The Most Effective Weight Training, Cardio & Nutrition for Women | Dr. Lauren Colenso-Semple
These notes were generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies.
As a woman, if there were things we should do differently to optimize results, I would be doing them myself and telling other women to do them. The narrative that women need sex-specific programs, nutrient timing, particular exercise intensity, or rep ranges makes women feel spoken to and part of a community, rather than just doing what their boyfriend or husband does. The narrative emphasizes women are not men, so they need something different. Data shows men and women respond to exercise very similarly.
Welcome to the Huberman Lab podcast, where we discuss science and science-based tools for everyday life. Andrew Huberman is a professor of neurobiology and ophthalmology at Stanford School of Medicine. Guest is Dr. Lauren Colenso-Semple, PhD in integrative physiology, certified strength and conditioning specialist, expert in science and practice of building muscle and strength, cardiovascular fitness, and hormones and exercise.
Discussion focuses on fitness for women and how it overlaps with what men should do, relevant to both. Dr. Colenso-Semple explains structuring ideal training routine by time available and goals. She covers science on if/when women's hormone cycles, life stages like menopause, birth control impact training. She is a trusted voice for science-based women's fitness and actionable protocols.
Podcast is separate from Stanford roles, aims to bring zero-cost science information to public. Episode includes sponsors.
No fundamental differences in muscle tissue between men and women at cellular level, hormone receptors, or hormones exposure that should change exercise behavior. Muscle protein synthesis response to exercise or nutrition shows no differences; similar protein metabolism and growth response.
Major difference is baseline muscularity due to puberty testosterone surge in men increasing muscle mass. Untrained adult man vs. untrained adult woman: disparity in baseline muscle mass from testosterone differences. Once training starts, similar relative size gains.
Female bodybuilders using chemical augmentation (testosterone or derivatives) achieve impressive muscularity rivaling non-steroid using men. Addition of androgens makes female musculature look like male musculature.
This informs non-steroid users minimally because it involves supraphysiological levels, the game-changer. Within normal testosterone range (men: 300-900 ng/dL, up to 1200 in some countries), no predictability of response to resistance training (e.g., 400 vs. 600 ng/dL does not mean much more muscle growth).
Among non-chemically augmented women, individual variation in muscle/strength growth potential exists, independent of testosterone levels. People start from different baselines; response depends on growth stimulus. Effective, consistent, progressive training key; genetic factors play a role.
At molecular level (e.g., fiber type differences), both sexes show dramatic adaptations to endurance or resistance training, indicating large potential in both directions.
Training (sprints, resistance) increases circulating testosterone in men, feeding back on psychology, growth, strength. Similar studies in women: circulating testosterone already low; assays often cannot detect normal low levels, so less known.
Acute post-exercise increases in testosterone, growth hormone not drivers of hypertrophy long-term, despite past beliefs leading to high-rep/superset promotions. No need to chase short-term response; not predictive of adaptation.
Until recently, heavy resistance training (70-90% 1RM or 1RM) scary for women; common fear: "I don't want to get too big." Changes: bikini category in bodybuilding seen as feminine muscularity ("looks good in a bikini"), required lifting; group fitness, CrossFit drew women; empowered lifting, less fear of results.
Still some sentiment lifting heavy makes you huge vs. toned. Bulky women rare on streets; no one gets extremely muscular by accident—requires hard work, often pharmacology.
No age too early for women to resistance train; cultural stereotype kept high school girls out of weight rooms, but shifting. Valuable for sports performance improvement, injury reduction alongside sport-specific training. Builds habits; daunting to start later after decades without.
Muscle gains possible anytime, even starting at 70. Starting earlier builds muscle like a savings/retirement account; inactivity leads to age-related muscle loss, problematic later.
Young kids do unstructured resistance (monkey bars = pull-ups/muscle-ups, gymnasts); not inherently unsafe.
Shift narrative: resistance training not for weight loss/being smaller, but growing muscle. Challenge muscle sufficiently for growth.
Full body program targets all major muscle groups with challenging loads (varies by exercise/muscles). Train low/moderate/high rep ranges, close to failure (e.g., 10 reps max, stop at 8-9 OK; if could do 20 easily, load too light). Progress load/reps over time.
2-3x/week: full body best (hits major groups appropriate frequency).
4x/week: upper/lower/upper/lower.
5-6x/week: more splits (e.g., chest/back, legs, shoulders/arms/calves/abs).
