Is Too Much Exercise Science Killing Your Gains?

Summary

In this humorous and insightful discussion, Dr. Mike and Dr. Pac explore the relationship between exercise science and practical gym training. They address common misconceptions, emphasizing that while science can guide principles, it's the consistency and hard work that truly build strength and muscle. They critique the tendency to seek absolute certainty from a field that naturally evolves and highlight the importance of understanding the difference between core fundamentals and marginal details in exercise science.

Takeaways

• 😀 The script discusses the misunderstanding and misrepresentation of scientific thinking in the context of exercise science and how it is often criticized without proper understanding.
• 🤔 It highlights the importance of using scientific literature as a base for knowledge in exercise science, but also emphasizes the role of expert opinion, experience, and personal preferences in forming a complete approach.
• 🏋️‍♂️ The conversation points out the contrast between the scientific approach to training and the 'Bros' approach, which may lack scientific backing but is often followed due to its perceived effectiveness.
• 🔬 The script addresses the issue of conflicting information in the field of exercise science, suggesting that while there may be some disagreement among experts, there is a broad consensus on the core principles.
• 📚 It criticizes the expectation that science should provide absolute certainty and argues that the evolution of scientific understanding is a natural process, not a flaw.
• 🤷‍♂️ The speakers argue against the 'one-size-fits-all' mentality, suggesting that scientific training is about applying the fundamentals consistently while allowing for individual variation.
• 👥 The script humorously suggests that the perceived disagreements among exercise scientists are often overstated and that most professionals agree on the majority of principles.
• 📉 It satirizes the reaction to new scientific findings, where minor changes in understanding can be sensationalized and lead to confusion among practitioners.
• 👨‍🏫 The speakers advocate for a more cautious and nuanced communication of scientific findings to avoid causing unnecessary anxiety among those who train.
• 👀 The script touches on the role of social media and content creation in shaping perceptions of scientific consensus and the potential for misinformation.
• 💡 Lastly, it suggests that the field of exercise science could improve its communication by reminding people of the difference between core principles and fine-tuning at the margins.

Q & A

What is the main argument against science presented in the script?

The script suggests that some people deride science without fully understanding it, comparing it to having an opinion about something without experiencing it firsthand.

What is the analogy used to describe the lack of experience with something before criticizing it?

The analogy used is about someone who has never been with a redhead or 'gotten laid' criticizing redheads, implying that one cannot know their preference without trying it.

What is the role of Dr. Mike in the script?

Dr. Mike is one of the speakers in the script, discussing the topic of exercise science and its impact on gains in the context of bodybuilding and fitness.

What is the significance of Dr. Pac being on Dr. Mike's top 10 list of best exports from Greece?

It's a humorous way to introduce Dr. Pac, indicating that he is considered an excellent representative or 'export' from Greece, alongside other notable items and figures.

What are some of the Greek contributions mentioned in the script?

The script mentions the cucumber dressing called 'tzatziki', Wonder Woman (as a Greek goddess), the Olympics, and the concept of democracy as Greek contributions.

What is the debate about the term 'pedophilia' in the script?

The script humorously discusses the term 'pedophilia', noting that it is often misunderstood and misused, and should not be associated with the concept of 'pedagogy' which relates to education.

What is the main critique of exercise science in the lifting community presented in the script?

The critique is that exercise science is often seen as contradictory and confusing, with different experts giving different advice, leading to a lack of clarity for those trying to apply it.

How does the script address the idea that scientific advice in exercise science changes frequently?

The script argues that while there may be some changes in the finer details of exercise science, the core fundamentals remain consistent and are supported by evidence.

What is the '52 set study' mentioned in the script, and why did it cause a stir?

The '52 set study' is a research paper that suggested a very high volume of sets might be beneficial for muscle growth. It caused a stir because it was misinterpreted by some as a new requirement for training volume.

How does the script suggest that people should approach exercise science in their training?

The script suggests that people should use exercise science as a base for their knowledge but also consider expert opinion, personal experience, and preferences. It emphasizes the importance of consistency and not getting caught up in minor details.

What is the final advice given in the script regarding the consumption of scientific information?

The final advice is to understand the difference between core fundamentals and marginal details. It suggests that while core principles are supported by science, minor details can change and should not cause anxiety or confusion.

