The "Science-Based" Scam

Get my books "Base Strength" and "Peak Strength" at www.empirebarbellstore.com
Blog and FREE checklist at www.empire-barbell.com
JOIN OUR Facebook FORUM! / 1515457825463939

[@CCSABCD]

I wouldn't put Jeff N and BB medicine with Seedman or Athlean x in t he same bag though

[@johnwetmore9559]

Seedman is the worst. Don't follow BB Med, but I respect the Jeffs.

[@atlaspowershrugged]

I sure would.

[@cjh1438]

They're all con artists.

[@diegozenteni1613]

@@cjh1438 feigenbaum and baraki tho? whew.

[@cjh1438]

@@diegozenteni1613 anyone who provides fitness information is prone to spike it with information designed to sell their products or services.

[@georgesarreas5509]

Most of the "science based" community is basically a lot of KZbinrs that are subscribed to MASS talking about topics on MASS. Here is the deal . The guys on MASS are Greg Nuckols,Eric helms, Mike zurdos, etc. They are real world coaches and athletes who use their experience together with their academic background to go through studies, check how they are conducted and give some practical applications. They go through the methods of the studies in order to show the viewer how to decipher these studies because most of the studies are lacking! Mike israetel is another good example of science based guy that values individual experience and difference. Also a good real world coach. If there is something that is proven is that multiple methods work. Low volume,high volume, low rpe, failure training, high frequency , low frequency. In the end though. What would it take to get you to the gym training and stick to it? And what are you training for? And I can guarantee that everyone of you who wants to be elite level athlete would not stick to science but hire a PROVEN coach

[@stevenhewes1990]

But the reality is that all of the coaches and athletes you mentioned have loads of coaches that have a better success rate then them. They don't use the same methods and get vastly superior results. A great example is Milos Sarcev has had more clients on the Olympia stage than all of the guys you mentioned combined. He's better. That's the reality of it. Just like Boris Sheiko, Louise Simmons and Stephen Korte have better powerlifters than all of your coaches and athletes combined. The science is pretty shit compared to the anecdote. Dr Stephen Seiler pointed this out in his TED talk. He mentioned how the real best athletes in various endurance sports DO NOT TRAIN in accordance to the science. Yet they have the athletes at the top echelon of their sport and not the control groups in the studies, that are training in accordance to the science.

[@georgesarreas5509]

@@stevenhewes1990 I do not disagree with ANY of what you said. Thats my point. What makes them good is not science (not on its own) . It's the fact they can listen to the individuals they are training. The fitness KZbinrs do not take.their advice because of their scientific background but because of their coaching skills. They use the "scientific background" for views. I never argued that coaches who have put better lifters exist.

[@richpayne504]

Ever since I started using Jeff Nippards POV on exercises and form as well as his frequency based studies I'm telling you no BS works

[@Artheam]

@@stevenhewes1990 You're appealing to authority. Many top athletes are successful despite other factors, purely because genetics and hard work as so important. Usain Bolt's coach can claim to have won many medals yet is he the best sprint coach? There are many coaches who are right for the athlete, but not necessarily because they are amazing coaches. Serena and Venus Williams had their father for many years, again, is he a great tennis coach? He's probably alright but it worked for him because of who he had to work with.

[@georgesarreas5509]

@@richpayne504 which was brought to him by MASS and eric helms. So what is your point?

[@TheJollyMisanthrope]

The big problem is 99% of the people that watch "science based" fitness videos don't actually do any research after the fact. They trust the personality on the channel and assume they wouldn't lie to them.

[@Amish_Avenger]

that's not a problem just with fitness. scientism is really bad nowadays. it's basically a religion at this time

[@TheJollyMisanthrope]

@@Amish_Avenger Yep, the whole "trust the science" nonsense that people are parroting. Science that can't be questioned isn't science, it's just propaganda.

[@samj8932]

They also assume what research is cited was interpreted correctly. Which often isn't the case 😅

[@HPKazan]

Crabs in a bucket.

[@TheJollyMisanthrope]

@@samj8932 Yep, easy to "debunk" something when you purposely misinterpret the data. Egotism and narcissism are well represented in the field of science. Throw in government funding and you get a lot of "scientists" making shit up so they can appease a political narrative and keep the "free money" flowing.

[@droogbear649]

My kinesiology degree was pretty good from penn state. As far as for lifting and athletics not so much. The main thing i took from it was experiment design, epidemiology, and research. Kinesiology seems to mostly to be an avenue for physical therapy.

[@AlexanderBromley]

I started my gym with a guy who got a kines degree from Penn state. That evaluation makes sense.

[@GRAYYZ]

Penn State also is home to Zatsiorsky 🏋️‍♀️

[@brenm3835]

As someone currently studying S&C at university level, I feel this. Such a soft science, large amount of fluff and anything useful they teach can easily be found on the internet. Love the martial arts analogy, will definitely be using that going forward.

[@milfslayer3202]

Martial arts is an acquired skill that has nothing to do with science whatsoever, the act of building muscle involves human/cellular biology which is quite literally a science…

[@kevinsho2601]

Its a bad analogy and now they are using scientific methods to create better coaching in bjj like the ecological approach which seems like its working.

[@elobiretv]

I have always found it comical when people like Mike Israetel act like his Phd in sport science is like the hardest fucking thing to get ever and even calls himself a doctor. It's not a terrible degree if you want to become a personal trainer or something but it's nowhere near as difficult as a lot of sciences.

[@jacobhenderson9605]

I know it was mostly a joke but if you look into Jeff cavalier more you’ll find shit that’s out right dangerous. He instructs people to breath out before squatting instead of properly breathing and braceing. Which is not great.

[@reggie7716]

Yep, he teaches an exhale on the decent in the squat, his deadlift form has a rounded back. Fake weights aside, just his form errors are enough to question his information. And for awhile he was part of that balance on a bosu ball "functional " training fad.

[@TheLouisianan]

When I first started lifting in college I remember just watching videos to get ideas to setup a program and came across that video and was like "nope." I don't know if anyone that follows him can squat more than 315 for reps.

[@jacobhenderson9605]

@@reggie7716 yeah and I’m not saying he doesn’t have some good information cause he does on some stuff. I think Alex highlighted that but when it comes to things like exercise execution and programming it’s pretty clear Jeff is out of his depth.

[@fancyhitchpin8675]

Don't pick on Jeff, watching a famous strength training guru struggle to lock out four plates is the only thing on social media that makes me feel good about my PRs.

[@AB3385ab]

Rehab seems to be his wheelhouse, I believe he was head of rehab for the New York Mets at one time. I'm sure they don't trust pro athletes to anybody- when he tries to put on the hat of a strength coach, things are on less solid ground.

[@PmanDelux]

as a flat earther i completely agree with your anti science stance

[@AP-qu2li]

Personal training should be looked at more as a trade in my opinion. You wouldn't ask a plumber what he knows about laminar flow before he fixes a burst pipe. As long as you know that he's an actual plumber and that he's done this before with satisfactory results, you feel good about hiring him. Hiring a scientist to help you with personal training seems like hiring a physicist to fix your burst pipe. Yeah, they know the mechanics of how the pipe burst, and why the solder adheres to the copper pipe, but he's never fixed a pipe. Of course you can be both a tradesman and a scientist here, but the result is the part that matters.

[@AlexanderBromley]

That is a spot on analogy. Getting people in shape requires such a minimal understanding of the science behind it but an exceptional understanding of practical application. Should be a trade

[@ralphwarom2514]

Literally, I grew up as Internet was getting big. I know so many people who grew massive by just lifting heavy things and constantly lifting heavier and eating more. The focus on the details is new and has benefits. But consistency , progressive overload and eat protein is probably 90% of what you need to get big.