Tailor to goals: overall health fewer accessories; physique change more on priority muscles.
Example: Mon/Wed/Fri full body (flexible). Same or vary exercises per muscle group (personal preference). For squat strength, squat >1x/week. For growth: vary (barbell squat Mon, good morning Wed posterior chain, hip thrusts Fri glutes). Quad-dominant (squat/lunge/leg press/step-up) + glute/hamstring (good morning/stiff-leg deadlift) same session or split days.
2-3 days/week full body. Vary/keep exercises same OK.
Warm-up: light set for mechanics/blood flow; moderate (50% 1RM, 10-15 rep possible, do 7-8 or heavier); then work sets to failure or 1-2 reps shy.
Work sets per muscle group per workout: at least 2, prefer 3, up to 4 (overkill beyond). Assumes 1 exercise/muscle; compounds hit multiples (e.g., squat/leg press = quads + glutes; bench = chest + delts + triceps—murky counting, but 2-3 sets compounds ideal).
3x/week = 9-12 sets/muscle (e.g., quads).
Autoregulation for rest preferred. Strength goals (e.g., 1RM deadlift): 4-5 min.
Average session (machines/dumbbells): 2 min most; 3 min squat/deadlift.
During rest: for time efficiency, agonist-antagonist supersets (e.g., bench press or chest
Pairing a push exercise like bench press or chest press with a pull like a row allows back-and-forth training without interfering with adaptation or acute performance, unlike straight sets without 2-3 minute rests. This is viable for time-crunched individuals: bench press or dumbbell incline press followed immediately by pulldown, then rest the remainder of the interval before repeating the superset. Supersetting prevents getting lost in your phone, keeping workouts on task and shorter. Studies on stretching or active recovery between sets lack sufficient data for clear benefits, but supersets or circuits are better than sitting idle.
Forced reps (assisted reps in good form) offer little benefit beyond fun with a partner. Drop sets work as finishers, especially on cable exercises, adding variety to the last set without being superior to straight sets. They suit time-efficient strategies and exercises like bicep curls or leg extensions where dropping weight is easy.
Control the weight to avoid injury and momentum, but intentionally slowing reps is not advantageous. Move as quickly as possible through the harder part of the movement and control the easier phase. For squats, stand up from the bottom as quickly as possible under load to complete reps. By reps 7-9 in a set of 10 with appropriate load, speed naturally slows without intentional slowing.
Partial repetitions and tempo variations are hard to replicate consistently, complicating progress tracking. Standardize range of motion, exercise, and tempo to clearly track increases like adding 2.5 pounds weekly. Varying these introduces too many variables, risking shorter range or faster reps to lift more.
Train close to failure across broad rep ranges. Old strength-endurance continuum (1-5 reps strength, 6-12 hypertrophy, 12-20 endurance) has evolved. For maximal strength (1RM), use low reps (1-5) for specificity. For hypertrophy, similar growth occurs across low/high loads and reps if near failure, but adjust volume: more sets needed for low-rep (e.g., sets of 3) to match volume of sets of 8-10.
Higher reps (8-15) allow 2-3 sets per exercise/muscle group; low reps (3-6) may need 8 sets due to longer rests, making them less efficient. Preferred range: 6-12 reps depending on exercise. Fun for 15 reps on face pulls, rear delts, leg extensions; avoid 20 squats. For beginners, 8-12 reps builds proficiency and reduces form failure/injury risk before lower/higher ranges.
Vary within the week per exercise (e.g., squats twice weekly: one low-rep day, one moderate-rep day) for variety and simultaneous progress tracking in each range. Better than switching every 3 weeks (e.g., 3 weeks 3-5, then 6-8, then 10-15), as it maintains anchor points for progress.
Heavy (5-8 reps near failure) and high reps (15-25, especially compounds) both risk injury if form fails. High reps on compounds like deadlifts offer more opportunities for tweaks; low reps allow resets and focus. Always warm up properly, use spotters, consider systemic/cardio fatigue (e.g., out of breath on 30 squats before legs fail).
Do resistance training first if hypertrophy/strength is priority, separate cardio by hours if possible to avoid interference (seen in high-volume concurrent training, e.g., sprints before legs). No true interference unless excessive volume. For general fitness (carry suitcase, sprint for plane, hike with pack, play sports), prioritize enjoyable activities like tennis, biking, hiking over structured cardio.
Walking is unstructured activity; step counts (7,000-10,000) lose appeal over time. Benefit from increasing low activity (e.g., 4-6,000 steps) is huge, but active people moving throughout the day don't need step obsession. With 2-3 gym days and enjoyable activities, no need for added cardio unless endurance-specific goals. Cardio for weight loss yields disappointing fat loss vs. nutrition adjustments.
High-intensity (e.g., 30s sprint/30s rest on Airdyne bike 1-2x/week) offers time-efficient adaptations equivalent to longer moderate cardio. Caloric burn is minimal (e.g., 100 calories).
No need to train differently by cycle phase; fluctuations don't reduce capability. Focus on how you feel: train hard, consistently, progressively. Skip/adjust if symptoms/fatigue/motivation low. > "The unfortunate shift of because you have a menstrual cycle and because hormones are fluctuating, you need to change how you are exercising is way too simplistic and doesn't align with the data."
Push through general malaise if not severe, but adjust as needed (e.g., poor sleep).
Individual sleep needs vary; one person might need 8-10 hours, while 6.5-7 hours is sufficient for others, with a preference for 8 but 6.5-7 being adequate. Less than 5 hours is problematic. Women can push through workouts even with 1-2 hours less sleep than usual without danger, though they might feel worse. Subjective performance measures differ from objective ones, similar to menstrual cycle symptoms. For example, deadlifting the same weight as last week might feel heavier or slower, but objectively, performance is unchanged. Factors like undersleep, jet lag, work stress, or distraction cause this. A subpar workout is better than none.
Women who take up resistance training tend to enjoy the progression and results. Historically, marketing has pushed ineffective programs to women, like constantly switching group fitness classes or at-home videos, leading to program hopping without results. Sticking to a good resistance training program yields visible body composition changes via muscle growth and an empowering sense of progression (getting stronger, doing more), which motivates long-term adherence.
Spend 2-3 weeks (or more/less) learning movements properly before progressive overload. Rushing into adding weight assumes linear progress (e.g., 10 pounds weekly), which fails and risks injury or form breakdown. Slower progression via adding reps instead of weight weekly is better. Proper technique and full range of motion are crucial; people often shorten range to add load (e.g., partial squats or benches), which isn't true progressive overload. Technically demanding lifts like hinges (deadlifts, good mornings) require kinesthetic awareness (e.g., knee bend, back rounding) before loading.
If a woman consistently feels lousy in a cycle phase and skips training, it's fine—no need to push through. Survey data shows 75-80% of women experience symptoms like cramps, low back pain, lack of motivation, irritability, but none report changing training in response. Symptoms typically last 1-2 days, affecting 1-2 workouts. Adjustments or pushing through are both acceptable, depending on the day.
Most studies focus on combined oral contraceptive pills (not hormonal IUDs or patches). No impact on strength, hypertrophy, or power—neither detrimental nor beneficial. Endogenous hormone fluctuations (large estrogen/progesterone/testosterone changes across cycle) don't affect performance/adaptations, so contraceptives don't either. Initial side effects might temporarily influence motivation/ability if the pill doesn't fit, but they often attenuate; switching helps. Benefits include reduced severe menstrual symptoms, enabling more consistent gym attendance during periods. Synthetic hormones downregulate endogenous production without impacting performance/adaptations.
No need to change training pre/post-menopause. Goals remain: increase/maintain muscle size/strength, reduce fall/fracture risk, maintain bone density—resistance training is key. Menopause-related estrogen decline doesn't directly affect muscle; age-related muscle loss is from inactivity, not accelerated by menopause transition itself. Correlation between hormones and muscle is overstated, similar to cycle-syncing myths.
Neural Aspects of Muscle Maintenance
Muscle/strength loss with age involves atrophy of nerve-to-muscle connections. Inactivity (e.g., immobilization, bed rest) causes dramatic muscle loss; sedentary life exacerbates it. Physical activity (even without weights) preserves muscle better than inactivity. Resistance training maintains motor unit recruitment (neural pathways) for movement, plus tendon/bone adaptations. Coordination activities like pickleball help aging. Gym intimidation (male-dominated weight rooms, not knowing what to do) is common; start with machines for familiarity, challenge near failure, then progress.
Group fitness classes ease entry despite suboptimal programming—they build gym comfort, teach patterns, enable social post-class machine trials. Classes provide structure/social aspect. For those preferring yoga/Pilates/hikes, these lack progressive resistance to counter age-related muscle loss.