Outlines

00:00

😀 The Perils of Misinterpreting Science

In the first paragraph, the speaker humorously compares the skepticism of science to personal preferences, such as dating or hair color, suggesting that without experience, one cannot form a valid opinion. The conversation then shifts to a discussion about the contributions of Greece to modern civilization, including democracy and the Olympic Games. The speakers, Dr. Mike and Dr. Pac, also touch on the topic of exercise science and its impact on bodybuilding, hinting at a common misconception that scientific approaches may hinder progress rather than enhance it.

05:02

📚 Balancing Science with Practical Experience

The second paragraph delves into the concept of being an evidence-based lifter, which involves using scientific literature as a foundation while also considering expert opinions and personal experiences. The speakers address common criticisms of exercise science, such as the perceived inconsistency among scientists and the idea that scientific advice is always changing. They emphasize that while there may be some debate among experts, there is a general consensus on core principles, and that healthy disagreement is part of scientific progress.

10:04

🔬 The Evolving Nature of Scientific Consensus

In this paragraph, the speakers continue to discuss the dynamic nature of scientific consensus, highlighting that while there may be a unified voice among scientists on many issues, the details can and do change as new research emerges. They critique the notion that scientific findings should be as concrete and unchanging as those in physical sciences, such as the properties of transistors. The conversation also addresses the role of social media in amplifying minor changes in scientific understanding and the potential for this to cause confusion among the public.

15:04

🤔 Addressing the Desire for Certainty in Science

The fourth paragraph focuses on the public's expectation for science to provide absolute certainty and the resulting frustration when it does not. The speakers suggest that some people are uncomfortable with the inherent uncertainty in scientific findings, particularly in the field of exercise science. They discuss the importance of distinguishing between core principles that are well-established and the fine details that may be subject to change, and the potential for this misunderstanding to lead to unnecessary anxiety among those who train.

20:05

📉 The Impact of Misinterpretation on Training

In the final paragraph, the speakers reflect on the potential negative impact of misinterpreting scientific findings on training routines. They argue that an overemphasis on the minutiae of scientific research can lead to neurotic behavior and detract from the fundamentals of consistent, hard training. The conversation concludes with advice for both producers and consumers of scientific information to maintain a balanced perspective and to avoid letting minor details overshadow the core principles of effective training.

Keywords

💡Science

Science in this video script refers to the systematic study of the physical or natural world through observation and experimentation. It is central to the theme of the video, which discusses the application of scientific principles to exercise and fitness. The script uses humor to critique those who either misinterpret or oversimplify scientific findings in the context of bodybuilding and exercise regimens, as seen in the phrase 'exercise science is killing your gains'.

💡Misinterpretation

Misinterpretation is the act of understanding something incorrectly or in a way that is not intended. In the script, it is discussed as a common issue where people misunderstand scientific findings, leading to confusion and sometimes incorrect practices in the field of exercise science. An example is the critique of 'Bros' who may misinterpret scientific studies about training to failure.

💡Exercise Science

Exercise Science is an academic discipline that studies the mechanisms of physical activity to improve human health and performance. The script discusses the role of exercise science in informing training practices and the potential for its misinterpretation by non-experts. It is a recurring theme where the hosts discuss the proper way to apply scientific knowledge to strength training and muscle gain.

💡Hypertrophy

Hypertrophy refers to the increase in muscle mass and size, which is a key goal for many individuals involved in strength training and bodybuilding. The script mentions hypertrophy in the context of discussing the effectiveness of different training methods and the role of exercise science in achieving this goal.

💡Strength Training

Strength training is a type of physical exercise that aims to increase muscle strength and size. In the script, it is discussed as an activity that can be informed by scientific principles, but also subject to personal preferences and practical experiences of trainers and athletes.

💡Evidence-Based

Evidence-based refers to a practice or approach that relies on scientific evidence to guide decisions and actions. In the context of the video, being evidence-based in lifting means using scientific literature as a foundation for training practices, while also considering expert opinions and personal experiences.

💡Consensus

Consensus in the script refers to the general agreement among experts in a field. It is used to counter the argument that exercise scientists always disagree. The hosts point out that while there may be some debate on the finer details, there is a broad consensus on the core principles of effective strength training and muscle building.

💡Uncertainty

Uncertainty in this context is the inherent lack of absolute certainty in scientific findings, especially in applied fields like exercise science. The script discusses how some individuals struggle with this uncertainty, seeking definitive answers that science may not be able to provide at all times.

