Broscience

_noob_

I've got a Phd and I lift. I know how to throw around the scientific literature to make it say what I want...

BeachGingerOnTheRocks

I've got a Phd and I lift. I know how to throw around the scientific literature to make it say what I want...

Is it heavy?

ArroganceInStep

I think there's two different points.

One is the weak guy who saw someone in the gym doing XYZ and decided that's what you HAVE to do to get a good squat or whatever, even if XYZ isn't why the lifter's squat is good.

The other is the weak guy who spends all his time on the internet reading BS blogs to find links to studies he doesn't understand that explain strength levels he's never come close to.

Both are wrong.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

Misunderstanding what I was saying.

ilovedeadlifts

Reminds me of a quote by CT Fletcher that!

I loled at one of CT's vids today.
He was curling and saying eff you to all of the guys who say he curls "wrong".

He said "what are you gonna do other than sit on your couch and hate"

DostThouEven

"Broscience" is the bunk you hear from guys in the gym, often lifters or trainers, that has no evidentiary basis or is counter to established evidence. They heard it from someone, accepted it as true, and have simply believed it ever since. Or it's an idea they came up with themselves and makes sense to them.

You have a link for your evidence. I have a 500 pound squat for mine. The link wins.

Got it, thanks.

Sounds like broscience

whierd

"Broscience" is the bunk you hear from guys in the gym, often lifters or trainers, that has no evidentiary basis or is counter to established evidence. They heard it from someone, accepted it as true, and have simply believed it ever since. Or it's an idea they came up with themselves and makes sense to them.

You have a link for your evidence. I have a 500 pound squat for mine. The link wins.

Got it, thanks.

If you followed the studies you would be squatting 510 pounds. You are only hurting yourself.

Hendrix7

But small meaningless study = worth while information?

This is what I'm trying to get at. Simply because a study shows XYZ occurred in a tiny dot of a population, does it really correlate with everyone else?

I saw a debate on this with Pulcinella and that silly "bodybuilder" Ian McCarthy.
He was basically arguing with a real bodybuilder over science and studies, when the bodybuilder had tried xyz and achieved results from it.

I'm typically going to do what works for me, or what I've seen work, instead of changing my training/diet based on a study that was done on middle aged men who don't lift weights.

The validity of Ian McCarthy's (or anyones) statements have nothing to do with what he looks like.

Would you still be so sceptical if it would would have been Layne Norton, Marc Lobliner or Alberto Nunez sitting there instead of Ian?

whierd

As always, it's important to remember: Correlation =/= Causation

It is also important to remember that Correlation does not NOT equal Causation either.

jonnythan

But small meaningless study = worth while information?

This is what I'm trying to get at. Simply because a study shows XYZ occurred in a tiny dot of a population, does it really correlate with everyone else?

I saw a debate on this with Pulcinella and that silly "bodybuilder" Ian McCarthy.
He was basically arguing with a real bodybuilder over science and studies, when the bodybuilder had tried xyz and achieved results from it.

I'm typically going to do what works for me, or what I've seen work, instead of changing my training/diet based on a study that was done on middle aged men who don't lift weights.

The validity of Ian McCarthy's (or anyones) statements have nothing to do with what he looks like.

Would you still be so sceptical if it would would have been Layne Norton, Marc Lobliner or Alberto Nunez sitting there instead of Ian?

Exactly. A single "bodybuilder" or "powerlifter" can only try so many things. Just because one process worked for someone doesn't mean that every aspect of that process is now truth, and the things not done are necessarily inferior.

If that were how it worked, all we need to do is find the person who lifted the most (or whatever) and do exactly what they did, and everyone else would be wrong. Maybe we should all be copying precisely what Andy Bolton did, because he deadlifted 1000 pounds so his routine and diet are the ideal.

No, that's obviously stupid.

