Live data from Hacker News

Serotonin booster leads to increased functional brain connectivity

alphagalileo.org

251–260 of 293 posts

Re: Serotonin booster leads to increased functional brain connectivity

#251
post #166
post #73

I’ll probably be downvoted for pointing this out but I feel like it’s important. 90% of the comments at the time of my posting this are great examples of the logical fallacy a lot of intelligent people fall into where they think their intelligence in one area means they’re qualified to make assessments or reach conclusions in fields outside of their own. This would be the same error in judgment that’s turned the noot…

> intelligent people fall into where they think their intelligence in one area means they’re qualified to make assessments or reach conclusions in fields outside of their own you're describing 99.99% of hackernews, lol (and I'm not even sure people here are that intelligent in the first place) (in case anyone is reading this thinking I'm saying I'm intelligent, rest assured I'm not)

I’m part of the 0.1%. The way I can tell that I’m very intelligent is because I know I’m always right.

Re: Serotonin booster leads to increased functional brain connectivity

#252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think we're disagreeing. I was specific to use "computer scientists" rather than "tech people". Lots of tech people are not programmers, which is mainly who I was talking about.

We are disagreeing. In my experience computer scientists are the dumbest "tech people" of all. I'm being facetious here, because I'm on a forum dominated by coders and it's a cheap thrill to troll a little bit. So to restate my opinion with less snark, I don't believe software engineers are any more rational or intelligent than other folks in the tech field. Most of the smartest tech people I've encountered have been…

> So to restate my opinion with less snark, I don't believe software engineers are any more rational or intelligent than other folks in the tech field.

I think "rational" and "intelligent" are imprecise words that have different meanings to different people. I think if we restrict ourselves to the questions like, would a computer scientist or an English Lit professor be able to speak more intelligently about genetics, or psychology, or botany, we have a more well-defined question.

> Tunnel vision is exactly the problem being discussed. It's like if you're really good at crossword puzzles and you think that would make you a good English Lit Professor.

Crossword skills aren't transferrable to English lit, so the analogy fails. Computer science and programming are training in deductive and inductive reasoning, which are general cognitive skills.

It's just self-evident that someone who's experienced and adept at deductive and inductive reasoning would also be adept at solving problems and inferring facts in other domains. They are for sure hampered by a lack of domain knowledge, but my point was that, all else being equal (like their knowledgebase), someone who has this training and experience would simply be more effective at inferring facts about a topic they know little about.

I don't think any point you raised contradicts this argument. Yes, people with more life experience or more varied interests have more knowledge to draw upon from which they can infer tangential facts.

But if said person were also a programmer, they would perform even better at such a challenge. And so, in aggregate, such people would perform better overall at such challenges than other professions.

Edit: there could of course be other mitigating factors that overwhelm this argument, for instance, maybe programmers are less inclined to have varied experiences (hyperfocus on computers, say) and so they just have a smaller knowledgebase from which to argue from, and so they appear less effective at such a challenge. But then not all else is equal.

Re: Serotonin booster leads to increased functional brain connectivity

#253
post #73

I’ll probably be downvoted for pointing this out but I feel like it’s important. 90% of the comments at the time of my posting this are great examples of the logical fallacy a lot of intelligent people fall into where they think their intelligence in one area means they’re qualified to make assessments or reach conclusions in fields outside of their own. This would be the same error in judgment that’s turned the noot…

Ok. Please describe the specifics of the trap, tho.

Telling us HN are doing "bad" won't help until you tell us what the bad is.

Re: Serotonin booster leads to increased functional brain connectivity

#254
post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN readers are the human equivalent of ChatGPT?

HN commenters like you and I are like ChatGPT, unaware if what we're saying is nonsense; we're full of ourselves and believe have something worthwhile to say. The lurkers on the other hand are humbler and smarter than us, they prefer reading instead of voicing their misinformed opinion, aware of their ignorance.

Sorry, by reader I actually wanted to say comenters. I guess I'm more like ChatGPT than I'd like to admit!