💡Neurotic Behavior

Neurotic behavior, as mentioned in the script, refers to excessive worry or anxiety-driven actions, particularly in the context of individuals fixating on the latest scientific findings to the point of anxiety or obsessiveness. It is used to describe the reaction of some people to the changing nature of scientific knowledge in exercise science.

💡Optimality

Optimality in the script refers to the pursuit of the best or most effective approach within a given set of conditions. It is discussed in the context of finding the most effective training methods or exercise routines based on scientific evidence, while acknowledging that the core principles of training remain consistent.

💡Certainty

Certainty in this video script is the state of being confident or sure about something, particularly in the context of scientific findings. The hosts discuss how people may expect too much certainty from science, which can lead to frustration when new research challenges previous understandings or when definitive answers are not available.

Highlights

Critique of people deriding science without understanding it, compared to having preferences without experience.

Dr. Mike and Dr. Pac discuss the importance of evidence-based training in the gym.

The role of scientific literature, expert opinion, and personal experience in forming a knowledge base for training.

The misconception that exercise science is solely about citations and references.

Dr. Mike's humorous take on the stereotypes of 'Bros' being gigantic and illiterate.

The debate on the effectiveness of exercise science in enhancing gains versus the anecdotal evidence of non-scientific lifters.

The consensus among exercise scientists on the core principles of training for strength and hypertrophy.

Dr. Pac's perspective on the strawman argument that scientists always disagree.

The critique of the expectation that scientific findings should never change or be uncertain.

The impact of social media and sensationalism on the perception of scientific consistency in exercise science.

Dr. Mike's discussion on the importance of distinguishing between core fundamentals and marginal optimizations in exercise science.

The humorous anecdote about editing videos to appease Big Pharma, Big Sugar, and Big Dairy before YouTube publication.

The critique of people who misinterpret scientific findings and create unnecessary anxiety around training consistency and effectiveness.

Dr. Pac's suggestion for exercise scientists to be cautious in their communication to avoid causing confusion.

The humorous exchange about the perception of donkeys in different cultures and their unexpected talents.

The closing remarks by Dr. Mike on the importance of not letting the anxiety of scientific uncertainty hinder effective training.

