Bro Science

The Bro Science Thread - AusBB's Strength Wasteland Discussion Thread

Post up your bro science, or bro science that you've heard.

Up until last week I didn't even know this word existed, so I looked it up on the internet urban dictionary, and I found the definition quite amusing

Everything you post...

So, if something works, but isn't backed up by science, does that make it wrong or not worthy?

Classic example is how science says the body can't use more than 30g of protein in one sitting, yet all the big guys are eating far more than 30g protein in one sitting....and...they....are....big...

I like how Urbandictionary's #7 takes an opposing view.

GHOSTrun said:

Classic example is how science says the body can't use more than 30g of protein in one sitting, yet all the big guys are eating far more than 30g protein in one sitting....and...they....are....big...

Click to expand...

Were does "science" say that??

this forum is the epicentre of broscience

GHOSTrun said:

So, if something works, but isn't backed up by science, does that make it wrong or not worthy?

Classic example is how science says the body can't use more than 30g of protein in one sitting, yet all the big guys are eating far more than 30g protein in one sitting....and...they....are....big...

Click to expand...

Where is this from?

30g is a case of brosciene, mainly due to supplement company marketing. Ie need 200g of protein, but can only absorb 30g. Well that means 7 meals, but I can't possible eat 7 steaks per day, if only there was a way to get quality protein without eating that much in a 24-30g serve???

Alan Aragon, who actually defined BroScience in UD and is its chief enemy, suggested much, much larger numbers ie bodyweight (lbs) in grams.

Another doosy is the need for 'fast acting' stuff post workout. True if you have completed an 11 hour fast like most of the research uses, but depends on what you have eaten before.

Hydrolysate being absorbed fast is also a goof one. It is like a minute or two slower than isolate and much more of isolate is actually absorbed.

Nutrition really suffers for broscience because 90% of what people think they know is dictated but supplement marketing. After all, how do most magazines and websites get paid?

gongi_meter said:

this forum is the epicentre of broscience

Click to expand...

well it does have bb.com in url

Stop.

Are you saying that supplement companies lie?

Shattered.

Squts are better then Leg press.

This is 100% bro science..

I cant find a double blind placebo study to say otherwise...

What do we do now? Abandon squats?

PTC said:

Stop.

Are you saying that supplement companies lie?

Shattered.

Click to expand...

a lot of supplement companies say their competitors lie!!!


I reading about the latest developments in broscience. The notion that 'doing higher reps on the leg extension machine to get deeper cuts in your legs when dieting for a bb comp is a novel one. So is working towards a better bicep peak.

Cardio makes you fat.
Carbs make you fat
calories dont matter
working hard/putting in effort = overtraining
fat burning zone
weights make you slow n bulky

John555 said:

Cardio makes you fat.
Carbs make you fat
calories dont matter
working hard/putting in effort = overtraining
fat burning zone
weights make you slow n bulky

Click to expand...

Carbs can mke you very fat, it all has to do with insulin sensetivity and secretion...

n00bs said:

Carbs can mke you very fat, it all has to do with insulin sensetivity and secretion...

Click to expand...

Yes, it has nothing to do with eating 1000's of calories over maintenance, over estimating activity and underestimating food intake.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_2JPn6gbKM]YouTube - Squats: Awesome or Awful & Overrated?[/ame]

Mahoney said:

Yes, it has nothing to do with eating 1000's of calories over maintenance, over estimating activity and underestimating food intake.

Click to expand...

Yes lets over simplify everything... Well done

Yes Insulin, Leptin, Ghrelin, Thyroid hormones, Sex hormones & neurotransmitters... Nothing to do with it.

How do we work out our maintenance? We ESTIMATE.. We go off bodyweight and measurments and have this magic number assuming everyones biological pathways are exactly the same and funciton the same way.

We assume that a 100kg person requires this much energy... How do you know there mitochondria are running as effectivley and efficiently as yours?

So this 1000 calories over maintenance is based on what? The esitmated maintenance or what their maintenance actually is?

n00bs said:

Carbs can mke you very fat, it all has to do with insulin sensetivity and secretion...

Click to expand...

Even if I'm in deficit calories?

John555 said:

Even if I'm in deficit calories?

Click to expand...

Refer to above i added more..

It has alot to do with alot of different factors and it is so complex. Weight loss of fat loss? Eat 1000kcal of carbs a day your in a defecit. Youll lose but it wont be optimal..

What i try to focus on is the optimal for each person. We are concerned with fat loss and muscle gain.

Some people do better on higher fat then higher carbs and insulin sensetivity has alot to do with it.

Insulin Sensitivity and Fat Loss | BodyRecomposition - The Home of Lyle McDonald

Good article from Lyle... The only reason i mentioned it is i have dealt with a few people who are "hard losers" and it all came down to getting insulin in check in order to actually loose fat. No simply lowering kcal and increasing exercise.

n00bs said:

Squts are better then Leg press.

This is 100% bro science..

I cant find a double blind placebo study to say otherwise...

What do we do now? Abandon squats?

Click to expand...

From a muscle building point of view?

There probably is no more validity in squats over leg presses. Especially given that whole 'squats make your whole body grow' has been dubunked over and other.

Or you could also look at the studys on squats vs leg presses showing greater activation and activity it just about every single muscle fibre in the lower body. Funnily, squats work the quads harder than leg presses.

Although in reality the hormonal response isn't that important, you will easily find it is greater in squats than leg presses.

You could also look at the countless studies correlating squat to vertical jump and running speed, and the studies that attempted to find this for the leg press.

I also value my health and being injury free. So i'm not going to be risking my back health to load up a leg press any time soon.

I also haven't mentioned the closed chain vs open chain issues or practical ones, such as monitoring depth on lp or the fact that a lot of people end up out maxing a leg press by 17.

Nobody has to squat by any means, but to say that there is no reason (scientifically, biomechanically or through Haitian Voodoo) that it is more effective in research is ridiculous.

n00bs said:

So this 1000 calories over maintenance is based on what? The esitmated maintenance or what their maintenance actually is?

Click to expand...

Over what their maintenance actually is. Hence the obesity. Formulae aren't worth crap and the problem.

Taubes and all those whack jobs seem to neglect that if the average person who cuts carbs from their diet are going to be cutting massive amounts of calories too.

In Wolf's paleo book he spends ages on "calories don't matter" etc etc. Then he lays out meal plans with food quantities, basically giving you a meal plan with the exact number of calories. Amazing people get ripped on the 1500 calorie plans he provides.

I'm not saying too many carbs aren't a problem, but its not just the carbs fault. You can't eat over maintenance and lose weight (unless keto due to that inefficiency, and that is only theoretical), just as you can't eat under it and gain. Of course "carbs can make you very fat" but so can fat and protein.

I also love that you referenced Lyle, when he would could not disagree with you're initial statements more.