-
Join the Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum The Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum is dedicated to no nonsense muscle and strength building. If you need advice that works, you have come to the right place. This forum focuses on building strength and muscle using the basics. You will also find that the Ausbb- Australian Bodybuilding Forum stresses encouragement and respect. Trolls and name calling are not allowed here. No matter what your personal goals are, you will be given effective advice that produces results.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Please consider registering. It takes 30 seconds, and will allow you to get the most out of the forum.
Bro Science vs. Science and what you need to know
0ni
Registered Rustler
If you want to actually learn something pick up a kinestheology book and look at medical studies done on rehab in old / injured people
Too many people focus on the program, or what fucking creatine to use, or when to eat their fucking Krispy Kremes for optimal gains
Want to make gains? Learn how to move properly and fix your retarded movement patterns and muscular imbalances
This last training cycle I have been focusing almost entirely on fixing my movements, my volume is down and my lifts are all going up. I spend about 90 minutes doing stupid looking shit before I train so that I am actually moving correctly now. Even my bench is going up lol
Too many people focus on the program, or what fucking creatine to use, or when to eat their fucking Krispy Kremes for optimal gains
Want to make gains? Learn how to move properly and fix your retarded movement patterns and muscular imbalances
This last training cycle I have been focusing almost entirely on fixing my movements, my volume is down and my lifts are all going up. I spend about 90 minutes doing stupid looking shit before I train so that I am actually moving correctly now. Even my bench is going up lol
wingman
Super M0derator
And can you get them glazed with creatine?
Repacked
Punxsutawney resident
Jungnaut
YOLO Kunce
Ok but why would I want to look at studies about rehabbing injured geriatrics, what does that have to do with us?
Also 90 minutes is a long time even for mobilityWOD (and something like deFranco's Limber 11 takes about 10 minutes tops), I am interested to know what kind of mobility program you are following?
Rugby88
I have Ep1c Calendar kunce
Good post [MENTION=2727]Fadi[/MENTION] ;
What is bro-science V real science anyway?
Bro-science seems to be, in general - eating 4,5,6 meals a day, training 4,5,6 times a week, focusing on 1-2 muscle groups per session, keeping protein high, watching what junk food is eaten etc etc - doesn't sound to bad to me? Most bodybuilders have followed this method for a number of decades through involving through other methods - still trying to work out what is wrong?
Bro-Science is a made-up term to describe a person guy generally that looks after himself, fitness wise, looks wise etc - but generally was some great results because they follow some pretty basic bodybuilding methods, mentioned above.
Don't get me wrong - I think the zyzz generation of trainers need an upper-cut sometimes but hey at least their in the gym and following some pretty good basic bodybuilding fundamentals.
Also what do people expect from the science world? Training/bodybuilding is a drop in the ocean in regards to what are are studying, experimenting on etc etc - so to base everything around science isn't going to get you very far....bodybuilding like many sports has involved through trial and error over many decades but if you look closely enough there are some core fundamentals that all successful bodybuilders, athletes follow -
- Consistency
- Eating correctly
- Training Hard
- Resting correctly
It's not rocket science nor do you need science backing X program your doing to get big....as I have said many times on the forum look at what 99% of successful bodybuilders, athletes have done over a number of decades now and not much changes - but all of a sudden people are questioning this - yes by all means question but you can't get away from the core building blocks of bodybuilding and really sometimes that is something that science has not proven to be wrong or right - its simply what works....
What is bro-science V real science anyway?
Bro-science seems to be, in general - eating 4,5,6 meals a day, training 4,5,6 times a week, focusing on 1-2 muscle groups per session, keeping protein high, watching what junk food is eaten etc etc - doesn't sound to bad to me? Most bodybuilders have followed this method for a number of decades through involving through other methods - still trying to work out what is wrong?
Bro-Science is a made-up term to describe a person guy generally that looks after himself, fitness wise, looks wise etc - but generally was some great results because they follow some pretty basic bodybuilding methods, mentioned above.
Don't get me wrong - I think the zyzz generation of trainers need an upper-cut sometimes but hey at least their in the gym and following some pretty good basic bodybuilding fundamentals.
Also what do people expect from the science world? Training/bodybuilding is a drop in the ocean in regards to what are are studying, experimenting on etc etc - so to base everything around science isn't going to get you very far....bodybuilding like many sports has involved through trial and error over many decades but if you look closely enough there are some core fundamentals that all successful bodybuilders, athletes follow -
- Consistency
- Eating correctly
- Training Hard
- Resting correctly
It's not rocket science nor do you need science backing X program your doing to get big....as I have said many times on the forum look at what 99% of successful bodybuilders, athletes have done over a number of decades now and not much changes - but all of a sudden people are questioning this - yes by all means question but you can't get away from the core building blocks of bodybuilding and really sometimes that is something that science has not proven to be wrong or right - its simply what works....
steveP
Well-known member
Bro-science has 2 meanings.