[@dustinirwin1]

@@AlexanderBromley This is an absurd take. Plumbing is science based, and plumbers understand the physics and science of plumbing. If I want to do my own plumbing, I will research plumbing. Just as if I want to train myself in the gym, I will research what works and what doesn't. There is a tremendous amount of science related to strength and performance, and if people want to engage in that science, we should encourage and help them.

[@miguellorenzosingian1562]

@@dustinirwin1 You're missing the point. Of course plumbers understand the science of plumbing. It’s the other way around that isn’t true. You wouldn't be worth crap as a plumber if you had a PhD in Physics but never went through a plumbing apprenticeship.

[@perman07]

​@@dustinirwin1Have you spoken to many plumbers? They have very little knowledge of stuff like even basic physics IME.

[@ramonkroes325]

I think there are levels to this, when I started working out I got a lot of information from channels like Jeff Nippard. I don't think "intermediate" and "advanced" lifters rely on the information from Jeff Nippard, I think they know how individual training is and might watch more channels like RP or JST (or none at all because they read books or know their own training). These are also scientific channels but make clear that training is individual and that you must try to search what is optimal for yourself (or client).

[@anthonypillarella]

Agreed. I would personally take it further and say that the Bromley-type advice of "it's all individual, man" is as harmful to beginners as it is helpful to intermediates. When I was starting out, I had no idea what program was good, what would do nothing, and what would put me at injury risk. And as much merit as there is to trying things out, beginners will improve on nearly anything and just picking something at random with no understanding of if it's good is unsatisfying. "It's all individual, man" created so much frustration for me and made it really, really difficult to learn anything because it asserts there is nothing to learn. "Everything is highly individualized, but this is the general best practice" gives you a place to start and an actual opportunity to learn.

[@AlexanderBromley]

That's not really how I approach giving newbies a place to start. I have a couple of books and a few hundred videos that all reinforce the same idea: pick a baseline of work and progress forward. The progression is what causes growth, not the exact arrangement of stress in an individual workout. Anyways, I really don't see how starting with thin research and ending with, "but it's all individual" doesn't create more confusion. To address the OP, I would think the most current research would actually apply to the most advanced since they would theoretically be walking the thinnest tightrope to continue growing. But it doesn't. And if it doesn't apply to them, it certainly has no business being applied to people who can accidentally bench 300lbs by following Arnold's Bodybuilding Encyclopedia, a year subscription to M&F, Sheiko's Powerlifting Fundamentals, Crossfit, Starting Strength or exploiting literally any one of the COUNTLESS triggers for growth that can be mastered without needing a stats class.

[@jamesallred342]

@@anthonypillarella Disagree. Anecdotally, Bromley's advice was the simplest and most clear when I started running Greyskull as a beginner. What I got from this channel was "have a basic plan, show up, be consistent, get lots of volume so you learn technique". Bromley simplified a lot of the confusion for me early on in his program reviews.

[@kylemckinney_22]

@@jamesallred342 I agree, both side are needed practical aka "real life" and scientific. Like watching Dave tate vs watching Mike isratel.

[@anthonypillarella]

This is a very critical comment, so I want to first point out that I've followed and enjoyed your channel since you helped with my first weight cut in 2018. Please don't write this off as someone who isn't a fan coming in here to yell at you, I'm here because I was interested in your take on this. This video, insofar as it refers to Jeff Nippard, could not be more wrong. - Leverage degree to give position of authority: Literally doesn't mention his degree. I've followed him for years and found out what the degree was a few weeks ago due to Rona discussions. The entirety of his comments are surrounding the studies he's referencing. - Using one-off trash study to sell bullshit: Uses meta analyses when possible, rarely references just one study. Frequently mentions when something needs more exploration. - Overextrapolating study results: Also, no. In fact, every video states that fitness/muscle building is highly individualized, and that the "science-based" recommendations simply offer a good place to start. This feels like you made a video about Joel Seedman, then threw in the biggest YT names in the video and thumbnail for clicks, assuming they'd be the same. It's unsurprising you had to walk back your statement on Jeff Cavaliere given how little research you clearly did on Jeff Nippard.

[@AlexanderBromley]

I'm criticizing the approach which is synonymous with time in acadamia. Whether he leverages it by mentioning it or by making his channel revolve around research is not practically important. I haven't watched every Nippard video, but that's not the standard for response or criticism. He leans on academic research in every video and academic research is irrelevant to bodybuilding and strength sports. Plenty in the field have degrees but way, way more don't and zero competitors are staying up to date on these studies to get the next competitive edge. So I don't know what further research is needed to substantiate my point. All studies in this field are trash studies; even the best ones provide conclusions that are already well known or lead to trivia that doesn't influence how the most competitive train. It's not just about the study containing errors, it's about the limitation of the questions you can ask in the first place. If you ever find yourself in the warm up halls of the Worlds Strongest Man, IPL Worlds, or the Olympia, ask around about the last meta-study that shifted anyone's training paradigm. You are right, training is 'highly individualized', which means all lifters should be learning how to set a baseline and move forward, making intelligent changes based on need. These videos don't address that because it's beyond the scope of what academic research can take on. I had this issue with Prilepin's Chart; I constantly get hit with 'but it's a good guideline'. No, no it's not. I could say 'just do odd numbered reps'. It's a good guideline. It works. But it's not based on anything meaningful. I appreciate the time you took for your response!

[@culdeus9559]

@@AlexanderBromley Nippard does at least cite the research he reviews so you can go deep dive them later, that's not true of all and warrants mentioning.

[@cgibbons2673]

Nippard is not worth listening to IMO

[@culdeus9559]

@@cgibbons2673 He's a fantastic beginners resource.

[@captainmichaelj2321]

@@AlexanderBromley I don't think your comments about studies being trash and non of the world-class athletes using them is true. They usually have professional sports coaches and trainers who would already apply them in their training. On top of that, those studies are the best available information and are still applicable for general population, even if it doesn't fit the top 0.1% of population. I think you have gone too far in this video. I mean, who are you really to judge those academics and studies?

[@janpokrzywinski]

I think with a lot of these youtubers, what is "exceptional" is their video production quality. Kind of like how do you make a fancy dinner, ingredients are the same but sprinkle some garnish on top and arrange it nicely on a plate and suddenly you can charge 3x the price for CRB.

[@TheJollyMisanthrope]

Not to mention a lot of what they present is just them rehashing another person's work.

[@mishrathium]

this

[@larrypotter2243]

@@TheJollyMisanthrope That's called spreading information. Which is the job of an informational video. If every researcher made their own videos as well, it would be a pretty slow process.

[@TheJollyMisanthrope]

@@larrypotter2243 Most fitness channels are just parroting information they have no clue about, and making money off of it. Little to no integrity to be found.

[@larrypotter2243]

@@TheJollyMisanthrope I agree that most do that. You original comment just lacked enough specificity as to what you were referring to. The parroting of info that they don't know anything about is pretty dumb.

