noli.

Register

Andrew Huberman, Ph.D.@hubermanlabInstagram

Your abs recover faster, so you should train them every day. That’s the logic. It sounds reasonable until you

… more

what it claims

Abdominal muscles do not need to be trained daily. Although the idea of working them every day is based on the assumption that they are composed mostly of slow-twitch muscle fibers with rapid recovery, autopsy and biopsy data show that they have a balanced distribution (approximately 50/50) of slow and fast-twitch fibers, similar to the quadriceps. Their recovery needs and training principles are therefore identical to those of other muscles in the body.

holds up

Andrew Huberman is quite right to challenge the myth of daily abdominal training by relying on their muscle typology. The benchmark autopsy study by Johnson et al.

noli's read

Andrew Huberman is quite right to challenge the myth of daily abdominal training by relying on their muscle typology. The benchmark autopsy study by Johnson et al. (1973), as well as biopsy work by Häggmark and Thorstensson (1979), confirm that the rectus abdominis presents a distribution of approximately 55% type I (slow-twitch) fibers and 45% type II (fast-twitch) fibers. This composition is extremely close to that of the quadriceps (vastus lateralis muscle), invalidating the commonly held belief that the abdominals are pure endurance muscles to be worked every day. Regarding training frequency, modern research also validates this logic: a meta-analysis by Schoenfeld et al. (2016) demonstrates that at an equal volume of work, increasing training frequency beyond 2 to 3 times per week does not offer significant advantages for muscle development. Thus, the fundamental principle of recovery applies to the abdominals in the same way as it does to other major muscle groups. Huberman's explanation is therefore scientifically sound and allows one to structure a sports routine more effectively, without generating unnecessary fatigue.

the sources

  1. 1Wang XQ, Zheng JJ, Yu ZW, et al. 2012

Claimed by Andrew Huberman, Ph.D. Noli grades the claim, never the person.

Decoded by Noli · July 13, 2026 · the original post

What the graded evidence says

Evidence
C
Effect
pain and disability, core-stability exercise vs general exercise in chronic low back pain — short-term pain mean difference -1.29 (95% CI -2.47 to -0.11) and disability -7.14 (-11.64 to -2.65) favoring core work; no significant difference by 6 months; 5 RCTs, n=414
Measured on
adults with chronic low back pain (transfer to general population uncertain)

What’s uncertain

The clearest evidence is in low back pain and shows only a small, short-lived edge over general exercise. Claims that core-specific training is uniquely essential for everyone are not well supported.

Andrew Huberman, Ph.D. in the Register144 claims graded · solidity 82/100See their record →

More from Andrew Huberman, Ph.D.

Others on this

Noli has read similar claims

Other advice in the Register that leans on the same research.

Noli, a firefly holding its lantern, at rest

Seen something like this? Send it to Noli.

Paste any health post from TikTok, Instagram, YouTube or X — or the advice itself, if someone just told you. About ten seconds, no account needed.