What is the stupidest "Bro Science" thing you've heard?

[ritch]

Absolute Fact!

I can just imagine you waking up at night screaming such phrases, lol.....

[Erik C]

I can just imagine you waking up at night screaming such phrases, lol.....

That's quite an imagination that you have.

[Palpatine Q]

yee ha

we got us an imbecile

[Never1AShow]

MCT oil.

[Vince B]

Well yes, but in those pictures, Larry is posing for pictures. That's not the way he used a preacher bench. His arms are way too high up, as the bench should be under his armpits, elbows further down, and that looks like a flat surface preacher bench, that he said doesn't work.

Yes, Larry is demonstrating what NOT to do in those two exercises. I am amazed he didn't have sore elbows. Well, maybe he did?!

Larry, Vince Gironda and Ray Mentzer were three guys who used their brains re exercise. Lots of little things can make a difference. They analysed

how the muscles function and selected exercises that targeted those muscles.

We have all seen how the shapes of biceps vary heaps among the champion bodybuilders. Arnold has two different biceps. Sergio never had a peak. Albert Beckles and Boyer Coe had peaks on peaks.

So the question remains: can doing different exercises affect the ultimate shape of the biceps-brachialis?

[Erik C]

So the question remains: can doing different exercises affect the ultimate shape of the biceps-brachialis?

The answer is yes.

[D.O.A.]

Joon-science: "You'll lose three pounds of muscle for every one pound of fat while cutting and on the sauce"

Hahahaha! prepairing us for another failure of his latest diet plan.

[Vince B]

The answer is yes.

I can tell you that training biceps on my biceps-supinator machine sure feels different from other machines and even free weights.

Since one can load a resistance on the twisting movement it is still there even if you don't turn your hand while curling the weight.

At the completion of an arm workout my biceps are truly stimulated.

[Erik C]

I can tell you that training biceps on my biceps-supinator machine sure feels different from other machines and even free weights.

Since one can load a resistance on the twisting movement it is still there even if you don't turn your hand while curling the weight.

At the completion of an arm workout my biceps are truly stimulated.

I don't know what specific machine you are talking about, as there are a lot of machines.
Of course there is a difference between free weights and machines. One isn't better than the other. They work the muscles differently, and that's a good thing, so one should do both.

[ESFitness]

just head over to the Steroid board, print out a screenshot of the topics, tape printout on dartboard, put on a blindfold, throw a dart.

there's a 50% chance whatever question/statement contained in the thread is the stupidest bro-science you'll ever hear.

such as "you need to increase the dose with each cycle" or the assentation that if a guy uses 2g/wk his first cycle, he simply MUST use 2.5-3g for his second or else he won't grow.... etc... such utter stupidity.

[D.O.A.]

I can tell you that training biceps on my biceps-supinator machine sure feels different from other machines and even free weights.

Since one can load a resistance on the twisting movement it is still there even if you don't turn your hand while curling the weight.

At the completion of an arm workout my biceps are truly stimulated.

You never lifted real weights. You wouldnt know what truly stimulated means. Except when it comes to stalking people

[Vince B]

I don't know what specific machine you are talking about, as there are a lot of machines.
Of course there is a difference between free weights and machines. One isn't better than the other. They work the muscles differently, and that's a good thing, so one should do both.

Surprisingly, you pretty much define bro science re bodybuilding with that statement!

[ritch]

I don't know what specific machine you are talking about, as there are a lot of machines.
Of course there is a difference between free weights and machines. One isn't better than the other. They work the muscles differently, and that's a good thing, so one should do both.

Wow, something we can agree on! Add a cable movement perhaps in the mix and now we're talking...

[Erik C]

Surprisingly, you pretty much define bro science re bodybuilding with that statement!

How so? Free weights and machines do work the muscles differently. For instance, MRI studies prove that a free weight front squat, and a front squat in a vertical Smith Machine, work different muscles. The casual observer would assume otherwise. The latter would be bro science.