[@Jmack7861]

I will say in Jeff nippards defense he used to be a high level tested powerlifter, and is a pro tested bodybuilder I do believe as well

[@jojcaac5488]

Heh heh "tested" (not sayin he's on gear)

[@Froghourt]

Yeah I will say that part of the argument doesn’t really apply to Jeff N. at all, he is pretty on top in those fields. He held the bench press national record at one point (it was broken right after but still)

[@Jmack7861]

@@jojcaac5488 I believe he is natty, along with 99% of tested powerlifters (in the ipf) but I know novices that don’t know anything about how gear, wada, or out of meet testing works will say “drUg tEsTeD dOESnT mEaN dRuG fREe”

[@jojcaac5488]

@@Jmack7861 ya never know, the only one who knows if a person is on drugs or not is the person themselves.

[@Jmack7861]

@@jojcaac5488 but the likelihood that someone is going to shut themselves down for over a month causing a regression for the ability to use gear for maybe a week is not high. Unless there is a way to do something like the Russians did where the urine is completely swapped, or the person hasn’t competed in a year and isn’t at the top level to where they are in the out of meet testing pool there isn’t a window of time anyone could get away with it. And using bio identical compounds while your levels are in the reference range and all the other work you’d have to do to keep the rest of your bloods within normal limits just isn’t worth the work or time AND on top of that being in the middle of the reference range on TRT is not near the same as being able to blast test tren anadrol and halo through a meet.

[@stanblackburn700]

"Formal academic research is not the cutting edge of strength training." So true. Experience speaks loudly in this field.

[@martin1234512345]

Wish I had known about you years ago. Amazing stuff. I have combined the 70s powerlifter and bullmastiff programs from your book. One cycle through in base phase and I love it. Love the freedom of the auto regulation in the bullmastiff program and the just brutal work of the 70s program. Thank you for everything.

[@fancyhitchpin8675]

Looking forward to the deep dive and subsequent disillusionment with Cavaliere.

[@kwastek]

LOL, my thoughts exactly! :D

[@djm90909]

This is how I felt in grad school tbh. There is science and there are the people doing science. Humans are not robots. We make mistakes and have biases. Scientists are just regular people studying theory. And rarely does theory meat the road of reality.

[@REVIVALFitness]

“Athlean X and Jeremy Ethier look like distance runners who do some bicep curls” 🔥🔥🔥

[@cro_magnum]

Damn king good to see you here.

[@joshuadawson8202]

That is true for Jeremy, but seems harsh on Cava seen as he’s in his mid 40’s and still ripped.

[@paul11423]

you have body dismorphia, they are muscular...

[@shellytanner]

@@joshuadawson8202 Skinny! There is a difference. If Jeff is "ripped" so is 99% of Ethiopia

[@MiroTheHero7]

High School Teacher - "Your habits in high school won't slide in university, it's a different animal." University Professor: "Here's some playdough"

[@AlexanderBromley]

hahaha between the breadth courses and bouncing around from different majors, I learned quickly that much of college is High School part II. My loathing for the university system is a different video....

[@MiroTheHero7]

@@AlexanderBromley I think it provides more value in the networking opportunities and other career resources than the courses will ever provide - especially in this day and age. I'm pursuing a graduate degree and have found that just completing the coursework will not really get you anywhere. If the courses is what someone is going to university for then they are pretty much getting scammed.

[@jonathand9682]

That playdough costs $30K or more!

[@faizanullah5646]

@@AlexanderBromley cant wait

[@rockon8174]

Yup!!!

[@bruceyako3993]

Performance physcology is very interesting. Did you know that nor-adrenaline, when it get's to a threshold level in our brain actually forces us to QUIT! it litterally switches off motor control so we can't keep running for example. Dopamine help tamp down nor-adrenaline so we can push through the performance. The best atheltes know how to release dopamine during thier performance to stop nor-adrenaline from forcing them to quit.

[@AlexanderBromley]

Now that's what I was talking about!

[@MV-ch3mm]

I can't take the AthleanX dude seriously. I actually listened to his advice and wasted a lot of time I could have spent doing squats. Nippard is a good boii tho.

[@lukebbuff]

Agreed. Nippard’s content is pretty good as long as you remember not to treat the science as dogmatic gospel (which he doesn’t suggest either).

[@kwastek]

AX is a joke. But I don't like Nippard. He just rubs me the wrong way. He's to proper. A good school boy. I prefer guys throwing an F bomb here and there ;) you know what I mean..

[@richpayne504]

Agreed

[@richpayne504]

Using Jeff's training I'm benching 325 with a fit look. Not a powerlifters body

[@richpayne504]

And that's 8 months of training soooo

[@mufinmakesmusic1210]

Alex has the most under-appreciated lifting channel on youtube. He provides so much value for free

[@scottlapier4797]

Athlean-X: Science Based Training is killing your gains. Great video, Alex. I graduated with my Bachelor's in Exercise Science in 2013. I've been working with clients ever since. It is daily battle reeling people in and getting them to actually understand "what the science says." To be honest, I've learned more by actually coaching people hands on, than I did from reading studies. That said they still a great resource and if you can understand what they were actually testing and how it can be applied, you can further develop your methods using the information.

[@dannybautista8817]

Good sir. Would you mind explaining what a exercise science degree is and what classes you took. I’m currently going to college and am still figuring out what to major in and exercise science seems pretty interesting.

[@scottlapier4797]

@@dannybautista8817 it's a 4 year/bachelor's. Classes included. Anatomy and Physiology, Biology with labs, physics, motor learning, kinesiology with labs, statistics and research analysis, specific classes for programming for strength training and personal training, cardio Physiology classes, medical pathology classes and a few others I'm forgetting. If you can find a nationally accredited program, it's no joke. You'll be set up for either becoming an exercise professional, physical therapist with more education or a bunch of other career paths.

[@dannybautista8817]

@@scottlapier4797 wow that’s a lot of classes. Thank you for sharing everything. I hope you have a good day.

[@Cenot4ph]

If you follow athleanx and belief its a credible soirce it means you are not credible

[@CloaknDagger]

Gotta say I recentlyfound you and I absolutely love how stellar of a communicator you are. Leagues above others, and your precision with words gives me greater understanding of the concepts you explore. Subscribed!

[@dallasn16]

You hit the nail right on the head in first part of your video. If you can't back up your "science" with athletes you've produced then it's not science.

[@rafaelalamilla5583]

Very thought-provoking video Bromley! You bring up a lot of really good points in this video about science-based content and want to share my thoughts as someone who holds a bachelors (CSUSB alum) and masters degree in Kinesiology - and is now doing a Ph.D. in Health Science. 1) I've realized that many of the KInesiology programs are hit or miss with the way that they lay out their curriculum. Some are very much a glorified personal training degree while others are very vigorous and oriented in the hard sciences. I'm lucky in that I've had the latter experience for both of my degrees (not sure what was going on with CSUSB when you were there, they have outstanding faculty now though). I would say I was trained as a physiologist rather than a "kinesiologist". 2) You are alluding to a big issue with many Kinesiology programs: they don't teach you how to apply this knowledge into everyday situations and how to coach people. The ACSM has caught wind of this (about time) and is lobbying for accrediting bodies to change this of for the future. 3) You bring up a great point about how muddy a lot of the work is. Science, specifically with humans, is very tedious and has so many variables involved. You can't reasonably control everything (nor should you, the real world application will take a big hit). I've learned to take findings with a grain of salt half the time because the parameters of the studies may or may not be reproducible. As an aside, science (not just my field, but all field) have a big issue with reproducibility of results. Academics aren't incentivized to reproduce data - it's all about who can produce the most novel and interesting data. 4) You also allude to a big issue with science at the moment: we are prioritizing randomized control trials way to much. Sure, RCTs are the best way to see if an intervention works but you'd think the way people talk about them that it's the ONLY way to obtain new knowledge. Case studies, observational, cross-sectional, etc. methods are all valuable. I honestly gravitate towards yourself, Matt Wenning, Dave Tate, and Greg Nuckols more than these "science-based" folk because of my latter point. 5) As much as we like to shit on the flaws of science, most of the way we know about how humans adapt had it's start in scientific research. 6) Physical fitness/exercise has always been in this muddy spot socially. It simultaneously fits in the healthcare setting as a preventative strategy but also functions as a way to obtain a higher social standing. I think that's part of what makes it hard to study. Your perspective matters immensely here. Keep up the great work man, I really enjoy the content you put out!