Re: Serotonin booster leads to increased functional brain connectivity

#255
post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The health podcast industry is making this problem even worse. Many people consume content like Huberman’s podcast and assume he’s an expert because he speaks so confidently and at such lengths. Yet Huberman’s podcasts are well known to contain a lot of errors on very basic concepts and extreme exaggerations. He appears to well-versed in topics related to his domain of study, albeit with exaggerations of his findings…

What are your opinions on Peter Attia’s podcast? They seem similar but it’s impossible for a lay person to judge if they’re trustworthy.

My take on both of them is that there’s a lot of research supporting positive health outcomes which they oddly tend to neglect, and I suspect they have strong biases. I should preface this with admitting I know nothing at all about this stuff.

There was one episode where Huberman had a guy on talking about how young men should drink milk to maximize free testosterone and thus maximize “health” outcomes like height. There is a fairly substantial amount of research suggesting this isn’t actually a great idea more generally speaking because maximizing body size doesn’t have inherent benefits and could even have long term disadvantages for health outcomes. Further, drinking a lot of milk appears to be correlated with increased likelihood of developing cancer. And worse still, there are other foods which deliver the benefits of milk without the same disadvantages. Yet this odd little bit was accepted freely and without any criticality. Finally, maximizing height is kind of a culturally motivated desire in my mind. If you’re happy and healthy, who cares if you didn’t milk your growth spurts to the utmost degree? Is being 5’10” a shameful thing? Or even 5’6”? It struck me as so bizarre to hear someone in health still bent on growing kids larger. We’re not cattle. If we eat enough, we’ll grow enough. Let it be.

Attia has been slowly shifting over, but he’s been very pro animal-based foods in a field of research where the greater body of work indicates that these foods should be more limited or emphasized quite a bit less than he has. Or maybe this has changed quite recently. I know in the last few years he has begun to mention more often that eating plants appears to be critical to health and performance, but when I’ve listened in, he still heavily encourages eating more meat than seems necessary. It seems weird given he has a book about longevity now (I’m only half way through so maybe he’ll surprise me still) yet he doesn’t seem to be on the cutting edge of this research in regards to diet.

They’re very smart (smarter than I am by a wide margin) and probably very current in their research but I suppose it seems like they ignore certain areas of research. They seem a little “old fashioned” at times when it comes to diet in particular.

I’m not saying people should never eat meat. It’s about moderation. Attia also emphasizes consuming protein in ways that a lot of research doesn’t support, but I’m not in the field so what the hell. I don’t know who’s more correct.

Re: Serotonin booster leads to increased functional brain connectivity

#256
post #73

I’ll probably be downvoted for pointing this out but I feel like it’s important. 90% of the comments at the time of my posting this are great examples of the logical fallacy a lot of intelligent people fall into where they think their intelligence in one area means they’re qualified to make assessments or reach conclusions in fields outside of their own. This would be the same error in judgment that’s turned the noot…

The health podcast industry is making this problem even worse. Many people consume content like Huberman’s podcast and assume he’s an expert because he speaks so confidently and at such lengths. Yet Huberman’s podcasts are well known to contain a lot of errors on very basic concepts and extreme exaggerations. He appears to well-versed in topics related to his domain of study, albeit with exaggerations of his findings…

That's functionally identical to how generative LLM AIs have no problem successfully outputting objectively false bullshit or blatant hallucinations that people will readily accept as true. No one needs actual facts or data cause anyone capable of speaking with a manipulative psychopath's boundless confidence interspersed with a couple technical terms knows what they're talking about, right?

Re: Serotonin booster leads to increased functional brain connectivity

#257
post #73

I’ll probably be downvoted for pointing this out but I feel like it’s important. 90% of the comments at the time of my posting this are great examples of the logical fallacy a lot of intelligent people fall into where they think their intelligence in one area means they’re qualified to make assessments or reach conclusions in fields outside of their own. This would be the same error in judgment that’s turned the noot…

> the logical fallacy a lot of intelligent people fall into where they think their intelligence in one area means they’re qualified to make assessments or reach conclusions in fields outside of their own

The Dunning-Kruger effect.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

> The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias whereby people with low ability, expertise, or experience regarding a type of task or area of knowledge tend to overestimate their ability or knowledge.