A lot of this came from the OP telling a female who enjoyed running and cycling, and was preparing for some races in the coming months, to do absolutely no cardio whatsoever and lift instead. The rationale, which I called broscience, was that cardio could be added later to create a bigger calorie deficit. That is broscience. It's nonsensical, detrimental to the person's goals, and is based on faulty reasoning.

Ever since I said that, the OP has been complaining about being called "broscience" all over the forum.

NCchar130

I think studies are interesting food for thought.

I'm far more interested in what real people in the real world did to get the results I see. Now if their secret was starving themselves or living on supplements/shakes, I know their way is not for me because I'm interested in eating real food (as much as possible), etc. But if their method is sensible, I don't particularly care what the latest study says about the matter. Sometimes it's ok to make decisions using your common sense.

I ruptured disks in my back a few years ago and had terrible muscle spasms in my legs. My doctor prescribed muscle relaxers. I asked if there was anything more I could do; he didn't have any advice. I felt loopy and drugged up on those pills and later discovered soaking in Epsom salts and reducing caffeine helped as much or more than the pills (for which I have no doubt there were many important studies showing their effectiveness in muscle spasms blah blah) and I had none of the unpleasant side effects. Maybe this was a placebo effect - I don't really care either way. Trying what I tried was based on advice from a non-medical person who had found it effective and it worked well for me too.

3laine75

I often hear the term thrown around here as broscience.

People will often quote a few studies stating what they are saying is true because they have a study showing XYZ shows that ABC happens.

They often feel that this outweighs any other evidence to the contrary and if its not in a study, it actually means nothing.

However a vast majority of these studies are not what one would call relevant to the subject matter in hand. For instance, does uptake of nutrients between someone of 10% body fat correlate with someone of 40% bodyfat? Would the protein synthesis of someone who trains as a bodybuilder/athlete be consistent with a general everyday person, let alone an old man like i have seen with some studies?

Now I like anyone likes studies to base my opinion on, but often I feel people here are too quick to judge an aspect they have very little knowledge on beyond reading a few studies that may or may not have any correlation to the matter they are comparing them to.

Your thoughts?

do you have any studies to back this opinion up :D:D


good point, well made, sir.

icimani

This:

... I often think there's too much focus on minuti and not the important things like adequate sleep/rest/consistent training etc.

I believe it has to be your own journey with your own beliefs.

Any time someone cites a study, there's usually a response of "correlation does not equal causation", but I would also suggest that "correlation MAY CONTRIBUTE to causation". Not for the minuti of IIFYM, but for larger concepts like getting enough sleep, eating breakfast, etc.

jonnythan

Broscience is less about misusing actual scientific research. It's more generally the ignorance or actual *rejection* of scientific research in favor of "I'm bigger than you; your science is stupid bro."

Or, in cases where there is no scientific evidence, "I'm bigger than you; I don't need science bro."

jonnythan

I'll also note that the OP is an employee of a supplement company.

He therefore has financial incentive in promoting products and methods that do not necessarily have any evidentiary basis whatsoever. He also has a financial incentive to be big, because it helps him sell/promote the company's product.

I'll let the readers draw their own conclusions.

twelfty

A lot of this came from the OP telling a female who enjoyed running and cycling, and was preparing for some races in the coming months, to do absolutely no cardio whatsoever and lift instead. The rationale, which I called broscience, was that cardio could be added later to create a bigger calorie deficit. That is broscience. It's nonsensical, detrimental to the person's goals, and is based on faulty reasoning.

Ever since I said that, the OP has been complaining about being called "broscience" all over the forum.

somehow i doubt Patrick Makau will be taking that sort of advice lol

bostonwolf

I think the Earth is round and I have heard it revolves around the Sun. Still not sure though....looking for valid references.

Watch a ship go over the horizon. Notice how it disappears from the bottom first, then the top? First question proven.

Watch the sun set. Then watch it rise the next day. Second question proven.

Try again.

myofibril

“Bro science: a term used by the scientific and pseudo-scientific community to try to discredit people who often have more experience and better results, but may not be able to argue as well about unimportant things on the internet.”