[@mikemoore2791]

I watch this channel because you give solid advice, based on experience as a competitor and a coach.

[@benjamintreitz1647]

Bromley - your content stands out, just saying. I have recommended your breathing/bracing videos alone to dozens of people. Also the videos about spinal stability, the McGill Three etc, Your channel is premium stuff. Keep up the good work please.

[@swandaley]

I love this video. Being a guy who works in marketing, I see through the science-based messaging. Sure, many bodybuilders from the 70s and what not have great genetics, but a lot of the techniques they used were effective. One thing I’ve noticed with a Jeremy Ethier is that he often misreads studies and ignore basic principles. This is especially true when he said you should backload protein before bed. He ignored the fact the fact that protein has a high thermic effect of food and that it can impact sleep.

[@mmjsfca]

Athlean-X should never be mentioned in a neutral-positive light

[@AlexanderBromley]

haha I knew I would regret that comment

[@Ason19]

Brilliant. This is the kinda content I'm going to rewatch multiple times to get all the good info wrung out. With the tiny exception of the AthleanX fandom, but I wouldn't expect you to be up on his ethical controversies.

[@No-vu7pc]

Lol @ the kinesiology rant. My own experience with nutrition & dietetics was very similar.

[@AlexanderBromley]

I knew it wasn't just me!

[@suhailagha8270]

This is the new fitness KZbin. Channels shitting on each other in an bid to outperform the algorithm.

[@furezj]

Now THIS is cooking with peanut oil.

[@suhailagha8270]

@@furezj What are you cooking today my man. :)

[@axeloverstad7383]

The Blaha legacy lives on

[@Tehownilator]

There’s a difference between shitting on someone and correcting them. Real love means telling the truth. Some people respond to the truth by learning something about themselves, even though it’s hard or embarrassing. If you know anything about yourself that’s valuable, you know it was difficult to accept at first. But then some people get offended and reactive. It’s exactly the difference between growth and stagnation; and when you give that mindset a whole system to support itself, you create a literal monster - constantly needing more artificial reinforcement because it’s based on insecurity rather than the truth. The truth isn’t negative except in the hands of an ego in denial. That’s the real take. Not “stop being negative bro!” That’s for pussies. Plain and simple. “Positivity” is a subjective ideal, totally dependant on anyone’s interpretation of whether something is “negative” or not. What it ends up meaning is that whoever is most willing to use this so called ideal as a club to beat down the people who disagree with them about something will have control over what “positivity” means. So not only is it extremely inefficient and confusing; it ends you up with the complete opposite of what it claims to be about; where tyrants claim to be in support of “positivity”, and use that elite status selfishly for their own personal gain with no regard to the cost to others. And because they’ve convinced themselves that they are in support of the good, they are even more dangerous than an outwardly aggressive and unapologetic person who won’t get nearly as much support form others. This is why Gandalf refuses to take the ring himself in the LOTR. He knows that with his status as a powerful wizard with a mindset and popularity as being in the service of the good, that he would be that much more dangerous as a tool for evil with the corrupting power of the ring. Niceness is not goodness. In fact, anywhere it’s focused on as any sort of value, it is usually evil.

[@mindfuldrone]

Exactly. And this is the point I unsubscribe from Bromley. If I wanted half baked sophomoric takes on the difference between "hard" and "soft" science I'd hang out in liberal arts dorm rooms.

[@oncecursed1]

A piece a lot of people miss is that much of the science done in applied exercise science is based on bro science. Concepts are started in the gym, they seem to work, so we then research it to test and prove/disprove it. Science is our best bet, but it comes from laypeople most often.

[@johnrich7879]

Just wanna say: Thank you very much Alexander!

[@icntsywhtiwnt2]

Being totally ignorant, my newbie approach to volume has been to increase it over several weeks then drop it and add weight. I also use long rest times because when I started out, I had half an hour with a trainer and the breakneck speeds we took to get in as much variety as possible meant we could get to push-ups, an exercise im decent at, and I couldn't do a single one because my muscles were jelly. And week to week it didn't feel like I was progressing as I got too exhausted to PR much.

[@OMAR-vk9pi]

To be fair a lot of science based people have also gotten rid of some of the old bullshit ideas these do it yourself guys came up with back in the day but yeah there’s some guys that obviously get scamy with “science”

[@Uncle_Tijikun]

That's an interesting take, but I honestly think we should be making a clear line between evidence based channels like Jeff Nippard, RP, Barbell medicine from channels that promote gimmicky stuff saying that it has a scientific background while cherry picking studies. I think you're not doing the good parte of the evidence based community justice in this video by clumping them with the clowns. And I say that with the greatest respect for you man as I really enjoy your content

[@mianashhad9802]

That is exactly what I was thinking.

[@kwastek]

But "evidence based" is used in the same stupid meaning as "science based". Bromley is evidence based. Juggernaut is evidence based. Starting Strength is evidence based. Coaches with a lot of experience are evidence based. The fact that something hasn't been "published" (i.e. published an an academic journal), doesn't mean that it doesn't exist and doesn't form a body of knowledge and experience.

[@tuukkakankkunen2869]

@@kwastek The issue with this video is that it makes assumptions. Jeff Nippard for one is both. He started as accomplished powerlifter and has coached natural bodybuilders. Just the fact that he is "science based" does not mean he cant be "evidence based" aswell.

[@holdinmcgroin8639]

lol, if i look up "Science based" on YT, this vid is third to come up. Thats the alghorithm for ya

[@lastsonofkrypton3918]

because you watch this channel, the algo takes into account your viewing history

[@AlexanderBromley]

I've become part of the system I hate.....

[@lastsonofkrypton3918]

@@AlexanderBromley "Resistance is futile." *laughs in Borg*

[@chattingwithshap8010]

I love your content. No BS. Part of the issue is the lack of education most people have. Strength training at its core is not, nor will it ever be super complex. Progressive overload - recovery - proper nutrition - rest - exercise selection are the keys. Sure there are other details, but none of them replace solid programming with a purpose.

[@MrDW-ei1fe]

What are you talking about? this entire video was bs.

[@chattingwithshap8010]

@@MrDW-ei1fe how so?

[@MrDW-ei1fe]

@@chattingwithshap8010 where do I begin? I’ll start with his assertion that the “science based” KZbinrs (whatever that means) are hiding behind their degrees to gather a base without having any actual training and experience to back it up. Jeff Nippard, Stronger By Science, and Barbell Medicine all have advanced degrees but also perform very well in their respective areas. Jeff Nippard has a great physique and has performed well in both bodybuilding/powerlifting. Same for the others with regards to powerlifting. Nobody that is “science based” is trying to make training harder to reach or more inaccessible to typical people. If anything, they are quite actively doing the opposite and they’re doing it well. Bromley appears to be frightened of anything labeled science because he probably didn’t do very well academically. I’d wager that he would have a rough time in a high school biology class. Anyway, if he is so confident in his anti science based opinions then he should invite Jordan Feigenbaum to openly debate. Jordan has said countless times he will openly defend his positions in a public debate.

