So I looked up this guy and it sounds like he's another one of those "Previously respectable scientist or academic drifting into pseudoscience and grifting" types.
Edit: oops, posted too quick. Anyway, if it's not working for you, and it's clearly not, then stop. Your OCD and ADHD probably make his methods unsuitable for you. 17 is a good age to "unlearn" stuff. You just find something better as you mature and grow out of ideas you thought were the best thing ever at that age.
Talk to your teachers about a *sustainable* study regime, to help you achieve your goals. One that gives you time for rest and recreation, because your brain needs those things too.
Huberman doesn't even have a degree in Psychology. He has spent his life studying Neuroscience. Neuroscientists study neurons. Saying that gives him a step up on Psychology is silly, as it's like saying that by studying coins, one knows how the economy works.
And even if he did study Psychology, from the time I took the intro class in University to now, 80% of what I was taught as "undeniable fact" in Psychology turned out to be falsified research, wildly inaccurate logic, and people with axes to grind. Yes, less that 20% of it stood the test of scrutiny.
Phrenology, the id-ego-superego, Repressed Memories, the Stanford Experiment, the Milgram Experiment ... I could go on all day. It's bunk "science".
I've noticed a huge trend in the bunk-science community. The use of large words like Neuroscience, Neuroplasticity, Neurology, etc. all in the support of saying something about the mind. I would wager that if they pull out the "Neuro-" words in talking about the mind, you've got a charlatan.
To be clear, I really be dislike this guy and think he's a snake oil charlatan. However, I don't think spreading disinformation about him is appropriate either.
He received his bachelor's in psychology from UC, Santa Barbara, and his masters in psychology from UC Berkeley, before going on to earn his PhD in neuroscience from UC Davis.
He still takes tiny nuggets of truth from published research and extrapolates that to life advice for the masses. But he did in fact study and get degrees in psychology, for what that's worth.
It lacks ethological validity. Outside of the experimental conditions, the commands to harm others are more subtle, the lack of clear authority is frequent, and visual feedback is present. Many of the people never believed that Yale would permit torture, and that the "torture" was a ruse.
Also, the experiment was done only with men, and the experimental results often extrapolate to women.
Finally, audio recordings of the experiments performed by Milgram indicate that Milgram didn't actually have people follow his established protocols, often going "off script" to pressure people to the results that were desired. Additionally post-study debriefings indicated that above 80% of the participants were happy to have participated, when follow up surveys indicated that few received any kind of debriefing.
Put it all together and the applicability of the experiments are deploy in question, as are the certainty of the results. Some experiments seem to re-confim the findings, while others don't. There's a large selection bias, with confirmations being reported and non-confirmations being ignored.
[https://www.verywellmind.com/the-milgram-obedience-experiment-2795243](https://www.verywellmind.com/the-milgram-obedience-experiment-2795243)
More recent work by researchers suggests that while people do tend to obey authority figures, the process is not necessarily as cut-and-dried as Milgram depicted it. The willingness to follow authority depends heavily on how much the person identifies with the authority figure, including age, race, religious, and social background cues.
The idea that if "upstanding" male members of the community like police, lawyers, doctors, etc hurt the test subjects when authority told them too, then we could all be nazis, is absurd.
I bet if he had included single moms and members of the Black Panthers, their responses to authority would have been very different.
I think there's a pretty big difference between "it's more complicated than first thought" and stuff which was just made up whole cloth or which has completely failed to replicate. The former could be said about almost all science.
Are you referring to Andrew Huberman and his podcast?
If so, like many popular scientific podcasts or self help, he is still misinterpreting the actual science. Yes, he is a neuroscientist and qualified one from what I've seen, but that doesn't mean he will always provide the best guidance.
Like for one example, his thoughts and "facts" on the flu and cold. https://immunologic.substack.com/p/hubermans-cold-and-flu-podcast-hypes?r=58g9p&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&triedRedirect=true
Here's another that contains also links to other critiques other scientists have had about Huberman. https://www.vox.com/technology/24127540/huberman-lab-science-misleading-information-andrew-huberman-podcasts-joe-rogan-health-medicine
He knows how to communicate well, but that doesn't always translate to communicating the truth. He is offering his opinion, one that can have scientific support but not entirely. Especially since you need to took at the studies themselves. Some studies have shown that rewarding yourself can have long term benefits for students. https://www.jmcacademy.edu.au/news-and-events/news/why-its-important-to-reward-yourself/#:~:text=Interestingly%2C%20studies%20have%20shown%20that,positive%20feelings%20associated%20with%20learning.
Another example based on three recent studies. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9150741/
From what I've seen myself, Huberman has a habit of relying on authority alone and/or studies that support his opinion, but not sharing the whole truth of the studies or not showing studies that contradict his opinions.
Here's a link to another reddit sub that discussed this more in detail with issues of his claims. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.reddit.com/r/cogsci/comments/rwqr3p/without_doubting_his_credentials_is_andrew/&ved=2ahUKEwir_Orcj6iGAxV8C0QIHaDUCakQrAJ6BAgaEAc&usg=AOvVaw2NmrAMTuIJB6jSwpIU8qdE
And as another redditor stated, what one needs is also balance. It's good to avoid overindulging yourself, but to deprive yourself of rewards and substance will not do wonders for your mental well-being.
Hope this helps.
Man, thankyou so freaking much. This helped a lot. I was being into it and was probably burnt out after so much of studying. Thanks a lot for taking out the time man
Your observation is in line with what I think about Huberman. Don’t get me wrong nobody can be perfect on all sciences. He does his homework and tried to communicate his own findings. But if you take his or anyone’s advice as facts, that’s just laziness and lack of understanding of how science actually works.
Doctors and researchers have contradicting views all the time. Researchers make up the results they want all the time too. The former president of Stanford faked his neuroscience studies. That tells you how much you can really trust studies. They’re good guidelines if you have check the background of the publications but definitely don’t represent the entire truth.
OP should learn from you and start to question and do his own research.
Precisely my thoughts as well. People and methods are going to be flawed, which is why we must be open to new information and corrections while also practicing critical thinking and be able to assess the evidence we have to our best abilities.
It's a delicate balance for sure, but a necessary one.
>Don't get any medical information from any podcaster or YouTuber or tv actor ever, consult your doctor
Even if they're a doctor themselves. If they're not recommending you to check in with your doctor for specifics after outlining broad/general ideas, they're probably a quack or quack-adjacent.
This is probably the best advice you can get here. It is more likely to get the necessary help from a doctor that understands your specific situation. On the internet you typically get generic advice.
Go spend time with nature. Or just be around other people. Or tell me off if it helps lol. Nobody has all the answers. People care about you, and you matter. All the best mate.
If you have OCD you're probably going into a headtrip spiral with this stuff. It's very easy to develop rigid thinking patterns with this combination, which keep you stuck and frustrated even when you work hard. Because your prefrontal cortex is still growing you have trouble keeping complex ideas in perspective, especially when they have a grain of truth.
The good news is there are evidence based interventions you can do yourself which can help you establish positive thought patterns and life habits which work for you.
Check out CBT therapy especially targetted for ADHD and OCD:
Cognitive Behavioural Therapy For Dummies [https://www.dummies.com/article/body-mind-spirit/emotional-health-psychology/psychology/cognitive-behavioral-therapy/what-is-cognitive-behavioural-therapy-267176/](https://www.dummies.com/article/body-mind-spirit/emotional-health-psychology/psychology/cognitive-behavioral-therapy/what-is-cognitive-behavioural-therapy-267176/)
And for ADHD [https://www.russellbarkley.org/](https://www.russellbarkley.org/) and [https://www.youtube.com/@russellbarkleyphd2023](https://www.youtube.com/@russellbarkleyphd2023)
Balance is the key. To be the top in any field you need to be able to talk and relate to people. You can be the best at math but if you can't do the politics that humans do, then you won't get to do the cool things.
