Science-Based Fitness is Killing Your Progress

[@denisek221]

Can't wait for the book to come out

[@joga_bonito_aro]

Who needs science when we got bro science... am i rite bois?

[@bolieve603]

Great one! I recently saw a study where the experimenters' protocol was much more successful than Zone 2, except 25% of the participants dropped out due to injury or illness, so they weren't counted in the results.

[@marioschadt939]

No worries man, you made the point very clear. Absolutely agree.

[@marioschadt939]

Thumbs up 👍👍👍

[@denisek221]

You deserve to coach biiiig teams

[@seb_fried]

Hi you seem very nice, but I firmly disagree. We need science to tell myths from what really works. Sure, there is a lot of good practice that has been established without studies. And it is true that science produces some noise, especially with how the online information economy works. That does not mean evidence based stuff is bad by any means. Btw. for me, when starting to lift, this kind of content really helped me lose my fear of doing something wrong. People like Mike Israetel frequently underline the importance of consistency, focusing on the basics, etc. - dunno if I am an exception here though. I agree that this requires some information literacy to not get distracted by BS. But BS is much more rampant outside the evidence based community, I think.

[@AfffS-oz5sd]

The non-evidence based community is NOT scientific! It’s like saying “I have a science theory about how the earth is flat!” That’s not fuckin science!

[@tjrugbymuscle]

Maybe I came across wrong. I should have stated the science is important to get to a lot of these issues, it’s also not useful to scour the internet for the latest paper just to get content out. With a sport like rugby we actually can’t use science with everything because the adaptation needs are so diverse. We can shape ideas with research, sure, but to put this stuff in practice is to take a leap.

[@timeandmoney84]

So true what you say about content creators creating controversy. I think the messages you are putting out are important. Good video. Thanks

[@AfffS-oz5sd]

Which is literally what he is doing. Ironic isn’t it?

[@tjrugbymuscle]

Thank you mate 🙏

[@tjrugbymuscle]

Thanks for watching/listening.... I went a bit hard here because as much as I love this industry, it's incredibly frustrating. What do you think? Am I just turning into a grumpy old bastard? Comment and let me know

[@AfffS-oz5sd]

“Think about how many big people you know, how many are weak?” Bro are you joking? Go look up the PRs of my Olympia competitors, there’s clearly a difference between strength and hyper trophy. Plenty of small guys with massive strength too. All that matters is genetics + calories + strength? Actually delusional. Is your issue with the studies, or how people interpret/represent them ot click bait on social media? Also the implication that because a lot of studies are done on beginners they don’t apply to trained athletes? If I have 2 savings accounts one 10% interest and one 8%, why would the 8% magically be better after 2 years? Also these aren’t only done on newbies.

[@tjrugbymuscle]

Firstly, Olympia competitors are full of gear, strength and size go much less hand in hand when PEDs get involved, for natural trainees this is not a concern. My issue is probably more to do with how they are represented. Your argument on interests doesn work because hypertrophy training isn't linear. Say a cable lateral raise is shown to be 2% better than using DBs in a 12 week study, that is absolutely information that can be useful. But does it really man that if person A used cables and person B used DBs that person A would be 2% bigger (or more if those gains are compounded)? And in practicality terms, there's also so much else going on that hypertrophy training is still more of an art than a science, we've had vastly contrasting methodologies work. In sports, big guys are the strong guys, of course there's variance in that and of course in some weight-class sports you'll have guys who try to deliberately remain lighter, but in general a bigger muscle is a stronger muscle. The principles are pretty simple, progressive tension overload and enough calories, this is not worth overthinking, especially when physical training is about so much more than this

[@BrigCommander]

why are you so angry?

[@AfffS-oz5sd]

You’re right bro fuck science we’ve learned literally nothing useful from that shot, all you need is the bro split work each muscle 1 time per week as long as u go hard that’s enough and otherwise I simply aren’t hard enough and gotta get harder!!!! Technique fuckin dumb anyway like weights don’t know how to count and samsulek does ego lift so why should I do science e???

[@tjrugbymuscle]

Well that wasn’t coherent in any way at all. Nor did it address a single point from the video