Transcripts

a lot of people who are deriding science

they don't even know what they're

deriding it's like saying like dude in

redhe heads I don't with them be like

you ever f with a red head before like

no have you gotten laid before no well

then shut up about it how can you know

what your preference is if you haven't

even tried it me personally in my own

head in my imagination I've tried every

flavor all kinds of girls all kinds of

guys too I was about to say all kinds of

people of a gender I don't even care

about multiple genders at the same time

my head's a Fed Up Place

pack folks Dr Mike here for RP strength

and I am joined by my esteemed colleague

Dr Pac who makes my top 10 list of best

exports from the country of Greece other

things on that list include let me try a

few and then you let me

know uh the what's that cucumber

dressing y'all motherfuckers use ziki

cucumber ziki uh and then Wonder Woman

and um no she's Israeli Scott the video

guy but she Wonder Woman is Greek

because she is from uh um she's a Greek

goddess technically sort of um and

theusa that's very Greek isn't it yeah

and then um uh the Olympics you guys

came up with wrestling also in the

Olympics subcategory technically so

that's 4.5 or we're up to um the JY is a

Greek word yes um modern civilization

that was cool lowkey pretty great uh

democracy uh a word I can't say but it

means interacting with minors in a way

that they're not having maybe so much

fun and adult things are involved

pedagogi you could say could say that

yeah which is not bad but but close yeah

um and then philosophers and shit um uh

you guys don't what is the name for

Greece in Greek Ela or elas helis yeah

cuz Helen basically is like the shit

over there still is she like your queen

of England sort of yeah yeah it's we

have the Zeus the goat the the three the

three other gods Pray For Rain and just

white houses and donkeys everywhere

donkeys I didn't know that really I

thought that was Mexico Mexicans I love

you but your donkeys are off the chain

in a good way do you know what the

Mexican donkey show is no no way no uh

later off camera I will tell you what

that is

awesome imagine a donkey and a woman

interacting in a way that typically

species

don't I have imagined it my man it's a

conversation over chess yes you freak

what were you thinking the donkeys are

fucking good at chess you wouldn't think

right because normally they're just

stand there and they're like but like

dude they fucking pull that Queen out

quick but they don't pull out quick in

all the other regards I'll shut up

now I am simply rambling to to Nowhere

for two reasons one I've had a long week

of work and I have no idea what's going

on anymore I'm delusional but two

I'm trying

to stay away from this quite terrible

subject that is honestly I think a

little bit of kind of the Peril of our

times if we talk about current

events that are quite scary we got the

Middle Eastern kind of Wars but that

sort of happens all the time we got

Russia Ukraine terrible we got China

Taiwan scary World War III type of shit

but then also we know for a fact the

worst one of all of these is that

exercise science is killing your gains

and in fact could it be killing you tune

in tonight at 11: Channel

news4 but on a serious note is exercise

science killing gains does starting to

read literature and try to use exercise

science means you're going to get

smaller rather than bigger and why are

all the Bros gigantic and probably

illiterate how does that all work yeah

so it's a thing we are somewhat used to

hearing now U more like a knee-jerk

reaction

to

people reacting to a misinterpretation

or a

misrepresentation of scientific thinking

rather than actual science when it comes

yes scientific thinking as they

understand it is you cannot say or do

anything in the gym without a laundry

list of references yes and as if you

don't have a PubMed link to justify

everything and anything that you do in

the gym you are not a science-based

lifter scientific based dating would

let's say you and I were on a date are

we not hello hello bride at

all

2008 five say something to me anything

say anything hi

citation imagine my man now we're on a

date that's it so that is not how

scientific dating works I would have no

idea how dating Works have you ever been

on a date yes why was that so awkward

for you to answer cuz I totally went on

one and I remember it cuz I did it of

course you did with the dates and the

dating stuff that was fun um and it

turns out exercise science doesn't work

like just citations only either P what

does it look like when you use exercise

science properly to inform your lifting

in the gym for sure so being an

evidence-based or a science-based lifter

is comprised of a few things one you use

scientific literature when available as

the base of your knowledge the base of

your knowledge not the totality of your

knowledge exactly then you have expert

opinion and experience as well so

coaches athletes experience lifters

experienc lifters and your own

experience in the gym that you obviously

have to gcheck with the scientific base

so if you're like based on my experience

lifting doesn't grow muscle well we have

plenty of evidence to show the opposite

but anyways and then you also have your

personal preferences or or the

preferences of whoever you're working

with if you're a professional your

client is like I like leg presses not

hack squats you don't need a citation

just be like sweet we're going to do lag

presses or if you're a really good coach

you're like shut up pussy you're doing

hack squads yes so with that example you

know from the science that similar

movement

pattern as long as you're hitting long

muscle lengths and using a great range

of motion and you can overload the

muscle and so on and so forth that's

science then from experience and

obviously expert opinion you know that a

lot of people have utilized both

movements to see amazing gains couple

that up with preference okay you want

leg press instead of the hack amazing

that's great that's an evidence-based

approach there are a couple of issues

I've heard people run into complaints

they have about exercise science in in

the lifting

World I'd like to share a few of them

and get your

responses or maybe you can't respond and

then you'll be punching the air

RN is that how it looks like yeah we'll

obviously edit it and say whatever we

want because big science and big PhD is

paying the bills here I don't like to

admit this publicly but we never Scott

the video guy never just edits a video