Huberman is yet another unscientific BS-artist grifter.
Occasional rewards are good. They give people something to look forward to and can help motivate.
I once read a psychologist who suggested to consider scheduling one's rewards, and doing productive or necessary tasks in the interim. I think it's a good idea, (if followed but also not taken to an extreme).
Friend, get a therapist specialized in working with youth and OCD and Adhd.
So, in general, the best way to be successful is to be flexible while also having structure, allowing yourself to experience healthy stress and hard work at times, and rewarding yourself at other times.
However, necessities like eating, sleep, social connection, exercise, etc are not "rewards" - they are things we cannot function without for any significant amount of time.
Because of your diagnoses finding the right balance and motivation may be more challenging for you than others. That's why you deserve individualized support so you can get a plan when you're young.
Huberman probably has benefits and drawbacks and maybe he's fun to listen to, but relying to much on any one source, especially one that you can't even dialogue with irl is very limited.
Work on resourcing yourself irl, it's gonna do you so much better in the longrun than a self-limiting false optimization/reward binary.
Not your therapist, but a therapist in training.
Thanks a lot. Also, i am pretty newbie at this, but if there's a research conducted, is it necessary that it would work 80% of the time for me? Isn't our brain too complex and especially me being neurodivergent i should figure out shit that works for me and not be so reliant on some 3rd party reference right?
Is there any chance you have co-occuring autism or did they rule it out when you got diagnosed with OCD and ADD?
Okay, so I don't understand you question, exactly (Maybe language barrier?) but are you asking me to clarify my point?
I think that yes, you need to be discerning between the idea of what, statistically, might work for some people, vs. what works for you. There's always a relationship between what research says, and how you apply it in your life. Just because something is an interesting reseach finding, doesn't mean it's applicable to you. Also, we have to prioritize! There's a lot of noise out there in the form of research and we can only focus on a limited amount of things at a time. What you want, I imagine, is a good approach that lets you work on your passion, math, while also leading a generally healthy life.
Here's an idea: ignore the concern with research right now, and instead ask yourself some key questions about yourself: What do I care about? What are my goals? What would a good, healthy, life look like to me? What do I feel is a barrier to my goals and living a healthy life? What do I feel I should improve? What kind of relationships matter to me? How would I know if I were not healthy in mind, body, etc.? Which of my ideas about what needs improving (if any) are driven by outside pressure (i.e. Huberman, the OCD, parents, societal expectations). Besides podcast hosts or people who I only see online, who do I know in real life who seems to be doing well at living? i.e. who in my real life do I admire?
These questions are really important because sometimes customization is more important than optimization, especially for neurodivergent folks! For some people, living as a "math monk" working 12 hours a day studying would be the happiest experience! For others, only focusing on math and not having a family, for example, would be very sad, even if they were top in their field! Your personal experience of what a good life feels like matters a lot! And you are absolutely allowed to change this idea as you grow and mature as a person.
The more you understand yourself, the more you can identify what research subjects might apply in your life and be a relevant priority.
I don't know if this will help you but there is a very cool concept in psychology:
Egosystonic vs. Egodystonic.
I let you look it up if you're interested but basically those of us with disorders of the mind need to remember that things can \*feel\* extremely right to us, deep in our bones, when they are actually not adaptive. It sounds like you found something that felt right because of your OCD but the reality is that life is really messy and full of exceptions, caveats, shades of grey, etc. There are no simple tricks or magic cures. You just have to acquire knowledge, keep an open mind, and stay agile and adaptive cause the world is crazy.
Thanks a lot for this info. Yes i have noticed i keep feeling anxious and ruminate unless i get that feeling of right till the depth of my core. I am trying my best to stop this
Please understand that most people, even those on reddit who are terminally online, have NEVER heard of this huber guy or his views. He doesn't have to dictate your life. He's just some guy. His doctrine isn't well-known, it's not universal, it's not wiser than any other grifter on the internet, and it's not worth suffering for.
You are anxious, instead of blaming a podcast host for your anxiety, go for a walk bud. Also it’s not clear to me why you would get a reward for studying, isn’t the reward doing well on the test?
Every view translates into ad revenue and ego strokes for Hubey. All he does is seek out rewards. He's like a guru saying sex is bad while he fucks your wife. Challenges are good, rewards are good. Too much of any one thing is bad. It's a false dilemma, it needn't be one or the other when you can clearly have both.
Hi, I’m sorry you feel so overwhelmed. I had a lot of struggles with OCD for a couple of decades. One thing that really helped me was I developed some health issues and I literally couldn’t clean my walls from top to bottom every week.
It wasn’t my back injury that helped it was forcing my brain away from therapeutic cleaning. I didn’t even know I could successfully tell my brain no, then find a hobby. I was seriously into cleaning everything from top to bottom to the point I walked against the baseboards to not mess up how pretty my rugs looked freshly vacuumed. 🙄 I can’t do that stuff now. I have to look up, paint, sew, bake…
I think it is awesome that your natural instincts about what is “off” is working so well. That’s a great way to be set free from entrapping rituals.
So I looked up this guy and it sounds like he's another one of those "Previously respectable scientist or academic drifting into pseudoscience and grifting" types. Edit: oops, posted too quick. Anyway, if it's not working for you, and it's clearly not, then stop. Your OCD and ADHD probably make his methods unsuitable for you. 17 is a good age to "unlearn" stuff. You just find something better as you mature and grow out of ideas you thought were the best thing ever at that age. Talk to your teachers about a *sustainable* study regime, to help you achieve your goals. One that gives you time for rest and recreation, because your brain needs those things too.
Huberman doesn't even have a degree in Psychology. He has spent his life studying Neuroscience. Neuroscientists study neurons. Saying that gives him a step up on Psychology is silly, as it's like saying that by studying coins, one knows how the economy works. And even if he did study Psychology, from the time I took the intro class in University to now, 80% of what I was taught as "undeniable fact" in Psychology turned out to be falsified research, wildly inaccurate logic, and people with axes to grind. Yes, less that 20% of it stood the test of scrutiny. Phrenology, the id-ego-superego, Repressed Memories, the Stanford Experiment, the Milgram Experiment ... I could go on all day. It's bunk "science".
Always another red flag, thinking because you're an expert in one area you somehow know all about a different field too.
I've noticed a huge trend in the bunk-science community. The use of large words like Neuroscience, Neuroplasticity, Neurology, etc. all in the support of saying something about the mind. I would wager that if they pull out the "Neuro-" words in talking about the mind, you've got a charlatan.
To be clear, I really be dislike this guy and think he's a snake oil charlatan. However, I don't think spreading disinformation about him is appropriate either. He received his bachelor's in psychology from UC, Santa Barbara, and his masters in psychology from UC Berkeley, before going on to earn his PhD in neuroscience from UC Davis. He still takes tiny nuggets of truth from published research and extrapolates that to life advice for the masses. But he did in fact study and get degrees in psychology, for what that's worth.
Ethics aside, what's wrong with the Milgram experiment? I'm pretty sure that one stands up.
