or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Health & Body › Random health and exercise thoughts
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Random health and exercise thoughts - Page 2951

post #44251 of 57265
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeeKay View Post

I'm going to say something that might surprise you to see coming from someone who is a medical doctor, a published author, and has spoken at national research conferences:

The vast majority of research is pure crap and not applicable to real life situations.

While research can be a great tool, it has so many shortcomings that it often fails to make any sort of impact on patient care and management. These studies are often ridden with multiple types of bias, perhaps mostly selection and confirmation biases. They choose patient populations that in no way, shape, or form mimic real life. They attempt to make broad generalizations over a widely diverse group of people. Most research studies can't distinguish between a statistically significant finding(meaning, on paper there is a difference) vs. a clinically significant finding(meaning, the difference is big enough that anyone should give a crap about it). While journals boast of peer review as a method of preventing false information from being spread, every year there are countless numbers of retractions and corrections made -- and those are just the authors who bother to recheck their work. Most of these studies have small, specific sample sizes in extremely controlled environments and haven't been reproduced by anyone or made subject to a meta-analysis with similar studies. And very few meet the challenge of providing a large multi-center randomized control study -- the so-called Cadillac of research study types.

Just because there is a research study that says x is better than y, that doesn't mean that x is better than y. And even if there's 20 studies saying that x is better than y, that doesn't mean that y isn't better than x in certain people in certain circumstances. When any sort of decision making becomes algorithmic, meaning you are choosing yes or no based on someone else's recommendations, the individuality of patient care is lost and people will do poorly.

Now take all this I wrote about medical research and consider that these exercise and kinesiology studies typically have 1/10th the subject pool size and face even less scrutiny when being published.

Brad schoenfield specifically researches advanced trainees only because of the difference in physiological response and john meadows and Shelby Starnes have been using these theories to successfully train a whole lot of pros as well as themselves.
post #44252 of 57265
http://gregnuckols.com/2014/05/15/exercise-science-what-is-it-good-for/
post #44253 of 57265
post #44254 of 57265

This is why I'm much more inclined to trust popular programs, even moreso than coaches who've had success training a handful of elite lifters.  What works for someone squatting 600 pounds is probably not going to work well for me, so the latter isn't particularly relevant, compared to programs like 5/3/1, greyskull, and even starting strength that thousands of people have had success with.  Arnold got huge by doing reverse pyramids, that doesn't mean you should go bench til you can't move your arms.

post #44255 of 57265
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingJulien View Post

This is why I'm much more inclined to trust popular programs, even moreso than coaches who've had success training a handful of elite lifters.  What works for someone squatting 600 pounds is probably not going to work well for me, so the latter isn't particularly relevant, compared to programs like 5/3/1, greyskull, and even starting strength that thousands of people have had success with.  Arnold got huge by doing reverse pyramids, that doesn't mean you should go bench til you can't move your arms.

You are mixing powerlifting with bodybuilding.
post #44256 of 57265
Quote:
Originally Posted by tesseract View Post


You are mixing powerlifting with bodybuilding.

 

Maybe but my general point was that, rather than follow the advice of somebody at the top of the pyramid for whatever goal (bodybuilding, powerlifting), you're probably better off following a program that people at your level have had success with.  

post #44257 of 57265
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeeKay View Post

The vast majority of research is pure crap and not applicable to real life situations.

Yes, quite true. But that's not a problem with the research; people are always going to want report on their data. Especially with how ridiculously competitive post-doc jobs are these days. Don't publish and you don't have a job.

The problem is that people don't know how to read a paper and actually interpret the results. And I'm not talking about stats, which anyone can understand. I'm talking about understanding the actual techniques that people use.
post #44258 of 57265
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingJulien View Post

Maybe but my general point was that, rather than follow the advice of somebody at the top of the pyramid for whatever goal (bodybuilding, powerlifting), you're probably better off following a program that people at your level have had success with.  

Read the study I posted and the interview between Greg Nuckols and schoenfield and you will understand why this shit applies to you.
post #44259 of 57265
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeeKay View Post

Hollllyyyy shit that Elliot Rodger phaggot posted on the misc

Aspy manlet virgin. It would be more surprising if he didn't post on the misc.
post #44260 of 57265
Quote:
Originally Posted by VLSI View Post

Aspy manlet virgin. It would be more surprising if he didn't post on the misc.

What's 'the misc'?
post #44261 of 57265
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRINI View Post

What's 'the misc'?

Unaware
post #44262 of 57265
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by fuji View Post

Such a classic miscer hating women and not looking like he lifted.

"You should feel my pain... I'll make them feel my pain." Thanks, Misc!
post #44263 of 57265
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRINI View Post

What's 'the misc'?

I hope your angus is peppered m8
post #44264 of 57265
Quote:
Originally Posted by tesseract View Post

I posted a link to a study that explained hypertrophy, that should about cover it. You want the most amount of "waste products" in your muscle as possible. When you rest your body is trying to get all the lactic acid and shit out of the cells. This is why occlusion training has proven to be so effective.

I read the abstract and the last discussion parts of the study.

I am familiar with the idea of "waste products" and occlusion training. My coach uses it a lot on his more advanced lifters. I am not sure how this goes against what I was saying. If anything, its right in line with what I wrote in regards to that for a given volume and weight on the bar, higher rep sets could be beneficial compared to more sets of fewer reps. The higher reps with fewer sets will build up the lactic acid just like you said.

@Teekay:
I hear you, and I agree.
Thats specifically why I wrote that you have to check how the study was setup. I am writing my bachelors paper right now so I am familiar with the problems of validity, reliability and generalizations. I value anecdotal advice in lifting too, but just because something has worked for x doesn't mean it will work for y, especially if they aren't on the same level (what Kingjulien said). Understanding how popular programs work and reading proper studies is in many times more valuable to me, but if I have a very specific question I will no doubt ask the experienced lifters at my club whom I trust and have the same goal as me with their training.
post #44265 of 57265
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeeKay View Post

I'm going to say something that might surprise you to see coming from someone who is a medical doctor, a published author, and has spoken at national research conferences:

The vast majority of research is pure crap and not applicable to real life situations.

While research can be a great tool, it has so many shortcomings that it often fails to make any sort of impact on patient care and management. These studies are often ridden with multiple types of bias, perhaps mostly selection and confirmation biases. They choose patient populations that in no way, shape, or form mimic real life. They attempt to make broad generalizations over a widely diverse group of people. Most research studies can't distinguish between a statistically significant finding(meaning, on paper there is a difference) vs. a clinically significant finding(meaning, the difference is big enough that anyone should give a crap about it). While journals boast of peer review as a method of preventing false information from being spread, every year there are countless numbers of retractions and corrections made -- and those are just the authors who bother to recheck their work. Most of these studies have small, specific sample sizes in extremely controlled environments and haven't been reproduced by anyone or made subject to a meta-analysis with similar studies. And very few meet the challenge of providing a large multi-center randomized control study -- the so-called Cadillac of research study types.

Just because there is a research study that says x is better than y, that doesn't mean that x is better than y. And even if there's 20 studies saying that x is better than y, that doesn't mean that y isn't better than x in certain people in certain circumstances. When any sort of decision making becomes algorithmic, meaning you are choosing yes or no based on someone else's recommendations, the individuality of patient care is lost and people will do poorly.

Now take all this I wrote about medical research and consider that these exercise and kinesiology studies typically have 1/10th the subject pool size and face even less scrutiny when being published.


So you are saying that we should ignore research because outliers exist?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Health & Body
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Health & Body › Random health and exercise thoughts