Re: Serotonin booster leads to increased functional brain connectivity

#258

Something in our industrial processes must be screwing with people's serotonin levels because Psychedelics and other serotenergic drugs are becoming the defacto treatment method for a whole host of ailments. I personally suffer from IBS, migraines, sleeping problems, and mood swings, if I haven't taken a dose of psychedelics in the last 6 months. Now, getting regular exercise, eating well, staying hydrated, sleeping…

Please, please, please, to anyone in the thread, don't take this as anything other than an anecdote but...

I would go to extreme lengths to keep access to relatively small doses of mushrooms before ever, ever, ever, ever, EVER going back on an SSRI.

I don't really know how to talk about it without sounding like "a hippie" or something, and I keep rewriting this to keep it brief but since starting to experiment with low doses of mushrooms, I've basically eliminated my alcohol and cannabis consumption. I think I'm a pretty "addictive-personality" type person and didn't think I'd ever leave those behind, nor find something else that I genuinely feel is a net benefit for me, and that I don't really feel compelled to "reach for" other than when I specifically want to and have time set aside for.

I've suffered chronic lower back pain for 15 years, and the most dramatic single-point-in-time improvements I've felt have been the day after I've had a "nature day". I don't know if it's a mushroominflammation thing, I don't know if it's some mal-adaptive posture issue that my brain circumvents when on mushrooms, but something is going on.

Also, I'll go ahead and say it, SSRIs didn't sap my sex drive, but made it into a psychologically damaging curse due to physical side effects. Not an issue with mushrooms.

Re: Serotonin booster leads to increased functional brain connectivity

#259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish I could upvote your comment twice. Based on my observation how a childhood friend of mine was treated for a psychiatric condition I think all of the "science" of using drugs to treat mental issues is at the level of advancement comparable to medieval blacksmiths doing dentistry. It essentially comes down to "hey, try this, are you better or worse, worse? Try something else. Better, have more of it". All the th…

> I think all of the "science" of using drugs to treat mental issues is at the level of advancement comparable to medieval blacksmiths doing dentistry. Discounting an entire field of science like this, based on a second-hand observations, is exactly the kind of hubris the parent comment was talking about: There’s something about psychiatry and neuroscience that makes a lot of people who are good at engineering/softwa…

> There’s something about psychiatry and neuroscience that makes a lot of people who are good at engineering/software think that they are qualified to also be experts on the field of psychiatry.

This isn't always hypocrisy: There's a self-consistent idea here that you're missing: we recognize that psychology (and by extension psychiatry) is extremely hard. Human brains may be the most complex systems in the entire universe. I didn't get the feeling GP was claiming to be an expert, but rather he was claiming "there are no experts in psychology yet". I don't think that's as strong a claim as you seem to think. In fact I think most Ph.D.-level psychology researchers agree with just how tremendously difficult the subject is, and how little progress anyone is able to make.

It's consistent and defensible to believe both that it's absolutely critical for humanity to study its own brains, and also that we haven't done a good job at it yet. It's consistent and defensible to believe both that psychology researchers are smart, dedicated people doing admirable, important work, and also that they have really not made anywhere near the kind of progress to justify the level of confidence that pop-sci magazines, non-fiction writers, and podcasters exude. You don't need to be an expert in psychology to believe these things, either. You simply need to understand how deeply, fundamentally difficult the subject is.

Re: Serotonin booster leads to increased functional brain connectivity

#260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think all of the "science" of using drugs to treat mental issues is at the level of advancement comparable to medieval blacksmiths doing dentistry. Discounting an entire field of science like this, based on a second-hand observations, is exactly the kind of hubris the parent comment was talking about: There’s something about psychiatry and neuroscience that makes a lot of people who are good at engineering/softwa…

> You’re right that psychiatry and medication is a lot of trial and error, but that’s the most efficient and accurate way to determine which medications work with a patient. > Note they practitioners aren’t just guessing and hoping for the best. Soooo, which is it? You can't have it both ways, either trial and error or "educated guess".

> Soooo, which is it? You can't have it both ways, either trial and error or "educated guess".

Sure you can -- trial and error doesn't mean the things you're trying have to be picked out of a hat at random. You can choose a starting point based on existing research and iterate from there based on the results experienced by the patient.

Post reply on HN