1. Used to described something that works with no or little scientific backing (pre fatigue, protein shakes immediately after training, low carb/high fat, smaller meals throughout the day).
2. Also used to describe something that doesn't work by self appointed experts (bicep curl half reps will give you a bigger chest, no carbs after 8pm, every day should be a full body workout).
1. Used to described something that works with no or little scientific backing (pre fatigue, protein shakes immediately after training, low carb/high fat, smaller meals throughout the day).
2. Also used to describe something that doesn't work by self appointed experts (bicep curl half reps will give you a bigger chest, no carbs after 8pm, every day should be a full body workout).
Headley
BigRed Kunce
Oh man i fkn hate driving rollers
White_Lie
Look at Moi, I'm a Kunce
Talking foam rollers here headers, not bouncey bouncey rollers
0ni
Registered Rustler
nah I've tried all that stuff, this is better. Learning correct movement patterns from the ground up just like you would rehab a patient
Deadlifted 267.5kg for 2 reps today. Knees and hips were not firing at the same rate and locking out at the same time. So I'll be doing lots of single leg work like aeroplanes, bulgarian split squats, one legged RDL. These all force you to extend the hip and knee at the right time pretty well and will improve glute activation.
From last week I did a hard 260kg for a double. I had been working on loosening up my thoracic which I did by overhead squatting holding a resistance band tied to a rack. I have also been doing a discus throw like movement with one arm at a time also
chocchillimango
Well-known member
OK just because this whole science in the fitness industry thing gets me annoyed big time, here goes lol
Most of the studies (both good and bad) have specific contexts associated with whatever hypothesis is being tested regards fitness, strength, diet, whatever that relates to diet and training methods.
If something has been working, there's empirical evidence right there that it works, even if it's on a subject of one (ie yourself).
Fact is, while many things apply generally, when it comes down to it, much of what is diet and training related is also heavily impacted by each individual's circumstances, be that physical, psychological, lifestyle, etc.
So look at the science, yes, because you might learn something new that may apply to you and may help you find a more optimal way to approach your own training (or diet etc). But don't get dogmatic about "science vs bro science".
For the most part, a lot of the studies deal with issues that relate to elite athletes and for most of us, one would be splitting hairs and spending 99% effort wasted on what might be a 1% improvement.
Be open to learning from a variety of sources of information and evidence, and look at your own history and what works for you.
I'm really sick of all the "science bitch" hashtagging around the internet in relation to diet and fitness/training.
it usually leads to pointless arguments for which both sides tend to make ignorant comments and leads to trolling of the most stupid kind.
Opinions are not fact.
Probabiliities are not fact either and yet they seem to be quoted as such by "science groupies".
When I see someone quote "do you even science?" my response usually is "no, you probably don't, dude. but you think you do".
Best way to apply science to training in the every day is probably to focus on your movement patterns and biomechanics. forces, vectors, moment arms etc.
Rant over.
In my defence, I'm just a grumpy old physicist
PS fekking double blind studies (and variations) with some statistical analysis is not what scientific method is all about. Bloody applied sciences LOL
Most of the studies (both good and bad) have specific contexts associated with whatever hypothesis is being tested regards fitness, strength, diet, whatever that relates to diet and training methods.
If something has been working, there's empirical evidence right there that it works, even if it's on a subject of one (ie yourself).
Fact is, while many things apply generally, when it comes down to it, much of what is diet and training related is also heavily impacted by each individual's circumstances, be that physical, psychological, lifestyle, etc.
So look at the science, yes, because you might learn something new that may apply to you and may help you find a more optimal way to approach your own training (or diet etc). But don't get dogmatic about "science vs bro science".
For the most part, a lot of the studies deal with issues that relate to elite athletes and for most of us, one would be splitting hairs and spending 99% effort wasted on what might be a 1% improvement.
Be open to learning from a variety of sources of information and evidence, and look at your own history and what works for you.
I'm really sick of all the "science bitch" hashtagging around the internet in relation to diet and fitness/training.
it usually leads to pointless arguments for which both sides tend to make ignorant comments and leads to trolling of the most stupid kind.
Opinions are not fact.
Probabiliities are not fact either and yet they seem to be quoted as such by "science groupies".
When I see someone quote "do you even science?" my response usually is "no, you probably don't, dude. but you think you do".
Best way to apply science to training in the every day is probably to focus on your movement patterns and biomechanics. forces, vectors, moment arms etc.
Rant over.
In my defence, I'm just a grumpy old physicist
PS fekking double blind studies (and variations) with some statistical analysis is not what scientific method is all about. Bloody applied sciences LOL
Last edited:
