Top 10 MFP community falsehoods
Options
Replies
-
1. Broscience
January 8, 2013 Urban Word of the Day
Broscience is the predominant brand of reasoning in bodybuilding circles where the anecdotal reports of jacked dudes are considered more credible than scientific research.
2. Broscience
A sarcastic term implying that the time tested, muscle building wealth of knowledge developed and utilized by successful, experienced bodybuilders is inferior to the continually shifting hypotheses of articulate, textbook-savvy 155lb. chemists with little or no real world first-person experience to substantiate their conclusions. The term "Broscience" is oft repeated on bodybuilding and fitness oriented internet forums in an attempt to demonstrate online dominance as a substitution for success in the arena of actual bodybuilding.
I've wondered about this term since I never heard of it before coming to MFP. I looked it up and came up with these two definitions in the Urban Dictionary. I'm kind of tired so, maybe, I am misunderstanding. But, do these two definitions slam both physically fit folks AND scientists?
LOL the first seems to be knocking the physically fit. The second, scientists.0 -
Thanks for the info! I needed to hear this today. I never heard of using 31 cals times lbs of fat mass to estimate calorie needs.
That....can't....be....right....0 -
Oh yay, another person that doesn't understand that starvation mode is a medical diagnosis and exists, very significantly, for members of our community.
I find several of these statements to be either really judgmental, one-faceted, or just wrong. Just because a person speaks with authority doesn't mean they are the best educated. There are exceptions to many of these points.
Ultimately, what you need to state is that while sometimes these things are true and impact a person, the reality is that it happens rarely, and that the likelihood of a person's struggles being because of anything other than lack of accountability is rather low.
It's just plain dangerous to make blanket statements though.0 -
It's not. It's the amount of deficit you can sustain and maintain your LBM with strength training.That....can't....be....right....
So if you have 30 lbs of fat, you can do a deficit of 930 cal/day and not lose LBM. So if your TDEE were 2400 cal, you can eat as little as 1500/day before you start to lose LBM even with strength training.0 -
I think she just stated it a little funky. The actual method we're talking about is this:Thanks for the info! I needed to hear this today. I never heard of using 31 cals times lbs of fat mass to estimate calorie needs.
That....can't....be....right....
31kcal per lb of fat mass = maximum daily caloric deficit that can be supported by fat alone
In other words, each pound of fat mass can release enough energy in a day to cover 31 kcal of deficit.0 -
That is, without a doubt, the most intelligent and well-articulated post that I've ever read on these forums, and I agree with you 100%. Well done, sir.
THIS THIS THIS!!!!!! :drinker:0 -
1. Broscience
January 8, 2013 Urban Word of the Day
Broscience is the predominant brand of reasoning in bodybuilding circles where the anecdotal reports of jacked dudes are considered more credible than scientific research.
2. Broscience
A sarcastic term implying that the time tested, muscle building wealth of knowledge developed and utilized by successful, experienced bodybuilders is inferior to the continually shifting hypotheses of articulate, textbook-savvy 155lb. chemists with little or no real world first-person experience to substantiate their conclusions. The term "Broscience" is oft repeated on bodybuilding and fitness oriented internet forums in an attempt to demonstrate online dominance as a substitution for success in the arena of actual bodybuilding.
I've wondered about this term since I never heard of it before coming to MFP. I looked it up and came up with these two definitions in the Urban Dictionary. I'm kind of tired so, maybe, I am misunderstanding. But, do these two definitions slam both physically fit folks AND scientists?
LOL the first seems to be knocking the physically fit. The second, scientists.
definition #2 is the way I see the term most often used on MFP. i won't lie; it irks me0 -
I didn't read the study...does this need to be calculated on excess bodyfat (e.g., subtract 8% essential bodyfat for men/15% for women?)
I think she just stated it a little funky. The actual method we're talking about is this:Thanks for the info! I needed to hear this today. I never heard of using 31 cals times lbs of fat mass to estimate calorie needs.
That....can't....be....right....
31kcal per lb of fat mass = maximum daily caloric deficit that can be supported by fat alone
In other words, each pound of fat mass can release enough energy in a day to cover 31 kcal of deficit.0 -
Tagging for later because I'm supposed to be working.0
-
the way I read it, no. But please do read the study and see if you come up with a different conclusion.I didn't read the study...does this need to be calculated on excess bodyfat (e.g., subtract 8% essential bodyfat for men/15% for women?)0 -
THANK YOU! it's a pleasure to see something legit & worth reading on here!0
-
Oh yay, another person that doesn't understand that starvation mode is a medical diagnosis and exists, very significantly, for members of our community.
I find several of these statements to be either really judgmental, one-faceted, or just wrong. Just because a person speaks with authority doesn't mean they are the best educated. There are exceptions to many of these points.
Ultimately, what you need to state is that while sometimes these things are true and impact a person, the reality is that it happens rarely, and that the likelihood of a person's struggles being because of anything other than lack of accountability is rather low.
It's just plain dangerous to make blanket statements though.
