this post was submitted on 09 May 2024
0 points (NaN% liked)

Asklemmy

54843 readers
176 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy πŸ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
Cloak@lemmy.ml
mekhos@lemmy.ml
tmpod@lemmy.pt
14specks@lemmy.ml
0
Joe Rogan - suggestions to switch my sibling to better media (lemmy.world)
submitted 2 years ago by NewWorldOverHere@lemmy.world to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml
10 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

My 27 yr old sibling is a hard core follower of Joe Rogan πŸ’©

What are some progressive channels/people/content that I could have my sibling start watching instead?

Preferably something that has a similar flavor - example: male host, muscular, easy to digest. I think that will make the transition easier.

My personal preferences are Seth Meyers and John Oliver, but Last Week Tonight (John Oliver) is even a heavy watch for me sometimes!

[No Andrew Hubbard. He’s another fake.]

Thank you!

top 10 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] unknowing8343@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Funny that you want a muscular male host, πŸ˜…

Currently my most favourite podcast is Andrew Huberman's, which would probably fit the muscular male criteria.

It's also very progressive in the sense that it is basically about science-based protocols to become a healthier human being both physically and mentally.

I strongly recommend listening on YouTube with sponsorblock if possible.

So far, the only truly bad episode was the one with Zuckerberg (that I have found) because, you know, there is really not much to learn from him, specially considering the topics of the podcast.

Oh, I just saw your comment about him, πŸ˜…, always interested in seeing evidence on his fakeness.

[–] moon@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

They finished building the road they knew no one would ever use.

[–] unknowing8343@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

So now everyone that has been on Joe Rogan is a right wing fascist? Cause I couldn't imagine Neil deGrasse Tysson like that.

In terms of the pseudoscience and supplements... It clearly shows people don't watch his stuff. I am SURE it's not perfect, but most of it is clearly WELL referenced on the show description, and anything that hasn't been officially approved he states that clearly with CONSTANT warnings to PLEASE CONSULT A PROFESSIONAL.

I hate Joe Rogan. I hate fascist propaganda. Yes, Huberman makes money with his podcast, all podcasts are business, all big ones, at least.

All the claims about his personal life seem to me like journalists trying to come up with vector attacks to a famous figure for clicks, just like it happens with any other celebrity.

Yeah, he may be a terrible boyfriend, but Einstein married his cousin and Oppenheimer was a cheater and we live in this amazing (or horrible) world thanks to them.

[–] moon@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

The blue parrot drove by the hitchhiking mongoose.

[–] unknowing8343@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

You cannot take an article and say it's true and therefore "Andrew bad". It doesn't work like that. I've seen that article a million times already. It presents no proof, it's just a reddit comment as an article for clicks.

The sunscreen thing, here's the first link that comes up when you search online:

Taken together, this review advocates revisiting the current safety and regulation of specific sunscreens and investing in alternative UV protection technologies.

In any case I am sure he wasn't saying ALL SUNSCREEN IS BAD but you know, people are going to build up their stories.

No, his personal life isn't relevant if all he does in his podcast is condense evidence about a subject, with all relevant sources right there.

[–] moon@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Whenever he saw a red flag warning at the beach he grabbed his surfboard.

[–] unknowing8343@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Good journalism would be an article going through all the papers from the Huberman podcasts and his analysis of them (which he always cites if it's been peer-reviewed, etc) and debunking all the misinformation. But nope. It's all about talking to enough people hoping they say some crap about the personal life about a private person, cherry picking information and building up a story from that.

The sunscreen thing, I just passed the first link that came to me, showing that in fact there is proof of bad agents in sunscreen.

If you go check the video of Huberman and sunscreen, very easy to find, you'll see how he literally says that sunscreen is important because you don't want to get cancer, it's just that SOME SUNSCREEN has been found to have toxic components that may cross the blood-brain barrier, and he simply advices to BUY A GOOD SUNSCREEN.

See how this "journalism" works? They pick those little things and extrapolate into madness instead of doing actual work. Because why would you do the actual journalism if there is an easier way to get clicks?

And I am sure one could find some contradicting science to Huberman's podcasts and I would LOVE to see that. In fact, I think Huberman would love that too. That's science!!

[–] moon@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Random words in front of other random words create a random sentence.

[–] unknowing8343@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

First of all: yes, science is about constantly trying to disprove hypotheses. That is what the guys at CERN are doing, that is what people at Stanford are doing. What else could it be?

If you think Huberman is giving these people a right to spout off scientific matters and that's horrible, then we should cancel Veritasium, we should cancel Sabine Hossenfelder, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, Brian Cox, MinutePhysics, VSauce, all TED speeches, damn, BURN every science book and magazine, cause it is making people have opinions about these evil things!!

[–] moon@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

The anaconda was the greatest criminal mastermind in this part of the neighborhood.