[@chattingwithshap8010]

@@MrDW-ei1fe that wasn’t my take on his video. I think he was skeptical of just using Science as the sole criteria. I don’t have an issue with Science being used in some aspects, but part of the issues are the data pool is often small and hard to measure what participants do outside of the protocols given. For example, how many sets are needed for hypertrophy? While the numbers are out there, issues such as age, gender, genetics, rest, etc… all play a role. I can’t speak to how he would do in class, nor is that relevant. What matters more is the experience and honest answers he gives. Personally I like Jeff Nippard and other guys as well. I could easily simplify things as I said before: train consistently - eat well -rest enough - progressive overload - have a plan - master movements. That’s a combination of Science - experience and common sense.

[@MrDW-ei1fe]

@@chattingwithshap8010 how could you have a different take? He literally says in the video word for word that he thinks they are hiding behind degrees with no results to speak of. That in and of itself is 100% false and is just the tip of the iceberg. Nobody is trying to give a hard number on sets for hypertrophy. The consensus for hypertrophy is you can build muscle in any rep range and that volume drives hypertrophy. Other than that nobody is saying exactly or even approximately how many sets for hypertrophy. It’s a bit of a complex answer but the answer that these sources tend to give isn’t based off of a single study. Nothing that they are saying is based off of one or two studies. They are using a multitude of studies (meta analysis) to form a conclusion/make recommendations. Also they aren’t saying anything wildly unique that goes against everything anyone has ever thought to have known about training. Overall I don’t really think you or Bromley really have any idea what the people you guys categorize as science based are doing with said science. I’m not bashing you because you haven’t made multiple videos with this tireless anti science campaign but Bromley does and it’s more or less “dumb”. I think if you actually took a deep dive into what the sources I mentioned are doing you will find it’s far from giving out anything remotely resembling a hard rule when it comes to training/going against the grain. I cannot stress enough how completely incorrect his (and yours if you agree with him) claim is about what the opposition is doing. Really, go on barbell medicine forums or listen to their programming podcasts to get a better understanding on their positions regarding training.

[@tylerhebert8237]

I can easily forgive the click baitey nonsense, as long as the content remains excellent. I greatly respect your recanting of accusations against AthleanX after finding that your research didn't support your theory. This perfectly illustrates the honesty and dedication to truth that makes your channel one of my favorites.

[@kwastek]

Yeah, but AX is shitty in his own way.

[@AlexanderBromley]

lol I had to give him credit on this point, but that's what I keep hearing

[@kwastek]

@@AlexanderBromley It's so cute that a lowly YT viewer like myself, who happens to have more experience with a certain thing like AX here, can observe a pro like you and think: "son" you still have a lot to learn - but you'll get there :D

[@jamesgrant]

@@kwastek Meh, I have yet to watch a video of his that I totally disagree with given the context of what he's trying to do and who the typical viewer is. And he set up a gofundme for the Meadows family so he automatically gets points from me for that.

[@curlean-x4443]

@@jamesgrant lately he’s been a lot better other than the fear mongering. 2010-2016 was the prime of functional quackery and bro science

[@0405Caco]

Great content! So many youtubers keep using long words to look smart got people thinking they're dumb, and then you come keeping things simple so anyone can understand it. And for free! Thanks a lot, man.

[@tristanjames2575]

That is an amazing video. Breath of fresh air. The majority of ailments humans have to deal with, there are 3 outcomes (at least in the short term) that are common if the issue is ignored: 1 the person gets worse 2 the person stays the same 3 the person gets better I try to be careful about hard conclusions from observing correlations.

[@HerculesFit]

Facts! You can't depend on some study to tell you exactly how to train. Apply the fundamentals, gain experience, and just do what works 💪

[@freeaolcd]

I was just laughing to myself the other day about pseudo-intellectual science based lifting people. Great vid

[@vonPlosc]

Yep I needed this video 3 months ago when I was putting together my program for a cut. After going crazy watching a ton of videos, I gave up and started experimenting and it worked really nice, now I'm almost where I wanted to get and kept my gains. Cheers

[@wyattchristiansen9089]

One of those people who used to be heavily into the “citation desperately needed” cult. I still am pursuing my masters because I actually do want to perform research, but I have learned so much more from other coaches than text books and pubmed. Not to say they aren’t useful. When it comes to pain, injury, rehab, and biomechanics, I tend to rely on research more. But the bbm people in person, coaches like John Flagg and Kevin Cann and other mentors I’ve had have shown me how to bridge the gaps between science and bro science. Plus the 3 pillars of being evidence based are research, your and other’s experiences, and patient beliefs/preferences.

[@kingsilverfox7962]

I’ve been following you from around the time you had about 5-6k subscribers on your channel. There is one reason why. Because of YOUR content, and the way YOU present it. Everything you put out is always top quality information and always relatable, even if the the video production isn’t as high as some of the other competitors on KZbin. Honestly, I prefer this. It shows that you are not out to grab people’s attention by fancy, over the top editing. You are here to give us the best information and to give it to us straight. Unfortunately that isn’t what grabs people’s attention. The basics that work have always remain the same and like you said it isn’t sexy. I myself am a personal trainer and my biggest concern when I started my KZbin channel (not this user) recently, is that I would get drowned out by more popular channels despite the good information I could put out. So I do I appreciate this video and I completely understand where you are coming from. Keep on going Bromley 🤘🏼

[@zsahe21]

!!

[@fabiomerlin8820]

I know many of the science-based channels out there and most of them are full of "junk" info. Your content is one of the best... your information makes a lot of sense.

[@cody9133]

Every individual is their own fitness experiment. You have to set a goal, establish a hypothesis on how to meet that goal (pick a program, diet, etc.), run the experiment (actually stick to the program, diet, etc.), and compare your results to where you were and your goal. Wash, rinse, and repeat. It takes time, it's frustrating, but it's the only way to find the real truth for you. KZbin channels including this one are just a tool to learn about new methods to try in your own experiment.

[@johnterpack3940]

The big problem with the science around strength training is that everything works... just not for everyone. I only have three fast-twitch fibers in my entire body, and they work in shifts. So any program that centers around explosive movements will be useless to me. But "studies show" that those programs are effective.

[@freakied0550]

Just an observation, the "science based" community as a whole tends to be more focused on winning online arguments than getting results anyway.

[@kadourwalker2372]

100%

[@davida5053]

💀

[@hujiroyanma7257]

Facts

[@rockon8174]

They look pretty good

[@freakied0550]

@@rockon8174 the people he mentioned, for sure. The people in forums who will convince you that you can't make progress without using the latest most perfect up to date science based training protocol while hitting the exact macros prescribed by the latest peer reviewed study, not so much.

[@farhanhussain_]

Problem is that internet is full of too much information including too much misinformation and leaves the poor soul wondering which one is right. So many experts with conflicting advices each of which is science based. Very few authentic coaches and expert are there

[@canyonsteinzig3263]

PhD person here and you are so obviously right. Thank you

[@theFriendlyGhst]

I actually watched Jeremy Ethier a little bit when I was new to this but after a while I realized he wasn't much bigger than me and I was a complete beginner 🤣

[@Pastapillow]

Only discovered this channel a few days ago! Been watching a few videos - really well explained content and authenticity. Thanks!! *note the audio volume between clips on this is a little up-down

[@normalaverageboring]

I hope you get to see this dude. You are very smart so I think you know that you are providing elite information. Most people want the most bang for their buck. Spend the least amout of time exercising to achieve their desired result. That is what the more mainstream youtubers and instagram models exploit. You are focused on giving information that only 1% of the population want because the other 99% of people are LAZY. That is why 'Do this 15 minute workout to get shredded' is dominating everywhere.