Have you ever watched Survivor? If starvation mode exists , it would show itself on that show. These people lose so much weight and it is from a huge calorie deficit plus all the darn physical exertion everyday. So maybe people just are really NOT aware of what they are actually consuming... I think what happens is when they starve themselves they are more likely to binge and thus gain weight.... not rocket science....js0 -
yes, yes and YES
perfection0 -
Thank you thank you! I came on line today specifically to research the whole you must eat a minimum of 1200 calories deal. Yours is the first post I saw and it resolved my inquiry.0
-
glad it could help. Please also consider that there *are* minimum caloric needs. The most hassle-free way to figure out what they are is to establish a baseline of essential macronutrients. 1200 calories per day may or may not be necessary, based on your LBM. That number is thrown around too loosely for my liking but it can sometimes be correct. I just take exception to the idea that such a round number is a good blind recommendation for anyone... do the math and if you come up with 1200, then coolThank you thank you! I came on line today specifically to research the whole you must eat a minimum of 1200 calories deal. Yours is the first post I saw and it resolved my inquiry.
0 -
1. Broscience
January 8, 2013 Urban Word of the Day
Broscience is the predominant brand of reasoning in bodybuilding circles where the anecdotal reports of jacked dudes are considered more credible than scientific research.
2. Broscience
A sarcastic term implying that the time tested, muscle building wealth of knowledge developed and utilized by successful, experienced bodybuilders is inferior to the continually shifting hypotheses of articulate, textbook-savvy 155lb. chemists with little or no real world first-person experience to substantiate their conclusions. The term "Broscience" is oft repeated on bodybuilding and fitness oriented internet forums in an attempt to demonstrate online dominance as a substitution for success in the arena of actual bodybuilding.
I've wondered about this term since I never heard of it before coming to MFP. I looked it up and came up with these two definitions in the Urban Dictionary. I'm kind of tired so, maybe, I am misunderstanding. But, do these two definitions slam both physically fit folks AND scientists?
LOL the first seems to be knocking the physically fit. The second, scientists.
Not sure i'ts all about these particular types of forums. All sorts of forums have their resident experts ( or so they say )
What I found funny was that both 1 & 2 have good access to steroids .. 1 uses them and 1 supplies them , but joking aside many forums on many subjects all over the internet have those who just log on to ridicule, spew nonsense and others who will copy and paste their new found wisdom from wikipedia to make themselves sound superior.
I think information is all good but you do have to separate the wheat from the chaff. What works for person(a) may not work for others and I find people who are destructive / sarcastic in their postings are only really here for their own entertainment.
OP is trying to help, enjoyed the post but recognise it's flaws in some areas and I know diddly ..0 -
Every competing amateur and national level bodybuilder in the world wants to know how to gain muscle in a calorie deficit. Share the secret, they all want to know and would probably pay good money for it!0
-
Kris Gethin did it.
Hey, did anyone bother to answer my question? Hello....page two. I think.0 -
Neither of those definitions lines up with how I use the term broscience. It's not only bodybuilders or only nerds who are guilty. It's anyone who blindly repeats bad advice for any reason. Bodybuilders often seem to think that they have the answers because of their personal success. Some of them do, some don't. Personal success is not scientific research, and is prone to all sorts of error. Not the least of which is the attribution of results to things that have no causal link, only a correlative one. Nerdy kids also are guilty of it. It's difficult to see how a theory plays out if you don't put it into practice. That doesn't mean you have to have already lost 200 lbs of fat and gained 100 lbs of muscle to know whether a particular bit of research is sane... but it does help to have the context of seeing a theory in action.1. Broscience
January 8, 2013 Urban Word of the Day
Broscience is the predominant brand of reasoning in bodybuilding circles where the anecdotal reports of jacked dudes are considered more credible than scientific research.
2. Broscience
A sarcastic term implying that the time tested, muscle building wealth of knowledge developed and utilized by successful, experienced bodybuilders is inferior to the continually shifting hypotheses of articulate, textbook-savvy 155lb. chemists with little or no real world first-person experience to substantiate their conclusions. The term "Broscience" is oft repeated on bodybuilding and fitness oriented internet forums in an attempt to demonstrate online dominance as a substitution for success in the arena of actual bodybuilding.
I've wondered about this term since I never heard of it before coming to MFP. I looked it up and came up with these two definitions in the Urban Dictionary. I'm kind of tired so, maybe, I am misunderstanding. But, do these two definitions slam both physically fit folks AND scientists?
LOL the first seems to be knocking the physically fit. The second, scientists.
Not sure i'ts all about these particular types of forums. All sorts of forums have their resident experts ( or so they say )
What I found funny was that both 1 & 2 have good access to steroids .. 1 uses them and 1 supplies them , but joking aside many forums on many subjects all over the internet have those who just log on to ridicule, spew nonsense and others who will copy and paste their new found wisdom from wikipedia to make themselves sound superior.
I think information is all good but you do have to separate the wheat from the chaff. What works for person(a) may not work for others and I find people who are destructive / sarcastic in their postings are only really here for their own entertainment.
OP is trying to help, enjoyed the post but recognise it's flaws in some areas and I know diddly ..
The way I use the term "broscience":
3) Preaching of unfounded ideas or unproven methods as fact because "it worked for a guy I know". That sort of thing.0 -
When it comes to muscle building demands, bodybuilders are clearly at one end the end of spectrum. The very modest muscle building that is possible during a calorie deficit is of no interest to these folks. If you're interested in the concept though, I would suggest you read "Advanced Sports Nutrition" by Dan Benardot.Every competing amateur and national level bodybuilder in the world wants to know how to gain muscle in a calorie deficit. Share the secret, they all want to know and would probably pay good money for it!0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 400 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 991 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions