Bro Science

[Christian]

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.

You mssed my point...

I refernced lyle because he did a good job at showing the little info we have. Regardless of what he thinks in regards to other things does not make any other info all of a sudden irrelivent. Thats like not believing in religion or the bible and then thinking murder is acceptable because the bible said not to do it.

My point was it all comes down to a few things /genetics and hormones the latter being part of the first.

Without optimal hormonal patyways and regulation it becomes a nightmare to avoid gaining bodyfat and maintain significant muscle mass. Yes this is because it skews your "maintenance" but if you cant accuratley determine your maintenance what do you have to go off?

I have a client currently who we have tried most things to loose body fat. If this person ate "maintenance" of proteins / carbs it became almost impossible to see progress.. Increase fats lower carbs same protein same overall calories and bodyfat comes off.. AMAZING!

I am the first to admit we dont know enough about the human body we are only simply touching the iceberg with our current knowledge but we dont disregard things we see in everyday lfie because i cant google pub med for the specific sentence in the title of a study that i am looking for.

We cant forget real world results even if we truly dont understand them..

I am interested in other peoples opinions if insulin has nothing to do with it and it is only calories if how simply changing macros up and lowering insulin someone can have substantial fatloss as oposed to other methods.

 

[lozzo]

Best one i've heard;

Doing compound excercises like deadlifts builds "fatty muscles"

 

[Mahoney]

I have a client currently who we have tried most things to loose body fat. If this person ate "maintenance" of proteins / carbs it became almost impossible to see progress.. Increase fats lower carbs same protein same overall calories and bodyfat comes off.. AMAZING!

I am the first to admit we dont know enough about the human body we are only simply touching the iceberg with our current knowledge but we dont disregard things we see in everyday lfie because i cant google pub med for the specific sentence in the title of a study that i am looking for.

We cant forget real world results even if we truly dont understand them..

I am interested in other peoples opinions if insulin has nothing to do with it and it is only calories if how simply changing macros up and lowering insulin someone can have substantial fatloss as oposed to other methods.

You do realize that someone losing or gaining weight is NOT eating at maintenance by definition?

As far as insulin goes it gets complicated due to co-digestion. Some aminos and proteins are more insulinogenic than carbohydrates. Should we eliminate protein too?

There is an excellent piece in the Oct 2008 AARR worth checking out. "Insulin can suppress fatty acid oxidation on a micro-level under certain conditions. However, under hypocaloric conditions, these micro-effects cannot and do not develop into macro-effects."

 

[Christian]

You do realize that someone losing or gaining weight is NOT eating at maintenance by definition? Im not an idiot...

As far as insulin goes it gets complicated due to co-digestion. Some aminos and proteins are more insulinogenic than carbohydrates. Should we eliminate protein too? This point has been brought forward for diabetics and there are people on both sides of the fence..

There is an excellent piece in the Oct 2008 AARR worth checking out. "Insulin can suppress fatty acid oxidation on a micro-level under certain conditions. However, under hypocaloric conditions, these micro-effects cannot and do not develop into macro-effects." Ill have a read thanks

..... In bold.

Also remember that when recruiting people for trials they exclude all the people that those trials become relevant for... I.e the people that we deal with in regards to trouble with body composition. I see alot of people rubbish studies done on obese people and on people with insulin problems but then by that merit the ones done on this very narrow range of "optimal healthy people" becomes just as irrelivent...

http://www.ajcn.org/content/87/5/1497.full

It does make for interesting arguments when calories apparnetly are just calories...

 

[Bazza20]

Organic food, dangers of pasteurized milk = bro/hippy science.

 

[GHOSTrun]

Greenpeace broscience, check this out!

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kuovqFwUtDc"]YouTube - Lord Monckton Totally Destroys Global Warming & Greenpeace![/ame]

 

[Christian]

Organic food, dangers of pasteurized milk = bro/hippy science.

Seriously are you 3?

 

[Shrek]

this forum is the epicentre of broscience

You love it.....

















The broscience.

 

[Bazza20]

Seriously are you 3?

4

 

[John555]

Greenpeace broscience, check this out!

YouTube - Lord Monckton Totally Destroys Global Warming & Greenpeace!

Why that was like poetry, totally owned her. If you dont have time to check the facts because you have a "life", then why are you spending your life campaigning about something your clueless about.

 

[Ben]

this forum is the epicentre of broscience

And you are the epicentre of negativity

 

[bro]

lol.

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...

P.S. science does not say this.

 

[Christian]

The problem is "science" defines something then turns around and says the fucking opposite so what was it?

Im not saying it is useless im saying these people that winge about oh i have an article disproving all your infomation when they cant even comprehend the subject shits me.

Imagine 5 years ago having an argument regarding brain cells and neurogenesis. It is totally irrelivent to what we have today. Yet those people basing their opinion on other peoples research from then would take it to the grave.

Thats why its funny when you have real world experience of something, say insulin sensetivity and a diet with a little literiture to back you up and understanding of other hormones, then some 1 random study comes in that might not of even been well implemented and all of a sudden your real life research has no merit.

Then 12months goes by and your view is then the correct one beacuase research has caught up to what is going on.

This is what shits me... Not the lack of knowledge but the bullshit in between.

 

[Kyle Aaron]

Thats why its funny when you have real world experience of something, say insulin sensetivity and a diet with a little literiture to back you up and understanding of other hormones, then some 1 random study comes in that might not of even been well implemented and all of a sudden your real life research has no merit.

Then 12months goes by and your view is then the correct one beacuase research has caught up to what is going on.

This is what shits me... Not the lack of knowledge but the bullshit in between.

It's almost as if real science instead of providing simple definitive answers and then resting forever, were an ongoing process of discussion and discovery. Or something.

Stressful, I know.

 

[TGM]

Also remember that when recruiting people for trials they exclude all the people that those trials become relevant for...

I think that's a large problem with many studies done on strength training, they use whatever untrained male is hanging around the campus as a subject and so everything they do works to a degree because they aren't working with athletes.

The problem is "science" defines something then turns around and says the fucking opposite so what was it?

Im not saying it is useless im saying these people that winge about oh i have an article disproving all your infomation when they cant even comprehend the subject shits me.

Imagine 5 years ago having an argument regarding brain cells and neurogenesis. It is totally irrelivent to what we have today. Yet those people basing their opinion on other peoples research from then would take it to the grave.

Thats why its funny when you have real world experience of something, say insulin sensetivity and a diet with a little literiture to back you up and understanding of other hormones, then some 1 random study comes in that might not of even been well implemented and all of a sudden your real life research has no merit.

Then 12months goes by and your view is then the correct one beacuase research has caught up to what is going on.

This is what shits me... Not the lack of knowledge but the bullshit in between.

As far as I can tell the most recent journal articles are starting to agree with the information I usually see you post. Something to keep an eye on over the next few years.

 

[Christian]

I think that's a large problem with many studies done on strength training, they use whatever untrained male is hanging around the campus as a subject and so everything they do works to a degree because they aren't working with athletes.




As far as I can tell the most recent journal articles are starting to agree with the information I usually see you post. Something to keep an eye on over the next few years.

And thats what is frustrating, because its the same thing that has been said for so long...

For example

An epigenetic eating regimen uses specific food compounds to prevent cancer or Alzheimer's disease, University of Alabama at Birmingham researchers said.
Study co-author Trygve Tollefsbol said epigenetics research worldwide, including numerous studies conducted at the University of Alabama, have identified specific food compounds found in food such as broccoli and cabbage inhibit negative epigenetic effects that can help reverse or help prevent cancers and other aging-related diseases.
"Your mother always told you to eat your vegetables, and she was right," Tollefsbol said in a statement. "But now we better understand why she was right -- compounds in many of these foods suppress gene aberrations that over time cause fatal diseases."
The epigenetics diet includes such foods as soybeans, cauliflower, broccoli, cabbage, green tea, fava beans, kale, grapes and the spice turmeric, Tollefsbol said.
"The epigenetics diet can be adopted easily, because the concentrations of the compounds needed for a positive effect are readily achievable," lead author Syed Meeran said.
Meeran said sipping tea compounds called polyphenols in daily amounts that are equivalent to approximately three cups of green tea has been shown to reverse breast cancer in laboratory mice by suppressing the gene that triggers the disease. A daily cup of broccoli sprouts, which has sulforaphane as an active compound, has been shown to reduce the risk of developing many cancers, Tollefsbol said.
The review is published in the journal Clinical Epigenetics.

Copyright United Press International 2011

Shit didnt we already know that? Isnt this what we are telling everyone... I saw a study on how apples were good for you the other day wtf?

Yes i understand we need to expand out knowledge but what shits me is deep down the only reason it happens is so someone can try and find that 1 suposed thing that is in all of these foods and turn it into a pharmacutical.

 

[GHOSTrun]

P.S. science does not say this.

I have been trawling these kind of forums for years and have seen plenty of people who believe that the body can only use 30g protein in one sitting and anymore is wasted and they have provided "scientific" evidence to support it. Personally I think it's a load of shit, as common sense (to me anyway) would dictate a larger person is going to need more protein than a smaller person and it's not a one-size-fits-all-thing. It was just the first thing that sprang to mind as an example, I'm sure I'm not the only person who has come across this sort of 'info' being posted?

 

[Christian]

I have been trawling these kind of forums for years and have seen plenty of people who believe that the body can only use 30g protein in one sitting and anymore is wasted and they have provided "scientific" evidence to support it. Personally I think it's a load of shit, as common sense (to me anyway) would dictate a larger person is going to need more protein than a smaller person and it's not a one-size-fits-all-thing. It was just the first thing that sprang to mind as an example, I'm sure I'm not the only person who has come across this sort of 'info' being posted?

In my days before being interested in such topics i have seen studies regarding protien synthesis not increasing when you go over xxx amount.

Im sure real life has debunked this enough. But i know where you are coming from...

 

[And the Ugly]

Does anyone seriously think bro science only occurs in the strength and fitness industry? Or that it's new?
People know more now and are better educated than ever in the past. People will always be dumb humans, simplify things they don't understand and talk a lot of shit.
Get used to it. My advice is learn whatever you can through experience and reading some research - and ignore the idiots.

 

[Christian]

Hey sometimes "real" science isnt even real..

A Massachusetts doc, who is also a former member of Pfizer Inc.’s speakers’ bureau, is accused of launching what is being called "one of the biggest research frauds in medical history," according to The Day of New London. And he has agreed to plead guilty, according to a Massachusetts newspaper.
Dr. Scott Reuben, who is accused of faking medical research studies, including some that were published in medical journals, was charged with health care fraud Thursday in federal court in Boston, according to the U.S. Department of Justice.

Doc Accused of Faking Celebrex Study | NBC Connecticut

Feds Accuse Doc of Faking Research On Pfizer & Merck Drugs - Health Blog - WSJ

Medical News: Research Fraud Probe Leads to Criminal Charge - in Public Health & Policy, Ethics from MedPage Today

http://www.theday.com/article/20100115/NWS01/100119833/1047