[@taintwasher3703]

I think Nippard is a step above these; trying to follow Athlean X advice when I started out didn't get me any results at all until I saw a Nippard video on diet then my body changed overnight almost

[@birdman1325]

Athlean X and Ryan Humiston provide total garbage. Nippard isn't too bad, I agree.

[@birdman1325]

Ryan is at least entertaining.

[@erebus79]

Nippard's video defending sumo deadlift is the most dishonest video I've ever come across on youtube.

[@stephenward2743]

21:21 Easily the most powerful and significant statement of the video, well said brother

[@andreassinats6432]

Commenting for the algorithm boost, this channel needs more views

[@ninja.training.6197]

This video should have ALL the views, all people that have ever looked at a fitness video, should 100% watch this

[@daggersdown]

Bromley, I love you, NEVER CHANGE

[@michaelsutton1461]

The real issue is Human Nature. So many looking for the easy way, the quick way, the better way. Humans have been lifting heavy things and putting them down for a long time. Lots of empirical data there. Easy to see things like genetics, diet, effort have the greatest impact on the results. Of course you can always get juiced up and minimize the impact of the real drivers on results...But what's the point in that. The focus should return to self gratification...I set a goal and I achieved it. Stop looking for the short cuts. Hard work and dedication will get you there. P.S. This was a great video. More people need to take in the message.

[@johnharbour4936]

My man Bromley! Channel is growing!

[@CasualWarriorGhost]

I'd be very curious to see you dissect one of Nippard's videos and see where his advice is off base or misleading when compared to real world knowledge. I think you make good points and express yourself quite well, but deal mostly in generalities. Specifics could be most enlightening. Thanks for the vid.

[@AlexanderBromley]

See the video before this one

[@audiomystic]

Merit > degrees. In sports, skills,and athletic performance a degree will never outweigh real world experience. For a long time, authority has been vested in institutions. Information was hard to access and therefore it would be purchased from an institution then authority granted in the form of a degree. It is important to know the science but get out there in the world and develop the merit in-situ.

[@cody9133]

I went to LSU and most the athletes (especially all of the football team) were "kinesiology majors" to create the illusion of being students.

[@D_Huckins]

The points made in the conclusions at the end were spot on. For me personally, as soon as I stopped only adhering by “Science” and started listening to professionals, such as John Meadows in Bodybuilding, not much was changing. It’s not always “bro science” just because there isn’t a paper on it. If it work it works

[@milfslayer3202]

All lifting is science based, it just comes down to how much of a nerd you want to be about it.. I love Jeff Nippards programs since they’ve worked for me and the only science of his I really focus on is time under tension, progressive overload, and focusing on working in the stretched part of the ROM.. I couldn’t care less on what all the tricep heads are called but I trust him and his nerd brain on making sure my exercises are covering them lol

[@nikolamanojlovicci]

Before I start unpacking and debunking some of the more ridiculous claims and inaccuracies in this video, I have to make a disclaimer to kids - this is why you shouldn't listen to meatheads. Mr. Bromley is a perfect example of someone who doesn't understand much about anything discussed in this video yet positions himself as an expert. Great presentation doesn't mean great information, applies to some of the people he discussed too. Now I assume the rest of the comment will be on the negative side, but let me be clear, Bromley's main point of the video is perfectly valid. He is 100% correct. A lot of charlatans have used the science brand, especially in the fitness industry to sell and/or preach all kinds of nonsense. He is 100% right on keeping science honest, but luckily science has in-built mechanisms that do that already. Bromley is also fully or partially correct on a couple of other things which I'll highlight next. Is Bromley wrong about everything? No. For example, he realized that Jeff from Athlean X is not your average coach. The guy has an exceptional coaching career under his belt and a solid academic background too. I like how he calls these guys "runners who did some curls" and just a bit to the right on the Bell curve but both Jeffs, Nippard and Athlean X, are at least one standard deviation to the right, probably closer to two standard deviations. That would be fine if you, Mr. Bromley, weren't someone who looks barely above average and takes gear to accomplish that. Another thing he is partially correct on is the division of science into hard and soft. While no actual scientist would divide it like this, it does serve a valuable purpose for this video. Where he is wrong though is that nutrition science, medicine and exercise science fall under this category. They are very, very much hard sciences in this categorization. The only difference is that we simply don't have fully developed models of how everything works exactly in our bodies YET. Eventually we will get to the point of understanding enough to be able to make high certainty claims. Mr. Bromley also understands the point of you being your own test subject. You are basically your scientific sample and should be figuring how things work for you. Lastly, the point on time and environment changing is 100% on point. The most egregious inclusion here is you lumping in Jeff Nippard with the other people. Bromley said that these science based fitness individuals have no high achievements and/or top tier athletic performance. First and foremost, elite performance is not indicative of coaching ability. Quite literally 99% of the best coaches in ANY disciple were never even remotely close to being elite athletes themselves. This is not an exaggeration, almost nobody who is elite becomes a good coach. Great coaching requires one to be quite cerebral and methodical in their approach but you wouldn't know much about that would you Alexander. By this moronic logic, Jordan would be the best basketball coach, Messi would become a god tier coach in soccer, Coleman would be the goat of coaching in bodybuilding, yet all of them are mediocre coaches at best. Back to Nippard - the dude competed in natural bodybuilding and powerlifting (I belive 6 competitions in each sport) with great success, ranking as one of Canada's best for his age and weight categories. He also has a prolific career coaching athletes to the bodybuilding stage as well as a wealth of experience coaching the gen pop. Jeff would also be the first one to point out the shortcomings of science in bodybuilding, but in order to know that you would have to spend time researching topics instead of researching marketing tactics Alexander. Mr. Bromley stated at one point in the video that science is absent from the best coaching practices and with best athletes which is demonstrably false. Most of the elite athletes in practically any athletic discipline employ a ton of science, especially if their sport requires extensive strength and conditioning. In sports near and dear to my heart, bodybuilding and MMA, the leading trainers and camps are increasingly becoming more science focused. Matt Jensen, the RP crew and 3DMJ guys in bodybuilding, American Top Team in MMA. It is no surprise that these guys are producing elite athletes at a faster rate than anyone else plus they have insane longevity and health preservation as one of their focuses which will be the future of these sports. Another easy rebuttal is with respect to science not being at the cutting edge in "lifting" sports. Again, check out what the aforementioned coaches are doing. Also bodybuilding has a natural side too and more than 80% of the best WNBF competitors have accomplished their results by adhering to the the scientific principles. So Mr. Bromley, science is pushing us to the new frontier in lifting, you just choose to be blinded by your biases. Maybe you should take your own advice from the end of the video. Last but most certainly not least, here's a takeaway point for people interested in bodybuilding, if you made it this far - use science as presented by Nippard or Dr. Mike and the rest of the RP crew, or Dr. Eric Helms as a starting point. Test a reasonable training and nutrition plan, rigorously keep a logbook on everything you do and then make changes, test, compare and repeat until you figure out what really works for your unique genetic makeup and structure. Science will help you discard a lot of nonsense like partials and bro splits, that's why it is a useful tool. It is also the best method for knowledge acquisition. If you have the potential and the aspirations to be elite, then science will only help you as a tool you use on yourself because what we know now simply breaks down at the very extremes in bodybuilding. In this scenario you will literally be the lab coat guy studying yourself to see what helps you squeeze out the 1% gains.