Social media heavily features hormones/training links (also eating, work, socializing by phase). Physical activity (not specifically resistance training) ameliorates symptoms like cramps via blood flow, distraction; walking or training can help.
Nutrition and Menstrual Cycle
Poor data (self-reports) shows slight average intake differences by phase, but no evidence to change calories/protein/carbs. Stems from unproven anabolic/catabolic phase theory, extending to exercise/diet changes.
Common belief: Pilates/yoga provides enough "muscle training"; instructors look great (e.g., toned, energetic, older). But results often from genetics, prior training (gymnastics/speed sports), not just Pilates. Pilates promises "toned" long lean lines/muscle increase (toned = muscle size + fat loss), but lacks efficient progressive resistance. Even if happy with Pilates/walking, add 2x/week 20-minute full-body resistance training to attenuate age-related muscle loss, fall/fracture risk, maintain functional independence. Genetics hugely influence lean/non-lean mass ratio; prior strength/speed sports (gymnastics, sprinting, pole vaulting, tennis) contribute to lasting physique even with lighter activities later.
In 30s, exercising less as people around exercise less. Some stay fit doing yoga; often former D1 soccer players or gymnasts. Competitive sports early in life help retain musculature, possibly due to selection bias and genetics built upon with training. These cases mislead. With men, extremely muscular lean examples like Nimma (podcast with Mark Bell, steroid and TRT free, testosterone mid-500s, 8% body fat, insane muscle density) showcase genetic gifts plus hard work; cannot replicate by copying.
Parallel in women: Pilates teachers often former gymnasts, genetically gifted, maintain with minimal effort. Averages differ; distorts thinking on training and nutrition.
Hypothesis: Childhood activity sticks. Child gymnasts develop upper body strength easier in 20s from prior training. Genetic variability huge: bone structure, muscle insertions, waist size unchangeable. Shape fixed; can gain/lose fat/muscle. Some have broader shoulders, capped delts, low fat on arms/legs. Fat storage/distribution varies; fat loss order varies. Comparing structures misleading; some maintain low body fat at comfortable calories, others need unsustainable intake.
Old fitness ('90s): ectomorph (thin, long skinny muscles, small joints, hard gainer), mesomorph (muscular, lean), endomorph (excess body fat). Irrelevant now for training programs? Or just eat less if endomorph (muscle under fat), lift/eat more if ectomorph?
Labels from psychology, not physiology; makes no sense for training adaptations. Skinny people not always hard gainers; lanky teen boys blow up lifting. Example: 6'1", 150 lbs, gained 25-30 lbs first year (not all muscle). Others built naturally (e.g., bulldog Costello huge forearms, no weights). Genetic variation huge; height matters—5'6" with same relative muscle as 5'11" looks more muscular; taller need more mass.
Online debates on women training fasted. Data over mechanisms/extrapolation.
Longer-term studies: consistent fasted training yields same muscle growth/fat loss in men/women as fed. 2012 fasted cardio trend for fat oxidation; acute fat oxidation post-workout insignificant vs daily metabolism; no long-term fat loss edge. Opposite now: fasted causes fat gain/muscle loss—untrue. Morning glycogen from dinner; resistance training not glycogen depleting (unless long endurance—eat before). Train fed/fasted by preference.
Personal: Morning fasted; later fed. Always caffeine pre-workout for alertness (habituated, less performance boost).
90% adults drink caffeine daily; hard to study (withdrawal confounds).
Resistance not glycogen depleting. Starchy carbs pre? Might feel more energy; others GI issues. Experiment. Meal composition unlikely fuel if eaten close (digestion/absorption time); oats not used in workout. Liquids (marathon packs) faster.
No narrow anabolic window; protein synthesis elevated 24 hours post-resistance. 30 min vs 3 hours same for muscle adaptations. Study: post-training, assimilate up to 100g protein (vs prior 30g/feeding). Absorption/utilization differs; not all protein to muscle. Focus daily/weekly consistent intake to support training stimulus, not per-meal max/timing. Split total protein into meals for practicality/consistency.
Creatine renaissance. Same for women: creatine monohydrate powder (avoid gummies—often underdosed, sprayed post-production). Extra rep/sprint second; safe, well-studied. 5g/day if training (no stimulus = no muscle gain). Brain claims premature (data from deficits: Alzheimer's, depression+SSRIs, sleep deprivation, TBI).
