1. And... we're back. You'll notice that all of your images are back as well, as are our beloved emoticons, including the infamous :foo: We have also worked with our server folks and developers to fix the issues that were slowing down the site.

    There is still work to be done - the images in existing sigs are not yet linked, for example, and we are working on a way to get the images to load faster - which will improve the performance of the site, especially on the pages with a ton of images, and we will continue to work diligently on that and keep you updated.

    Cheers,

    Fok on behalf of the entire Styleforum team
    Dismiss Notice

Random health and exercise thoughts

Discussion in 'Health & Body' started by Eason, Dec 20, 2009.

Tags:
  1. tesseract

    tesseract Senior member

    Messages:
    1,883
    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2009
    

    This is absolutely wrong.

    http://g-se.com/uploads/biblioteca/full2013.pdf
     
  2. TeeKay

    TeeKay Senior member

    Messages:
    3,214
    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2010
    Giving lifting advice because you read a lot of stuff online is like giving sex advice because you watch a lot of porn.
     
    1 person likes this.
  3. jarude

    jarude Senior member

    Messages:
    4,767
    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2008
    What if its educational porn
     
  4. conceptionist

    conceptionist Senior member

    Messages:
    3,060
    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2011
    Location:
    North
    Absolutely wrong is very strong statement.
    It could be wrong according to the study you linked.

    There's other studies out there that show that overall volume is more important. Look at the video by Eric Helms (one of the most known researchers for bodybuilding training and dieting and coach of 3dmj) I posted.

    Anyway, did you read the rest of my post and the other one I made after that?
    Lol, but its pretty true.

    You can't compare science with a video showing the act / how something is performed without any instructions or educational aspect to it. Its like comparing reading studies about strength training or reverse engineering all the Sheiko routines to watching Arnold squat in Pumping Iron.

    Or did you mean that porn is too far removed from reality, like many studies?
    In that case I say that some findings are relevant, but you have to check how the study was set up.
     
    Last edited: May 25, 2014
  5. ridethecliche

    ridethecliche Senior member

    Messages:
    9,829
    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2013
    Location:
    Bahstan
    I'm confused. This would imply that someone that did a valid study can't speak about the subject because they're not huge?
     
  6. tesseract

    tesseract Senior member

    Messages:
    1,883
    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2009
    

    I read your whole post you are giving bad advice.
     
  7. conceptionist

    conceptionist Senior member

    Messages:
    3,060
    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2011
    Location:
    North
    

    Ok.
    Then please address my points one by one and point out where I'm wrong.

    I may have written some faults, and if so I'd like to know which they are. Anyone can simply say "you are wrong because you're weak and have no experience". That's easy. I'd rather have a discussion.
     
    Last edited: May 25, 2014
  8. tesseract

    tesseract Senior member

    Messages:
    1,883
    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2009
    

    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.
     
  9. TeeKay

    TeeKay Senior member

    Messages:
    3,214
    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2010
    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.
     
    Last edited: May 25, 2014
    2 people like this.
  10. Donut

    Donut Senior member

    Messages:
    865
    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2010
    Location:
    Edmonton, AB
    I've been feeling pretty lazy lately. On lower body days I just do my sets of squats and deadlifts then go home and on my bench days I don't even feel like doing any extra accessories. feelsbadman.jpg
     
  11. tesseract

    tesseract Senior member

    Messages:
    1,883
    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2009
    

    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.
     
    Last edited: May 25, 2014
  12. KingJulien

    KingJulien Senior member

    Messages:
    5,358
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    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.
     
  13. tesseract

    tesseract Senior member

    Messages:
    1,883
    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2009
    

    You are mixing powerlifting with bodybuilding.
     
  14. KingJulien

    KingJulien Senior member

    Messages:
    5,358
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    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.
     
    1 person likes this.
  15. hendrix

    hendrix Senior member

    Messages:
    9,452
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2009
    

    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.
     
    Last edited: May 25, 2014
  16. tesseract

    tesseract Senior member

    Messages:
    1,883
    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2009
    

    Read the study I posted and the interview between Greg Nuckols and schoenfield and you will understand why this shit applies to you.
     
  17. VLSI

    VLSI Senior member

    Messages:
    6,033
    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2011
    

    Aspy manlet virgin. It would be more surprising if he didn't post on the misc.
     
    1 person likes this.
  18. TRINI

    TRINI Senior member

    Messages:
    9,027
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    

    What's 'the misc'?
     

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by