I think the best combination is experience and knowledge (obviously) If I had to pick between the two I would take experience for the simple reason that exercise and nutritional science is still a relatively new field and is filled with limitations - for now that is...

Matt_Wild

A lot of this came from the OP telling a female who enjoyed running and cycling, and was preparing for some races in the coming months, to do absolutely no cardio whatsoever and lift instead. The rationale, which I called broscience, was that cardio could be added later to create a bigger calorie deficit. That is broscience. It's nonsensical, detrimental to the person's goals, and is based on faulty reasoning.

Ever since I said that, the OP has been complaining about being called "broscience" all over the forum.

Get over yourself, this is nothing to do with you, nor that thread.

And my comments were based on that thread were in general, not about telling a cyclist to stop training. It is an often used tool too burn fat when dieting down not to throw all ones tools for fat loss in at the beginning but to do so gradually as fat loss slowed.

If it came across that I was referring to the cyclist or that I had not made this clear then obviously my mistake.

Broscience is less about misusing actual scientific research. It's more generally the ignorance or actual *rejection* of scientific research in favor of "I'm bigger than you; your science is stupid bro."

Or, in cases where there is no scientific evidence, "I'm bigger than you; I don't need science bro."

No, its a term that I've seen misused everywhere, nothing special about my debate with you. Get over yourself!

I'll also note that the OP is an employee of a supplement company.

He therefore has financial incentive in promoting products and methods that do not necessarily have any evidentiary basis whatsoever. He also has a financial incentive to be big, because it helps him sell/promote the company's product.

I'll let the readers draw their own conclusions.

Openly so about being an employee, nothing hidden. I've never denied it and it is openly stated on my profile. However you statements, are completely false. I don't have nor need to use MFP, its not contracted nor is it needed for me to do.

I do because I enjoy helping people and then hearing of their results, nothing more.

I don't charge nor do I ask for anything on MFP. I don't make a penny from posting on MFP. Heck if the company makes 10,000 more sales from my posting here, I wouldn't see a penny, I don't get a financial reward from it.

bostonwolf

Matt,

The technical term for this sort of thing is cognitive bias. When people believe something they will go out of their way to discredit things that would negate that belief and accept things that would appear to confirm it.

bostonwolf

Broscience is less about misusing actual scientific research. It's more generally the ignorance or actual *rejection* of scientific research in favor of "I'm bigger than you; your science is stupid bro."

Or, in cases where there is no scientific evidence, "I'm bigger than you; I don't need science bro."

Again, for the most part when I see someone who has actually had some results in the gym and can articulate the hows and whys of those results, I'm more inclined to listen to him than to someone who boasts about eating like **** and running just to maintain where he is right now.

As you said, readers can draw their own conclusions. I know I've drawn mine.

jonnythan

Broscience is less about misusing actual scientific research. It's more generally the ignorance or actual *rejection* of scientific research in favor of "I'm bigger than you; your science is stupid bro."

Or, in cases where there is no scientific evidence, "I'm bigger than you; I don't need science bro."

Again, for the most part when I see someone who has actually had some results in the gym and can articulate the hows and whys of those results, I'm more inclined to listen to him than to someone who boasts about eating like **** and running just to maintain where he is right now.

As you said, readers can draw their own conclusions. I know I've drawn mine.

So which of the tens of thousands of trainers do you listen to? Whichever one you heard last?

mmapags

Matt, one the onne hand I see your point. Lot's of brosciece accusations flying around and lot's of questionable study info posted.

On the other hand, what is the best way to combat the myriad of myths that get posted as fact on here 100x per day? While studies might no be perfect, there are certainly a step in the right directions from "the trainer at the gym said" or "I read in ladies home journal" or something from a Liverstrong article or Wikipedia.

How much foolishness and time wasting nonsense goes up here every day? And if not studies, how would you propose countering it?

Alexfit12

Well, it can get worse. They can be quoting Dr. Oz...

My mother now drinks protein shakes (on top of a healthy and complete diet, with her only exercise being walking) because Dr. Oz said it improves bone density in women.