[Vince B]

How so? Free weights and machines do work the muscles differently. For instance, MRI studies prove that a free weight front squat, and a front squat in a vertical Smith Machine, work different muscles. The casual observer would assume otherwise. The latter would be bro science.

I am someone who did 10 deep reps with 400 pounds in the squat but didn't get huge legs from them. My conclusion was that squats weren't that good. Several decades later I watched Tom Platz explain how to do squats and I realized

what I was doing wasn't targeting the thighs like I thought they were. It is possible to cheat using a Smith Machine, too. Hey, I was the first manufacturer (1982) to put linear bearings on a Smith Machine and that transformed the device

because it reduced friction. Previously, most Smith Machines had chains and sprockets that joined one side to the other to prevent jamming. My machine can be lifted from one side without jamming.

When it comes to moving systems (bodies) so many factors are introduced that it is unlikely any science can be made of all the different champions doing the same exercises.

[Erik C]

I am someone who did 10 deep reps with 400 pounds in the squat but didn't get huge legs from them. My conclusion was that squats weren't that good. Several decades later I watched Tom Platz explain how to do squats and I realized

what I was doing wasn't targeting the thighs like I thought they were. It is possible to cheat using a Smith Machine, too. Hey, I was the first manufacturer (1982) to put linear bearings on a Smith Machine and that transformed the device

because it reduced friction. Previously, most Smith Machines had chains and sprockets that joined one side to the other to prevent jamming. My machine can be lifted from one side without jamming.

When it comes to moving systems (bodies) so many factors are introduced that it is unlikely any science can be made of all the different champions doing the same exercises.

You're wrong. Dr.Per A. Tesch's MRI studies are over 25 years old at this point, and have never been refuted. Originally, practically all his peers disagreed with his MRI results on muscle use. He told them try it yourselves. They did. The results that they got all agreed with his results. Real science = repeatable results. Science, not bro science. Fact.

[Vince B]

You're wrong. Dr.Per A. Tesch's MRI studies are over 25 years old at this point, and have never been refuted. Originally, practically all his peers disagreed with his MRI results on muscle use. He told them try it yourselves. They did. The results that they got all agreed with his results. Real science = repeatable results. Science, not bro science. Fact.

We can observe different people doing the same exercise. Some find the exercise effective while others get mixed results. Why is that? Lots of factors re individuals, levers, muscle fibers, etc.

All things can seldom be equal in gyms or labs. It would be interesting to do studies on a group of identical twins. Then most of the variations will be eliminated. Well, except when it comes

to moving systems. We can seldom be sure everyone is doing the exercise in exactly the same way. As proof, remember the amazing MedX lower back testing machine Arthur Jones built. Subjects

were strapped in the device and adjustments made to make sure only the target muscles were recruited. Even doing all those things didn't stop some people from cheating. If those MedX

machines couldn't restrict subjects then what does that say for typical equipment and free weights?

[Erik C]

We can observe different people doing the same exercise. Some find the exercise effective while others get mixed results. Why is that? Lots of factors re individuals, levers, muscle fibers, etc.

All things can seldom be equal in gyms or labs. It would be interesting to do studies on a group of identical twins. Then most of the variations will be eliminated. Well, except when it comes

to moving systems. We can seldom be sure everyone is doing the exercise in exactly the same way. As proof, remember the amazing MedX lower back testing machine Arthur Jones built. Subjects

were strapped in the device and adjustments made to make sure only the target muscles were recruited. Even doing all those things didn't stop some people from cheating. If those MedX

machines couldn't restrict subjects then what does that say for typical equipment and free weights?

Now that's bro science. Completely rejecting real science, for casual observations under no scientific controls. Tesch's work was repeated by dozen of other researchers, using different study subjects, and all the results were the same. Science is based on repeatable results. That's what is real. Unless you believe that MRI machines had some reason to lie.

[SF1900]

Now that's bro science. Completely rejecting real science, for casual observations under no scientific controls. Tesch's work was repeated by dozen of other researchers, using different study subjects, and all the results were the same. Science is based on repeatable results. That's what is real. Unless you believe that MRI machines had some reason to lie.

Ignore Basile. He told me that his theory was correct based purely on anecdotal evidence.

You can't argue with stupid.

[Vince B]

Now that's bro science. Completely rejecting real science, for casual observations under no scientific controls. Tesch's work was repeated by dozen of other researchers, using different study subjects, and all the results were the same. Science is based on repeatable results. That's what is real. Unless you believe that MRI machines had some reason to lie.

Yeah, sure, there is heaps of science available re how to bodybuild. Sorry, but the scientists aren't interested in large muscles and never have been.

I don't reject science because it is seldom applicable to bodybuilding.

It is one thing to do exercises yourself and quite another to get someone else to do them for a specific result. Some people, even closely supervised, still can't

put sufficient mechanical tension on a target muscle. I mean, that defies all science. You wouldn't believe it unless you saw it yourself. People cheat. They swing.

They do all manner of things and believe they are doing the right thing. They don't get a result so blame the exercise.

[Vince B]

Ignore Basile. He told me that his theory was correct based purely on anecdotal evidence.

You can't argue with stupid.

It is always refreshing to hear the opinion of a true expert!

[Erik C]

Yeah, sure, there is heaps of science available re how to bodybuild. Sorry, but the scientists aren't interested in large muscles and never have been.

I don't reject science because it is seldom applicable to bodybuilding.

It is one thing to do exercises yourself and quite another to get someone else to do them for a specific result. Some people, even closely supervised, still can't

put sufficient mechanical tension on a target muscle. I mean, that defies all science. You wouldn't believe it unless you saw it yourself. People cheat. They swing.

They do all manner of things and believe they are doing the right thing. They don't get a result so blame the exercise.

Granted some people make half assed efforts at exercise. However, those who are really serious about their workouts, will do what works, and get results. To say an exercise will work for one person but not another is wrong. Any exercise, done correctly by anyone, will get results. Again, some people will be fuck ups and not do things correctly. As Vince Gironda used to say, "My methods work. Some of my trainees don't."

[SF1900]

It is always refreshing to hear the opinion of a true expert!

Coming from the guy who told me and OMR that the way scientists define "theory" is wrong. Yes, all those scientists are wrong and you're right. 

Youre a bitter, old, desperate man, who is mad Arnold made something of himself and you didn't.  

[Vince B]

Granted some people make half assed efforts at exercise. However, those who are really serious about their workouts, will do what works, and get results. To say an exercise will work for one person but not another is wrong. Any exercise, done correctly by anyone, will get results. Again, some people will be fuck ups and not do things correctly. As Vince Gironda used to say, "My methods work. Some of my trainees don't."

I have seen some very serious guys spend years and years at getting specific results only to fail. How do you explain that? I conclude that they failed to put sufficient mechanical tension on those muscles so didn't get them to grow more.

So the statement "Any exercise, done correctly by anyone, will get results." is hardly true because both the instructors and subjects believed they were doing the exercises correctly. To be consistent we would have to conclude

that they weren't doing the exercises correctly. What science and experts have a difficult time explaining is why so many train so hard for so little in the way of results? You can go to any gym and the vast majority of trainees aren't growing much.

[The Ugly]

I am someone who did 10 deep reps with 400 pounds in the squat but didn't get huge legs from them. My conclusion was that squats weren't that good. Several decades later I watched Tom Platz explain how to do squats and I realized

what I was doing wasn't targeting the thighs like I thought they were. It is possible to cheat using a Smith Machine, too. Hey, I was the first manufacturer (1982) to put linear bearings on a Smith Machine and that transformed the device

because it reduced friction. Previously, most Smith Machines had chains and sprockets that joined one side to the other to prevent jamming. My machine can be lifted from one side without jamming.

When it comes to moving systems (bodies) so many factors are introduced that it is unlikely any science can be made of all the different champions doing the same exercises.

True story. The one at my gym is called a Basile Machine.