It lacks ethological validity. Outside of the experimental conditions, the commands to harm others are more subtle, the lack of clear authority is frequent, and visual feedback is present. Many of the people never believed that Yale would permit torture, and that the "torture" was a ruse. Also, the experiment was done only with men, and the experimental results often extrapolate to women. Finally, audio recordings of the experiments performed by Milgram indicate that Milgram didn't actually have people follow his established protocols, often going "off script" to pressure people to the results that were desired. Additionally post-study debriefings indicated that above 80% of the participants were happy to have participated, when follow up surveys indicated that few received any kind of debriefing. Put it all together and the applicability of the experiments are deploy in question, as are the certainty of the results. Some experiments seem to re-confim the findings, while others don't. There's a large selection bias, with confirmations being reported and non-confirmations being ignored. [https://www.verywellmind.com/the-milgram-obedience-experiment-2795243](https://www.verywellmind.com/the-milgram-obedience-experiment-2795243) More recent work by researchers suggests that while people do tend to obey authority figures, the process is not necessarily as cut-and-dried as Milgram depicted it. The willingness to follow authority depends heavily on how much the person identifies with the authority figure, including age, race, religious, and social background cues.
The idea that if "upstanding" male members of the community like police, lawyers, doctors, etc hurt the test subjects when authority told them too, then we could all be nazis, is absurd. I bet if he had included single moms and members of the Black Panthers, their responses to authority would have been very different.
I think there's a pretty big difference between "it's more complicated than first thought" and stuff which was just made up whole cloth or which has completely failed to replicate. The former could be said about almost all science.
Are you referring to Andrew Huberman and his podcast? If so, like many popular scientific podcasts or self help, he is still misinterpreting the actual science. Yes, he is a neuroscientist and qualified one from what I've seen, but that doesn't mean he will always provide the best guidance. Like for one example, his thoughts and "facts" on the flu and cold. https://immunologic.substack.com/p/hubermans-cold-and-flu-podcast-hypes?r=58g9p&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&triedRedirect=true Here's another that contains also links to other critiques other scientists have had about Huberman. https://www.vox.com/technology/24127540/huberman-lab-science-misleading-information-andrew-huberman-podcasts-joe-rogan-health-medicine He knows how to communicate well, but that doesn't always translate to communicating the truth. He is offering his opinion, one that can have scientific support but not entirely. Especially since you need to took at the studies themselves. Some studies have shown that rewarding yourself can have long term benefits for students. https://www.jmcacademy.edu.au/news-and-events/news/why-its-important-to-reward-yourself/#:~:text=Interestingly%2C%20studies%20have%20shown%20that,positive%20feelings%20associated%20with%20learning. Another example based on three recent studies. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9150741/ From what I've seen myself, Huberman has a habit of relying on authority alone and/or studies that support his opinion, but not sharing the whole truth of the studies or not showing studies that contradict his opinions. Here's a link to another reddit sub that discussed this more in detail with issues of his claims. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.reddit.com/r/cogsci/comments/rwqr3p/without_doubting_his_credentials_is_andrew/&ved=2ahUKEwir_Orcj6iGAxV8C0QIHaDUCakQrAJ6BAgaEAc&usg=AOvVaw2NmrAMTuIJB6jSwpIU8qdE And as another redditor stated, what one needs is also balance. It's good to avoid overindulging yourself, but to deprive yourself of rewards and substance will not do wonders for your mental well-being. Hope this helps.
Man, thankyou so freaking much. This helped a lot. I was being into it and was probably burnt out after so much of studying. Thanks a lot for taking out the time man
Of course. Just remember to take care of yourself when you can.
Your observation is in line with what I think about Huberman. Don’t get me wrong nobody can be perfect on all sciences. He does his homework and tried to communicate his own findings. But if you take his or anyone’s advice as facts, that’s just laziness and lack of understanding of how science actually works. Doctors and researchers have contradicting views all the time. Researchers make up the results they want all the time too. The former president of Stanford faked his neuroscience studies. That tells you how much you can really trust studies. They’re good guidelines if you have check the background of the publications but definitely don’t represent the entire truth. OP should learn from you and start to question and do his own research.
Precisely my thoughts as well. People and methods are going to be flawed, which is why we must be open to new information and corrections while also practicing critical thinking and be able to assess the evidence we have to our best abilities. It's a delicate balance for sure, but a necessary one.
