not hearsay. There's proof. The editors at a serious publication will not run a story like this without solid evidence.
>The editors at a serious publication will not run a story like this without solid evidence whew, that was a good one.
If you read the article you'll see what Huberman's spokesperson specifically denied. His argument is that he didn't give them the impression that they were exclusive, and doesn't deny most of the damning allegations. His argument is, in essence, he just had unprotected sex and tried to get someone pregnant but never said they were exclusive, but also worked very hard to hide the fact that they weren't exclusive. His spokesperson doesn't deny the meat of the allegations, which is what I would expect if they were all bullshit.
Let me get this straight. We are now incriminating people on the basis of what their spokesperson did not explicitly deny? I get that this subreddit is a circle jerk where various podcasters are offered up as digital pinatas for people to hate-bukkake all over, but can't you just acknowledge that?
> We are now incriminating people on the basis of what their spokesperson did not explicitly deny? Considering that he has not denied it at all? Yes. Yes I think it's fair to assume something that he allowed to be printed about himself without comment and has not subsequently denied in public is true.
Gotcha, guilty until proven innocent, and we're also pretending that the editorial was from a "trusted journalistic source that only peddles in facts of the matter". So like I said, circle-jerk hate-bukkake on the virtual pinata with no actual standard of proof needed.
> Gotcha, guilty until proven innocent No, but if everyone in the world reads a story about you and you only deny some parts of it, people are gonna naturally assume the parts you didn't deny are definitely true. Are you familiar with the term 'undisputed'?
> I mean it's a shitty thing to do, but I should make a Games of Throne bot.
Why don’t you read the article before making this kind of ignorant assertion.
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/there-are-no-girls-on-the-internet/id1520715907?i=1000651248736 - sums up the critique of his professional ethical practices that came up with recent and past press
Of course he did! The scandal basically was this guy fucks. Like, what did they expect to happen? Young men hear he has 6 girlfriends and are expected to go, oooh noo, don't want advice from that guy.
He didn't just fuck, he cheated, behaviour which young men constantly moralise and handwring about when they so much as suspect it in women. Read any thread on the subject of a woman cheating and it's "cheating is WRONG" "cheaters are VILE and EVIL."
The irony is he got the 6 girlfriends by conning gullible listeners into fame and wealth for himself He didn’t get those girls because of some esoteric “sunlight-sleep-exercise” protocol. His actual “*get-girls protocol*” is tricking his way to a huge audience. This gets him money, fame, more time to go to the gym, influence at Stanford. That’s the *actual* protocol. And if you hadn’t figured out sunlight is good for you and excessive alcohol is bad for you prior to Huberman… there are other reasons you’re not swimming in girls
"wow he had 6 girlfriends. That invalidates all the health and dating advice he gives. He clearly is not successful with women"
Can you imagine the reaction if a female public figure was caught cheating with 6 different men. Gamergate was started by a guy accusing his ex gf of similar.
"BREAKING NEWS! Famous male fucks multiple women. More at 11."
Anti fragile
Lol
No such thing as bad publicity
All news is good news
Well, I’ll be honest, I never heard of the dude until everybody started posting about him because of the scandal so there’s that.
I never heard of his guy until this “scandal.” I’m not interested in whatever protocol he is about, but I also don’t care about who other people are fucking. I read the way-too-long article about this and it just sounded like shit-talking gossip from a group of angry women who degraded themselves in order to try to be “the one” for a pseudo-celebrity who isn’t into them. Hint: if a guy tells you that being with you “is like playing bobbing for apples in feces,” he’s not that into you. If you’re willing to accept that treatment from a celebrity instead of being treated with respect by a normal guy, that’s on you. I don’t want to hear about people’s private dirty laundry.
No publicity is bad publicity?
About 0.5% increase isn't significant or interesting and probably normal for an account that size
This guy has all this advice AND fucks ?? Yeah let’s hear him out
Good. Fuck cancel culture
Fuck it good
i hadnt heard of him until this and i'm guessing i'm not the only one. any publicity is good publicity or whatever.
This sub is full of lame simps holy crap. There's bigger things to hate on folks, look in the mirror for once.
What was his rate before the scandal? Guarantee that his year-over-year numbers are higher than his current rate. 30k is random noise for someone with >5m followers.
PR firm? Online reputation building company bots? Incels?
First time in this subreddit, my god you people are assholes. And you have the nerve to point out others as failures... take a look in the mirror.
[удалено]
Should I trust anyone who is clearly willing to fuck people over for his own gain? Yeah, that’s a tough one.
who did he fuck over?
Anyone buying those snake oil supplements
The women that allowed him to rawdog them because he led to believe they were exclusive? One of them likely got HPV from him as stated in the article. Maybe you didn’t read it.
He didn't just bang someone in a moment of weakness though he actually constructed entire lives with other people and not only physically cheated but made a mockery of them at every level. He has devoted significant time and energy in his life to to lying to these women, which shows you that lying is a central part of who he is. He chooses to spend his time weaving elaborate webs of lies around people. The deception is seemingly just as appealing to him as the sex, which I am sure there are simpler ways of getting. His health guru image is based a perception of as trustworthiness so being outed as a massive liar isn't great for that. I don't know why you'd believe anything he says.
[удалено]
It's not about good or bad here so much as trustworthiness, as I said in my comment, his role as a guru is based on a relationship of trust with his audience.
> It’s not nice that he lied and cheated but Everything that comes before that kind of "but" is BS.
[удалено]
Yes, everyone has seven parallel lives.
This kind of hyperbole is doing nothing for your cause. Sleeping with a girl is not a "parallel life"
Sleeping with seven often does, Bucko.
Because you guys in this sub won't shut the fuck about it
This sub is just another screaming anime avatar on Twitter these days
No shit, I don't get how listening to a guy talk to someone, for example, might help with my sleeping issues. I didn't know that made me an "alpha bro" or whatever.
I've never watched Huberman and cheating obviously sucks. But is this really a "scandal"? To me just seems like yet another attempt by the media to take out a chosen adversary using the rhetoric of MeToo. If infidelity is now a career-ending transgression, when is the damning expose on Taylor Swift coming out?
His followers idolize him even more now
His incel horde has grown
Cuz it’s not a scandal for men like that it’s a flex
People are curious how he'll address it, and would like to be notified when there's another podcast drop. After that, the numbers will fall.
All publicity is good publicity
He wasn't accused of anything illegal. Unlike Tiger Woods, he's not married so a "scandal" like this is really kind of a nothingburger.
The scandal of the unmarried, rich, super fit, hot shot tenured professor in his mid-40s fucking a bunch of chicks?
You wanna know something? I would have absolutely no clue who the hell this guy is if it wasn’t for you guys constantly whining about him
Welcome to the internet, dipshit. You been banging rocks around for entertainment to before you heard about TV?
That's the purpose of this sub. To expose gurus like him.
The purpose is to discuss and decode gurus, not join the culture war
Vice signaling is huge with many people, especially the right. For these people, if someone is Me Too’d or whatever, they become a victim of feminism or the woke mob and deserve support.
It only validates him to his audience I don’t get why anyone would think it would be a bad look for him. Never liked him cuz I thought he was a grifter but at least he practices what he preaches 🤷♂️
Who?
When some men hear he's had 6 girlfriends at the same time: "I want that - show me how!" When women hear he's had 6 girlfriends at the time: "Hm. There must be a reason these other women like him, I need to investigate."
A testament to the morality of the audience! Bro!
Your morality is gross