[@AlexanderBromley]

This was a lot of writing for something no one is going to see. I planned on a thorough response, but got far enough to see the condescending tone and decided not to bother.

[@mrvacepadrva81]

@@AlexanderBromley he might be a condescending bellend but he is also mostly right

[@crackmonsieur]

"Quite literally 99% of the best coaches in ANY disciple were never even remotely close to being elite athletes themselves." This is completely untrue. Zinedine Zidane, Pep Guardiola, Mario Zagallo, Kenny Dalglish, Franz Beckenbauer, Jupp Heynckes , Giovanni Trapattoni, Alex Ferguson, Larry Bird, Doc Rivers, Carlo Ancelotti, Cael Sanderson, Mike Brown. These are just a few that come to mind as a casual fan of these sports and don't even include every sports coach ever. Pep Guardiola who've I've mentioned is arguably the greatest soccer coach of all time, do you think that him being one of the most renowned players of his era added more or less to his ability to coach? Be honest. If you look at Soccer's history of giving out the Onze d'Or Coach of the Year and FIFA World Coach of the Year award you'll immediately notice that almost every winner of it is a former athlete of the sport, and a very high level one at that, same with all of the AP NFL Coach of the Year Award going to coaches with extensive history playing in College Football. Ron Rivera won AP Coach of the Year twice, he's a former NFL Champion and consensus All-American. If you actually look at most coaches you'll quickly notice the majority are former elite athletes of the sport.

[@mrvacepadrva81]

​@@crackmonsieurluckily, football is my sport - you proceeded to list a lot of names as former athletes. His point wasn't that best coaches weren't athletes themselves, but that they weren't elite. Let's take a look at some names in your list. Zidane was considered the best player on Earth for a good bit. Why was he so highly regarded? BECAUSE HE WAS A CEREBRAL PLAYER. He was as unathletic as they come, but a genius. This is the key to coaching, you need to be cerebral in your approach and most truly elite athletes aren't. They are gifted with ridiculous genetics, but not brains. Carlo and Pep were both average players in their day and responsible for these more intelligence based tasks on the football pitch. so the original commenter is 100% on point.

[@crackmonsieur]

@@mrvacepadrva81" He was as unathletic as they come" Yeah this is nonsense. Zidane is lauded more for his dribbling, passing, and vision but these are all downstream from his athletic gifts. He was praised during his time for his strength and accerlation, plus later in his career for his defensive work rate. an unathletic person isn't doing any of this, a average athletic person isn't. " and most truly elite athletes aren't. Ok? I'm not arguring that every elite althlete becomes an elite coach, but that many of the best coaches themselves were elite althetes. You just seem to be working with a very narrow definition of what "elite" means.

[@aidenhowell9324]

Lifting is legit the most simple thing that you can get lost in a metric fuck ton of overcomplication. Go gym, lift heavy weights (relative to your strength) and when its not heavy anymore lift heavier, if you cant lift heavier lift it for more reps or sets

[@BrendanTietz]

My subs often compare me in a positive light to you but I have yet to watch your content because generally speaking I avoid watching informative powerlifting, strength or bodybuilding channels. I just find myself rarely in agreement with their approach to content. Glad to say I am refreshingly surprised by your channel! Really agreed with the message here and would love to podcast with you some time! Hoping this comment finds it's way to you but I will also try shooting you an email! I feel we can have some great convos and give out some awesome content!

[@AlexanderBromley]

Appreciate it! That would be great. DM me through IG and we can exchange info there @alex__bromley

[@destrohades2094]

"Science based" gained a lot of traction because of the backlash from youtube charlatan's e.g. V shred

[@AlejandrooVIII]

Ohhh nooo Alex you are betting on the wrongest of horses hahaha Jeff Cavaliere is as bad for fitness as he is for performance

[@AlexanderBromley]

Lol I had to give the man his due on this topic. But I haven't watched more than 5 minutes of his channel. I'll proceed cautiously.

[@AlejandrooVIII]

@@AlexanderBromley if you can check out Alec Enkiri’s (this guys channel is really good) video on why Jeff is not a strength coach Btw really appreciate your content man👌

[@AllanThrawlNutHugger]

@@AlejandrooVIII It's moronic saying he's not a strength coach. You don't get hired by The Mets if you know nothing. Alec Enkiri on the other hand literally trains no one beyond the under 9s athletics at his local high school.

[@AlejandrooVIII]

@@AllanThrawlNutHugger well without throwing appeals to authority here’s the thing - A strength coach should know proper bracing (Jeff doesn’t know or at least he recommends exhaling before squatting) - A strength coach knows you can’t program a 4RM deadlift set, then rest then again 4RM deadlift set (I don’t even know how much time he put for rest) and he calls that a back workout meaning do it whenever you train back (which is just weird and pretty much stupid) - He doesn’t seem to understand the concept of what RM means btw - His german training volume is crazy, resting 1 min doing 10 sets of 1 reps with 75-85% of RM (Again if you understand RM and percentages you know how crazy that is) - I’m not trying to be mr. Right man however for the sake of your progress I recommend you to read this with an open mind and challenge what Jeff says, to see if it makes sense - Bromley is an excellent channel for strength you are better of hearing him than Jeff

[@AllanThrawlNutHugger]

@@AlejandrooVIII Dude you are trying to be Mr KnowItAll. I don't follow everything Jeff says but a lot of what he says agrees with many other PROFESSIONAL strength coaches. IDK what you're talking about with the telling you to do 4RM DLs everytime you do your back days. In fact he doesn't get his Pro Athletes to conventional dl at all but he does say make DLs a regularly part of your program which is right. Dan John in Easy Strength has you doing DLs at either 2 sets of 5 or 3 sets of 3 everyday. The 10x10 stuff was just a 'try it and see how much you can do then try it again later and see how much you can do' thing, not a serious program. Check out the Will Tennyson review for a real program. Bromley's very good too but I've heard him talk bollocks on occasion as well, such as the acute rise in Testosterone you'll get from doing a high rep squat set will 'make you grow like a weed'. Lol.

[@capitaldeecolon4819]

Oh man, on the topic of kinesiology. That was what I was majoring, but I was on the path of physician assistant. The counselor told me I didn't need to switch my major to biology as one can have a degree in anything for PA, so long as people take the prerequisites before getting into a PA program. Ended up dropping it and witched to tech.

[@tmmm8578]

The only real issue with this video is that if you listen to some of the "science based" community in longer form podcasts: Eg. Barbell Medicine, Nuckols, Israetel, Nippard, Helms - they'll largely admit that the #science trend is effectively marketing - which is just the reality of the industry, they all acknowledge essentially what you're saying and for the most part the ones I mentioned and others tend to be responsible in the way that they convey information with regards to individual differences, anecdotes and the folk science of lifting. Infact Helms has a podcast about rationalism vs empiricism very much in the same tone of this video and I've heard most of the people I mentioned echo the same thing in longer form discussions. But like of course its a scam, in so far as marketing trends are scams - same can be said about your channel in some narrow sense.

[@ramironetto2797]

Bromley, my man, you are a breath of fresh air amongst all this BS out here. Keep it true!

[@iamindin001]

Glad I subscribed here - one of the best channels for me!