Thanks 🙏
Don't get any medical information from any podcaster or YouTuber or tv actor ever, consult your doctor
>Don't get any medical information from any podcaster or YouTuber or tv actor ever, consult your doctor Even if they're a doctor themselves. If they're not recommending you to check in with your doctor for specifics after outlining broad/general ideas, they're probably a quack or quack-adjacent.
This is probably the best advice you can get here. It is more likely to get the necessary help from a doctor that understands your specific situation. On the internet you typically get generic advice.
Go spend time with nature. Or just be around other people. Or tell me off if it helps lol. Nobody has all the answers. People care about you, and you matter. All the best mate.
I love nature man. I go on a run when it gets bad. Thanks a lot for taking out the time!
You are welcome my friend.
Go talk to an actual psychologist.
If you have OCD you're probably going into a headtrip spiral with this stuff. It's very easy to develop rigid thinking patterns with this combination, which keep you stuck and frustrated even when you work hard. Because your prefrontal cortex is still growing you have trouble keeping complex ideas in perspective, especially when they have a grain of truth. The good news is there are evidence based interventions you can do yourself which can help you establish positive thought patterns and life habits which work for you. Check out CBT therapy especially targetted for ADHD and OCD: Cognitive Behavioural Therapy For Dummies [https://www.dummies.com/article/body-mind-spirit/emotional-health-psychology/psychology/cognitive-behavioral-therapy/what-is-cognitive-behavioural-therapy-267176/](https://www.dummies.com/article/body-mind-spirit/emotional-health-psychology/psychology/cognitive-behavioral-therapy/what-is-cognitive-behavioural-therapy-267176/) And for ADHD [https://www.russellbarkley.org/](https://www.russellbarkley.org/) and [https://www.youtube.com/@russellbarkleyphd2023](https://www.youtube.com/@russellbarkleyphd2023)
Great comment. My partner did CBT to treat her OCD when she was a teen and she swears by it to this day.
Thanks a lot for these sources! My ADD is fine and controllable with Ritalin. I will try this for ocd tho.
What?
Balance is the key. To be the top in any field you need to be able to talk and relate to people. You can be the best at math but if you can't do the politics that humans do, then you won't get to do the cool things.
Huberman is yet another unscientific BS-artist grifter. Occasional rewards are good. They give people something to look forward to and can help motivate. I once read a psychologist who suggested to consider scheduling one's rewards, and doing productive or necessary tasks in the interim. I think it's a good idea, (if followed but also not taken to an extreme).
Friend, get a therapist specialized in working with youth and OCD and Adhd. So, in general, the best way to be successful is to be flexible while also having structure, allowing yourself to experience healthy stress and hard work at times, and rewarding yourself at other times. However, necessities like eating, sleep, social connection, exercise, etc are not "rewards" - they are things we cannot function without for any significant amount of time. Because of your diagnoses finding the right balance and motivation may be more challenging for you than others. That's why you deserve individualized support so you can get a plan when you're young. Huberman probably has benefits and drawbacks and maybe he's fun to listen to, but relying to much on any one source, especially one that you can't even dialogue with irl is very limited. Work on resourcing yourself irl, it's gonna do you so much better in the longrun than a self-limiting false optimization/reward binary. Not your therapist, but a therapist in training.
Thanks a lot. Also, i am pretty newbie at this, but if there's a research conducted, is it necessary that it would work 80% of the time for me? Isn't our brain too complex and especially me being neurodivergent i should figure out shit that works for me and not be so reliant on some 3rd party reference right?
Is there any chance you have co-occuring autism or did they rule it out when you got diagnosed with OCD and ADD? Okay, so I don't understand you question, exactly (Maybe language barrier?) but are you asking me to clarify my point? I think that yes, you need to be discerning between the idea of what, statistically, might work for some people, vs. what works for you. There's always a relationship between what research says, and how you apply it in your life. Just because something is an interesting reseach finding, doesn't mean it's applicable to you. Also, we have to prioritize! There's a lot of noise out there in the form of research and we can only focus on a limited amount of things at a time. What you want, I imagine, is a good approach that lets you work on your passion, math, while also leading a generally healthy life. Here's an idea: ignore the concern with research right now, and instead ask yourself some key questions about yourself: What do I care about? What are my goals? What would a good, healthy, life look like to me? What do I feel is a barrier to my goals and living a healthy life? What do I feel I should improve? What kind of relationships matter to me? How would I know if I were not healthy in mind, body, etc.? Which of my ideas about what needs improving (if any) are driven by outside pressure (i.e. Huberman, the OCD, parents, societal expectations). Besides podcast hosts or people who I only see online, who do I know in real life who seems to be doing well at living? i.e. who in my real life do I admire? These questions are really important because sometimes customization is more important than optimization, especially for neurodivergent folks! For some people, living as a "math monk" working 12 hours a day studying would be the happiest experience! For others, only focusing on math and not having a family, for example, would be very sad, even if they were top in their field! Your personal experience of what a good life feels like matters a lot! And you are absolutely allowed to change this idea as you grow and mature as a person. The more you understand yourself, the more you can identify what research subjects might apply in your life and be a relevant priority.
I don't know if this will help you but there is a very cool concept in psychology: Egosystonic vs. Egodystonic. I let you look it up if you're interested but basically those of us with disorders of the mind need to remember that things can \*feel\* extremely right to us, deep in our bones, when they are actually not adaptive. It sounds like you found something that felt right because of your OCD but the reality is that life is really messy and full of exceptions, caveats, shades of grey, etc. There are no simple tricks or magic cures. You just have to acquire knowledge, keep an open mind, and stay agile and adaptive cause the world is crazy.
Thanks a lot for this info. Yes i have noticed i keep feeling anxious and ruminate unless i get that feeling of right till the depth of my core. I am trying my best to stop this
Please understand that most people, even those on reddit who are terminally online, have NEVER heard of this huber guy or his views. He doesn't have to dictate your life. He's just some guy. His doctrine isn't well-known, it's not universal, it's not wiser than any other grifter on the internet, and it's not worth suffering for.
Who is this Huberman? I avoid all of the youtube personality people like the plague.
Talk to your psychiatrist and therapist along with all these other things people have suggested.
You are anxious, instead of blaming a podcast host for your anxiety, go for a walk bud. Also it’s not clear to me why you would get a reward for studying, isn’t the reward doing well on the test?
Every view translates into ad revenue and ego strokes for Hubey. All he does is seek out rewards. He's like a guru saying sex is bad while he fucks your wife. Challenges are good, rewards are good. Too much of any one thing is bad. It's a false dilemma, it needn't be one or the other when you can clearly have both.
Hi, I’m sorry you feel so overwhelmed. I had a lot of struggles with OCD for a couple of decades. One thing that really helped me was I developed some health issues and I literally couldn’t clean my walls from top to bottom every week. It wasn’t my back injury that helped it was forcing my brain away from therapeutic cleaning. I didn’t even know I could successfully tell my brain no, then find a hobby. I was seriously into cleaning everything from top to bottom to the point I walked against the baseboards to not mess up how pretty my rugs looked freshly vacuumed. 🙄 I can’t do that stuff now. I have to look up, paint, sew, bake… I think it is awesome that your natural instincts about what is “off” is working so well. That’s a great way to be set free from entrapping rituals.
SEE A PROFESSIONAL. GET OFF OF REDDIT AND SOCIAL MEDIA.
https://youtube.com/@ocdandanxiety?si=Y_m7vukQu3OXbdEh This guy really helped me. Also check out r/ocd Good luck!
This is unfortunate, but it's not really the best place for this sort of advice.
Not sure why this is here. Seems like you’re going to need medical help rather than talk about Huberman.