Bryan Johnson and Andrew Huberman engage in heated exchange over leg press form on X

Millionaire entrepreneur and neuroscientist go head-to-head on X over workout methodology.

In a surprising turn of events on social media, millionaire Bryan Johnson has found himself in a heated exchange with neuroscientist Andrew Huberman over a leg press video, creating a buzz across platforms. The confrontation began when Johnson shared a clip showcasing his leg press achievement, captioned, “New personal best.” Huberman responded with a critique, stating, “Awesome, but friends don’t let friends do partial reps.”

New personal best.

Leg press, one rep max: 850 lbs. Top 1% 18 yr olds.

. Previous best: 800 lbs (2023)
. Leg press to weight ratio: 4.97 pic.twitter.com/7fVdL3Th8W

— Bryan Johnson /dd (@bryan_johnson) January 24, 2025

Awesome, but friends don’t let friends do partial reps.

— Andrew D. Huberman, Ph.D. (@hubermanlab) January 24, 2025

Johnson took Huberman’s comment as a personal affront, referring to it as a “cheap shot.” In a lengthy reply, he defended his workout method and questioned Huberman's motives, stating, “Andrew what I did here is complete a technically accurate, validated biological age measurement according to peer-reviewed science and posted my data publicly. I get you wanting to take a cheap shot and score some likes; however, this reduces your credibility because it shows you favor perception over science.”

Andrew what I did here is complete a technically accurate, validated biological age measurement according to peer reviewed science and posted my data publicly. I get you wanting to take a cheap shot and score some likes, however this reduces your credibility because it shows you…

— Bryan Johnson /dd (@bryan_johnson) January 24, 2025

He further elaborated, “When you made that embarrassing error showing that you don't know how to calculate probabilities, I didn't say anything as I support you in your efforts to help people generally make better life decisions. You are going to be better off supporting people robustly pursuing science than trying to be liked.”

Huberman later took to the platform to clarify his stance, suggesting that Johnson had misinterpreted his comment. “Shoot. Misunderstanding of intent. It was genuine friendly encouragement/what I would have said if we were training side by side. It’s important that we use full range of motion. It was not meant to be a jab. Hence, ‘Awesome but…’” he explained.

Shoot. Misunderstanding of intent. It was genuine friendly encouragement/what I would have said if we were training side by side. It’s important that we use full range of motion. It was not meant to be a jab. Hence “Awesome but… “
In any case, hope to catch up in person soon.…

— Andrew D. Huberman, Ph.D. (@hubermanlab) January 24, 2025

He also acknowledged his previous miscalculation, saying, “Oh, and that probability calculation error was dumb; I was moving too fast. I corrected it and appreciated the opportunity.”