[@Adamcaudill]

The example of going into KZbin and searching “science based” in incognito mode has an incorrect assumption of how KZbin/Google search results work. Yes your search results are based on your account history, but also based on your local IP. This is why you will see ads for things other people in your house search for on your home wifi. KZbin doesn’t know your account history of fitness videos when your are in incognito mode, but it still knows a lot of people in your house watch fitness videos, so it feeds you more of that. If you’re on a VPN that complicated that a little bit.

[@davidw3709]

Athlean-X aka Jeff Cavaliere is an exception in regards to accomplishment. He was the head Physical Therapist & Assistant Strength Coach for the Mets when they had some winning years.

[@kingpinsbarbershop4669]

KZbinrs have largely over complicated strength/muscle gain, confuse the watchers and make you constantly question what you are doing in the gym. I think Rippetoe said something along the lines of complicated is more attractive than simple but simple doesn't mean easy. I started off with SS and milked linear until it stopped, then jumped on 5/3/1 for ages now i use periodisation programmes, for most part starts off lighter ends up heavier. Its effectively the same as a LP but an end goal is in sight. For most Average people such as myself getting better at the basics and getting stronger over time with the minimum amount of work needed is Fine.

[@ninurak3543]

Actually really great perspective on how the science could be biased or manipulated and may not paint the whole picture. I would have liked to see some recommendations or alternatives though since the implication is that these channels might not be the best resource or the be all end all. At the end of the day most people aren't looking to bench the most or have an olympia physique and most people aren't going to hire a coach. Which is probably why all the free info on fitness KZbin gets the views it does. Would be great if you could provide what in your opinion is a better starting point for absolute beginners to intermediates.

[@AlexanderBromley]

in rewatching this, that was the big missing point I regret. I meant to follow up the bit about these guys having 'disproportionate subscribers' with a list of resources and channels that deserve it and I dropped the ball. Future video!

[@ninurak3543]

@@AlexanderBromley ayyy looking forward to the video!

[@axeloverstad7383]

The tides have really been turning this past year

[@ReschDMD]

My problem with Athlean-X is that his PT degree means nothing in the context of strength training/bodybuilding. I am a PT myself, and nothing in our therapeutic exercise classes touches on bodybuilding. Most PT programs do not even use much equipment-they use Therabands and towels for resistance. Only 5 of 50 people in my PT class were into strength training. While his experience as a PT may have led him down the CSCS route or into strength training, saying, "Trust me, I am a PT and my degree backs this," is very dishonest.

[@peterbrown4405]

This reminds me of a makaveki motivation video. He talks about being sick of the science and everyone trying to find a comfortable way to do something that is meant to be hard. Science is important but so is hard consistent training!

[@icebox_Intruder]

Love. Love. LOVE. For years I've loathed this "well the science says" or "doesn't say..." I had been training for 20 years when I finally started back to school (B.S. in Exercise and Wellness- S&C concentration) and all I heard was that one dimensional thought over and over and most of the people regurgitating this stuff didn't even know how to lift or understand "plate math." It's very bizarre because they don't understand the science almost ALWAYS follows the non-science. The researchers hear about someone doing X and it has a lot of success and so they do studies on it. Sometimes validating it, sometimes fucking it up and saying it's invalid (because THEY didn't set it up correctly). I like Poliquins words when he says he had been doing something since the late 70s and he learned it from a guy who had done it in the 60s, who he thinks learned it from someone previous to that. BUT "science" didn't validate this method until like, 2013. So he said if he waited on the science, he never woulda been successful.

[@grinnyyyyyyyyyyy]

I've watch these videos and tried out what they suggest, and I believe I've made progress with most of their tips. But I can see how their advice is like trivia where they say "hey try this this exercise" buried in some research-based study. For me, I've made more progress when I started programming my routines and using periodization, and accounting for adaptation.

[@AlexanderBromley]

That's it. Of course starting with a recommendation of theirs will be productive, but the point is just about any starting point will be productive. The important piece of training success isn't what your starting point is, it's how you move it forward over time.

[@GarageStrength]

Great video and really sound points 👍

[@stevenhewes1990]

Coming from someone like yourself who has quantifiable, real world success that your methods work carries a lot of weight. Not just someone who has a bunch of letters after their name.

[@aldraone-mu5yg]

You get three studies that say one thing and three that say the opposite, you can get bogged dawn in this stuff.

[@FitnessSheriff]

Dude. I got bionicgym - vibrating leg wraps as an ad before your video....bruttttalll........but great video.

[@joethesheep4675]

What i always think is pretty funny is that a lot of ppl put "coaching experience" and "studies" against each other as if they where opposites but they are actually the same thing. As a trained scientist i wanna point out that theory and empiricism are 2 parts of science which have to go together or else you are practicing bad science. What coaches do (putting ppl on a program, writing down their numbers, etc.) is empirical testing. And most coaches have some theory behind what they are doing. So thats pretty neat scientific testing depending on how they treat their data. On the other hand we, often times have exercise science where 15 students where put on some 4 week program because a guy needed to publish something to progress our school system. And sadly this kind of nonsense often time gets a positive peer-review. Ofc there are good studies and bad coaches too but the "coach" vs. "science" premise that a lot of ppl have is completely wrong. Its 2 different ways of doing science vs. each other, really and in my experience, when you average everything out you are usually better of listening to a coach. PS: oh and dont judge a coach by his clicks on social media. Like Alex says this has a lot to do with marketing and there are plenty of guys/companies who really only know how to do marketing and not much else. On the other hand you got great coaches who are just not into marketing a lot and/or say a lot of things ppl dont like to hear (but need to).

[@d0nnerhall932]

Very important topic! Thank you for a long overdue video, Alex!

[@jerryseinfeld6971]

Your restore my faith in this industry, please keep it up

[@bobbyjackson1194]

“Studies show…” is the modern day equivalent of holier than thou priests referencing scripture to support any given viewpoints or positions they take on topics related to everyday people, while remaining very detached from real world struggles. It’s related to the meritocracy, and meritocratic underpinnings of predominantly capitalist market economics being a modern day restructuring of “good people deserve to go to heaven” into “this person is rich, therefore they deserve that wealth because what they’ve done must’ve been good” - while reality shows that some people do well life by making positive contributions, while may have made a fortune by inheritance, fraud, etc., and some people may have gone to a great school, college or university through their merits (intelligence, ability, etc) while others may have had far more opportunities or financial upper hands early on in life regards of where their innate abilities would’ve led them if required to compete without such advantages or if others did not have institutional disadvantages working against them

[@BaldOmniMan]

Powerlifters and bodybuilders are divas. Lol they want to make their training more complicated than it is. No disrespect to the science based guys, but their target audience doesn’t really even lift.

[@theinfjgoyim5508]

Thank God someone said it. I have only thought this like a million times.

[@evenAndre]

There is a saying: You can usually trust the data, but not the human conclusions drawn from it. One need to check the studies to validate claims.

[@wompastompa3692]

Ok, but how long SHOULD a string be?

[@mohanbeekie663]

I've been really liking the more recent videos and the edits added a nice touch.

[@AlexanderBromley]

Thanks! I'm happy I played around with the format. I'll be applying this to all my future training and programming vids!

[@Darcozell]

Probably, the best video I have seen this year. Thank you!!!

[@orijun]

Hey, love the content, love your approach. Keep on grinding, you'll make it !

[@TerryGrindr]

Alexander Bromley + Dr. Mike share the spot as the GOAT gym influencer

[@immersivecomics1603]

I’d say Jeff Nippard is a good source of basic information but his issue is over complicating simple topics by over inflating his videos with complex terminology that novice lifters won’t understand. He needs to explain the practical application of the studies he’s referencing