or sends it to Max or Aki the editor

guys he actually sends it to Big Pharma

first just to make sure we don't run a

foul of certain well sponsorships that

we have and then it goes to Big Sugar

because we never want to disappoint them

and you would think at that point it

just goes straight to the YouTube

editors nope big Dairy oh yeah m mhm cuz

they really get pricity about various

things that we say but if we're just

talking about folks with their

experiences on the internet had a couple

of critiques about exercise science that

I'd like for you to respond to one is

people will say look you talk to one

exercise scientist you hear one thing

you talk to another one of you people us

people and you hear another thing how

the fuck am I supposed to make sense of

this shit my first response to that

would be well different Bros say

different shit motherfucker so it's no

different

but also I have more nuanced responses I

could give I want to hear your shit

first how would you respond to that sort

of thing my initial response would be

what you said as well but also I think

that's a bit of a strawman argument if

you look in our field with the exception

of one or two crazy individuals who are

doing all sorts of stuff you've debated

one um you'll see that there is a sort

of consensus for most things and for

most basic principles when it comes to

getting jacked and getting super strong

Mano hens

Eric Helms Greg Knuckles Brad shonfeld

Milo wolf pack Andre Lucas that guy that

guy Dr Mike the real Dr Mike the doctor

guy not me JK me we probably agree on

something like 90% of the core stuff

more maybe more definely more um I think

the disagreements stand out and act as

sand and get to the

of irritated anti-intellectuals on the

internet yes and so they go these guys

can't even agree on anything and that's

just you having a lot of feelings

because we mostly agree on things but as

scientifically minded people we can't

agree on everything because there is not

a degree of certainty that is allowable

by science that is 100% And so in

addition to that healthy disagreement

means the debate is going on and we can

push into directions of more certainty

with research and with understand

understanding if everyone agreed on

stuff kind of gives off cult Vibes

instead of science Vibes so I think

sometimes people see that we disagree on

a little bit here and there and they

think oh well they just always disagree

more or less same page yes 100% there is

a shortcut to this we consult the

ultimate Arbiter of evidence-based

YouTube lifting and that's Jeff Nipper

we just ask him what's going on and then

whatever Jeff says it's just categoric

but that like you appeal to Authority

even though he is the God Among Us um I

called Jeff nippard and this I want this

to stay in Scott the video guy I called

him uh I called the two of us short

Kings and he corrected me instantly and

asserted truthfully that he was a short

God and I was like yes sir I took a knee

other than recourse to Jeff

nippard there is another thing people

will say they'll say look these

scientists now we get a consensus so

before we were all arguing against each

other and nothing made sense now for

this next critique we're all just one

unified unit exercise scientists that

all say the same thing but these people

will say the shit they say changes all

the goddamn time they say don't train to

failure next uh the data driven strength

people say you should only train to

failure with their meta regression I

don't know what data driven strength is

I know there's a guy named Zach involved

I think he's great awesome gu but but

our meta regression meta is like some

shit you say when you're really high

regression is something that your

parents keep telling you you're doing

after college it's never did anything

with your life I don't even know what it

means it confuses and irritates me thus

I hate it and it always says some

different shit pack how would you

respond to the the idea that science all

is always changing so who gives a shit

cuz #the Bros knew all along what to do

yeah the first response is hey what the

Bros say varies quite arold versus Mike

menser both Bros completely

contradictory training Styles yes a lot

of the stuff that Bros or experienced

coaches say also change or are very

different from as it should shit evolves

weird in science yes things do change

over time and we adjust our training you

know approaches to those things but

that's not a bad thing and the idea that

every month things are massively

changing is again just a false idea and

a strongman argument do you think that's

a little bit of an artifact of the

YouTube title thumbnail game and the Tik

Tock like game where people be like this

new study on volume changes everything

and at the end of a 30 minute long

in-depth discussion they're like it

doesn't really change everything but

it's a cool new insight perfect perfect

example with the 52 set study that

people lost their minds oh yeah cuz they

were like so I'm supposed to be doing 52

sets now it's like no one ever said that

you never read the study or even read a

properly vetted abstract about it you

didn't even watch the video nobody we we

did a we had a discussion myself Dr

shanfield Dr Wolf and the volume nobody

changed their volume recommendations all

that study did was like Hey turns out

you you want to push volume for a muscle

group even more maybe you can push it

even higher than we we thought before

and if you look at the average volume in

that study it was lower than the volume

uh the strongfield high volume study and

the radial study before of which it was

a replication so basically that 52 set

study even though it was the highest end

number of sets ever studied didn't even

beat the 45 set studies before it so

caricaturing it as a new landmark high

volume study was itself wrong because I

think I suspect no offense fellas feel

free to take offense fuck if I give a

shit um a lot of people who are deriding

science they don't even know what

they're deriding it's like saying like

dude fucking redheads I don't fuck with

them be like you ever fuck with a red

head before like no have You' gotten

laid before no well then shut up about

it how can you know what your preference

is if you haven't even tried it me

personally in my own head in my

imagination I've tried every flavor yeah

all kinds of girls all kinds of guys too

I was about to say all kinds of people

of a gender I don't even care about

multiple genders at the same time my

head's a fucked up Place pack but I'm

having a good time same so I think a lot