Increases creatinine (normal, inform physician). Long-term 5g/day safe. Monohydrate most studied; other forms no better (no less bloat/subcutaneous water; marketed to women). Dry scoop or blended same results.
Anecdote: Woman on creatine + training does 3 full pull-ups, excited. Reports 5g blurry/subcutaneous water, 3g better. Respect individual experience; validate and walk away if seeking validation. Engage open learners with science.
Distrust in academic science rising. Past misinformation: muscle turns to fat if stop; creatine destroys kidneys/hormones (esp. women, pregnancy). Menopause body comp changes need study: midsection fat redistribution/growth. Not just estrogen (not universal post-menopause). Rarely one factor.
Better science communication needed. Internet interest good (PubMed requests), but misinterpretation/cherry-picking weaponizes science. Single study not prescriptive. Be evidence-based, honest on knowns/unknowns. But of
Individualization is key when deciding behaviors. Biopsy is the way to assess receptor distributions in adult humans; fat biopsy is more uncomfortable than muscle biopsy. Imaging techniques for estrogen and testosterone receptor distribution and saturation would be ideal but do not currently exist. Biopsies involve taking 50-100 mg of tissue from a single site, leading to extrapolations about the whole muscle or body, with limitations in representativeness and pre-post designs.
Fat storage sites have a genetic component; looking at parents indicates propensity, but lifestyle matters. Genetics sets the starting point but does not dictate the endpoint. Parents' sedentary, poor-diet history does not have to predict one's outcome with better habits. Genetic encoding may involve more adipocytes at certain locations, with male-female differences tied to androgen and estrogen receptors. Hypothesis of reproductive advantage to hip fat in women; post-menopause shift to midsection fat lacks strong data, rooted in evolutionary biology. Not all men or women follow typical patterns.
Cortisol should be high in the morning to wake up and low at night for sleep—true for both sexes. Misinformation links any stress, cold plunging, zone 2, or high-intensity training to cortisol causing moon face and midsection fat gain, twisting Cushing syndrome effects. Normal acute cortisol rises are necessary for blood pressure, blood glucose regulation, and exercise; they do not cause fat storage. Women avoid intensity fearing cortisol. Ineffective cortisol supplements are sold; chronically elevated cortisol requires medication.
Stress can cause overeating (or undereating) excess calories, creating cryptic correlation mistaken for cortisol causation. People prefer blaming hormones over examining diet. Hormone blame trends shift yearly: oxytocin, serotonin, dopamine, now cortisol.
Cushing syndrome is not common; typically from steroid use causing chronically elevated cortisol.
Resistance training (30-60 minutes) triples or quadruples cortisol—normal and beneficial.
Most people, especially average women, are not at risk of overtraining; concerns about recovery and inflammation are overblown. True overtraining shows red flags: sleep difficulty, prolonged soreness, feeling under the weather. Training time affects decisions: evening training may disrupt sleep for some; morning boosts energy.
Both speakers prefer morning training. Assess personal energy post-training at different times. Morning training before 10 a.m. sustains energy; afternoon (noon-2 p.m.) depletes some. Avoid late training if caffeine disrupts sleep. Switching times (e.g., evening to morning) may temporarily hit performance, resolving in weeks. Caffeine preferred for training.
Hormone augmentation (not replacement) is rising: women use estrogen, testosterone, progesterone creams/injections for vigor, sleep, energy without measured deficiency. Anecdote: woman on progesterone feels like in her 30s. Menopause hormone therapy targets symptoms (hot flashes, poor sleep, night sweats), improving diet/exercise adherence indirectly; no data for muscle preservation/gain.
Testosterone proven only for low libido in women at low doses (low-normal levels). Higher doses risk voice deepening, hair growth—not worth it vs. lifting weights. Data does not support hormone therapy for preventing cognitive decline or cardiovascular disease; not a panacea despite symptom relief. Some women cannot take it. Avoid doom messaging.
Narratives push women-specific programs, nutrient timing, intensities, rep ranges to make them feel considered, but data shows men and women respond similarly to exercise. Fitness saturation leads to reinventing wheels or overcomplicating for excitement/edge, spreading misinformation.
Menstrual cycle phase studies found no differences, removing historical barriers to female research (standardizing phases, ovulation, contraceptives). This enables more studies in women, mixed-sex, or combined groups, especially for under-resourced labs. More funding now for women's health/fitness studies.
Lab studies (e.g., leg extensions) sacrifice ecological validity for control, molecular signaling, tight designs (e.g., unilateral legs). Not prescribing leg extensions universally but testing stimulus under conditions (hormone profiles, nutrition) on protein synthesis. Real-world gym programs sacrifice control/measurements. Both valuable depending on research question.
Trained 14 years; evolved from strength-maximizing (injury-prone), data-collection scaling back, to higher frequency shorter sessions (30-45 minutes) for habit maintenance. Current split: upper body push, upper body pull, lower body rotation (push-pull-legs, day off; flexible based on schedule). Sets close to or to failure (safer on machines).
Cardio occasionally; prefers outdoor activity (hiking dogs) over machines unless weather bad.
Not essential if full-body training uses full range of motion. Warm-ups with lighter sets of target exercises provide built-in mobility. Dynamic general warm-up or specific lighter loads equally effective. If mobility feels good, do it.
Want to double-click on long-term outcomes of these.
Hormone replacement therapy studies on women do not show improvements in cognition. Women who started hormone replacement therapy as they entered menopause fared better than those who didn't, but those who started after menopause did not. It depends on the outcome. The Women's Health Initiative in the early 2000s studied older versions of estrogen-based hormone therapy for reduced risk of cardiovascular disease. One trial stopped early because it wasn't reducing risk and possibly increased it, leading to media claims that hormone therapy causes heart disease and cancer. Later analysis unpacked the data: the study evaluated specific outcomes in varied ages and menopause statuses, not blanket statements. Recent work examines muscle mass, bone density, cognitive health via observational or cross-sectional trials, but patterns are often overstated (e.g., prevents Alzheimer's or dementia).
Deliberate cold exposure: depends; most compelling benefits are mental clarity and psychological well-being, not physiology.
Zone two: fine and necessary for long-term endurance goals, but prefer higher intensity or moderate activity instead.
Weight vests: skip. Marketed to women as alternative to resistance training, but walking with a weighted vest does not improve muscle or bone. Appropriate for squats, lunges, or jumping, but not a substitute for resistance training.
Armhang test as indirect longevity measure: skip. Grip strength data is robust (easy to measure in clinical settings, even bed rest), correlates with longevity as proxy for overall strength. Focus on full body resistance training instead.
Jumping onto/off things for longevity/safety: incorporate balance training into resistance sessions via unilateral exercises or walking lunges, working full ranges of motion in different planes. This builds strength, muscle mass, coordination to catch falls.
Dedicated abdominal work: no abdominal exercise burns belly fat. To hypertrophy rectus abdominis, load it progressively like any muscle. Most women doing crunches hope for leanness, not abs growth.
Favorite exercise people don't do: single leg RDL (Romanian deadlift). Targets glute and hamstring unilaterally, adds balance (hold on for stability or not). Use barbell pad on low squat rack bar for top-of-foot comfort over bench. Hold dumbbell on working side or opposite; prefers same side.
Scientifically shown to accelerate recovery from resistance training (stimulus to adaptation): methods attenuating soreness (e.g., ice baths, NSAIDs) may compromise adaptation by blunting hypertrophic stimulus via reduced inflammation, which is needed short-term.
Thank you to Dr. Lauren Colenso-Semple for rational scientific voice online, emphasizing basics amid noise.
She writes monthly research review with Eric Trexler, Eric Helms, Michael Zordos (Mass Research Review): breaks down latest science in health, fitness, wellness with actionable takeaways.
Links in show notes. Subscribe to YouTube, follow on Spotify/Apple (leave 5-star reviews/comments). Check sponsors. Comment questions on YouTube.
New book: Protocols: An Operating Manual for the Human Body (5+ years work, 30+ years research/experience). Covers sleep, exercise, stress, focus, motivation protocols with science. Pre-sale at protocolsbook.com.
Follow Huberman Lab on Instagram, X, Threads, Facebook, LinkedIn for science/tools.
Neural Network Newsletter (hubermanlab.com, menu > newsletter): zero-cost monthly with podcast summaries, 1-3 page PDFs (sleep, dopamine, cold exposure, foundational fitness protocol for cardio/resistance). Email not shared.
Keep Andrew Huberman in your library
Save the videos and channels worth coming back to, and find them again in one place.