I tell her she shouldn't be drinking that stuff if she refuses the touch even a 0.5kg dumbbell... But hey, Dr. Oz knows better... If only Dr. Oz where there to listen to her complain when she gains weight...

jayche

Ain't nothin wrong with a lil broscience

Matt_Wild

jonnythan - where do you get your views from? I've read a number of your responses and a vast majority seem to agree with what I believe, you however seem 110% sure your views are the only valid ones.

Why is this? What makes you so sure?

FWIW you make some very good points in a lot of your points, why so much anger and name calling and so many put downs to those who have opinions that may conflict with your own, even if they perhaps cannot name each individual source?

I read a huge amount of data and I'm sure I cannot tell you every single source of information I read, it doesn't make the information I am giving any less valid.

Your thoughts?

Mcgrawhaha

can i have 2 slices of cake for lunch instead of a regular meal? hurry, i need to know!!!

bostonwolf

I look for new ideas, I look for strategies that are sound based on what I've learned from 20+ years in the weight room (admittedly on and off.)

If I feel like it will work for me, I try it. If it works, I stick with it. While I'm not lifting right now as I'm training for a 5k, before that I read up on full body workouts, particularly one that was similar to the Stronglifts 5x5 workout. I had never lifted that heavy on a consistent basis and rarely had done a full body workout.

I tried it and my strength improved quickly and dramatically. That added to the time saving over a split routine convinced me that this the way to go.

See, I'm capable of absorbing information from multiple sources and synthesizing it based on research and personal experience.

In regards to diet, I had started to realize that as I lessened the amounts of grains I ate, I felt healthier and had more consistent energy throughout the day. I just happened to check out Tim Ferriss' Four Hour Body from the library, read about his Slow Carb diet and decided to give it a try. Eliminating grains six days a week works for me.

Eating at Taco Bell might work for you, that's fine. But it also involves you blatantly disregarding the science that tells us that eating fast food is horrible for our bodies. You know this, yet choose to eat processed foods anyways.

Broscience at work for you, no?

jonnythan

jonnythan - where do you get your views from? I've read a number of your responses and a vast majority seem to agree with what I believe, you however seem 110% sure your views are the only valid ones.

No, I absolutely don't believe 110% that my views are the only valid ones. Quite the contrary.

I am, however, highly skeptical of people saying things that don't make sense, where the only evidence is "look how much bigger I am than you."

Anyway, my views come from all sorts of places. Research studies (Pubmed, NIH, NEJM, etc), Aragon, Wendler, Rippetoe, physicians, textbooks, etc.

FWIW you make some very good points in a lot of your points, why so much anger and name calling and so many put downs to those who have opinions that may conflict with your own, even if they perhaps cannot name each individual source?

Anger? Name calling? Not sure what you're talking about. Maybe you're confusing me with someone else?

I don't call anyone names and I don't put anyone down. I absolutely do question claims that have zero evidence, especially if they're given as recommendations contrary to someone's goals.

bostonwolf

And pretty much what I've seen from Matt is "this is what I do, this is why I think it works for me. Give it a try." I can take that at face value and make decisions on whether to use it or not on my own.

Matt_Wild

Matt, one the onne hand I see your point. Lot's of brosciece accusations flying around and lot's of questionable study info posted.

On the other hand, what is the best way to combat the myriad of myths that get posted as fact on here 100x per day? While studies might no be perfect, there are certainly a step in the right directions from "the trainer at the gym said" or "I read in ladies home journal" or something from a Liverstrong article or Wikipedia.

How much foolishness and time wasting nonsense goes up here every day? And if not studies, how would you propose countering it?

Is it a step in the right direction?

I see supplement companies do it all the time on small scale studies and also the same here - is there really a difference?

In the same vein, should we all be following the "The China Study" since it was a vast and detailed study over 20-30 years with various outlined benefits, simply because it is a study showing consuming plants over animals suggests overall improved health and life expectancy?