of times when people to your point

they're not even intentionally straw

Manning they just don't really know what

it is they're criticizing other than an

amorphous YouTube thumbnail I was on uh

a podcast of a very nice gentleman who

asked me this question not in any kind

of vitriol he asked it just sort of

openly so like you know how come you

exercise scientists disagree and I said

name people to disagree and he was like

Dr Milo wolf and I was like we agree and

90% of everything is like okay and the

next several people he named were just

YouTubers and not exercise scientists

and I was like go on and he's like ah

fucking you got me that he had the

perception that it was exercise science

types and so it's if you say exercise

scientists it's like uh you have to go

to school for that have a degree in that

and have a profession in that just a

blogger or vlogger doesn't quite meet

that muster and so people see like three

or four YouTube thumbnails from their

favorite creators something seems to

contradict something else mostly for the

algorithm game and then they get

confused because they can't get

straightforward answers which is my next

question for you pack do you think some

of the frustration with exercise science

is because it changes and because

science can't give full certainty are

some people just interested in like

science and exercise being the same

thing as like the science of transistors

like here's exactly the voltage channels

you need and we know this down to a 1:1

ratio but not all Sciences are of equal

hardness to one another if I may be so

perverse is it some do people just want

the kind of direct answers that a social

science slash physical science at this

rate can't give them yes I think that's

the main issue here the expectation from

science and we've seen that not only in

our field in other fields as well where

they're like how dare they be wrong or

change

CU they expect science to be this thing

where they imagine us in a lab with a

lot of fancy equipment figuring out the

exact thing you need to do in every

instance to make the most gains when in

reality we're trying to get closer to

the truth there are some terms and

conditions but in our field specifically

and in the pursuit of maximal strength

and hypertrophy gains the

basics are pretty much the basics that

they we sure now we're talking about

length and partials hey there may be

something there but has that really

changed massively how we do things yes

we're emphasizing the stretch a bit more

sure it's not like turning everything

upside down exactly pack last question

for you do you think we as exercise

scientists and as kind of the torch

carriers of the profession could we do

anything better to communicate science

better or are we doing some shit real

bad that we're just asking for it at

this point yeah we we can be a bit more

cautious with some of the things we

Express and the way we express them to

keep reminding people that hey we're

still figuring out some of the fine

details this is our best guess at the

moment the best guess at the moment but

chances are even if that best guess is

somewhat wrong because again the basics

are in place you're not looking at

losing your gains or killing your gains

the misinterpretation of Science and the

anxiety and the neurotic behavior of oh

I got to know every Last Detail the

latest paper said and I got to be super

scientific with everything otherwise I'm

not making gains that's what's killing

your Gams yeah how many people out there

training who are hash team science just

have like just below diagnosable

neurotic disorder yeah I don't know but

that's mean the science in me Thum I

that's right that is a good answer um I

suspect it's quite a few I think a lot

of people who flock to science are

uncomfortable with uncertainty and they

pretend the science to have more

certainty than it can give us at this

juncture and then some of them will

assert to the Bros you're doing this

wrong science says otherwise ex one Pub

Med link and it's like first of all if

that's not a met analysis I don't give a

fuck what one study said and second of

all there's much more context and Nuance

than any piece even agglomeration of

research can tell you and so a lot of

people who just are uncomfortable with

uncertainty pretend that science answers

those uncertainties and then some people

who fall for that end up being like well

what the hell these are all educated

guests I thought you guys had revealed

wisdom and then they get pissed yeah and

that's that's the thing man it's those

people and people that don't get science

that give science a bad name when it

comes to practical Like Us in the

trenches Us in the gym like a scientific

way to train sure you're paying a bit

more attention to a few variables but

scientific training is literally good

old hard training with consistency for

strength for hypertrophy nobody's

telling you you have to be on a bul b

twerking uh you know at r r uh 35 and

doing something easy or something

completely unconventional yes one thing

also that I think is helpful is for

people both in the production of science

the communication of Science and the

consumption of science to understand

that there's a very big difference

between altering the core

fundamentals and looking for sense of

optimality at the margin yes because I

think some people will be like so do I

do 37 C or 39 and my response is usually

like you need to check into a

psychiatric facility but um I think when

we're talking about core fundamentals

science has first of all never

contradicted them and only has bolstered

support for them but on the periphery

very small details here and there

science can change on quite rapidly but

those details don't matter that much

exactly and and so if we remember that

when science says this new thing it's

like the news if you read news headlines

and really take them to heart you're

going to have a panic disorder today the

world is ending today because the news

is always like artificial intelligence

has boosted by our economy by 300% but

is there a Slowdown in the works like oh

God a slow down I can't afford a

Slowdown that'll just make the gain

still keep coming but at a slower rate

but it sounds bad and so a lot of

exercise science is like should you

really be doing length and partials I

think it gives people a bit of anxiety

to see that but guys these are all small

things

consistency challenging the muscle over

time making sure to recover growing in

strength over time and making sure

that's happening choosing exercises that

work for you nobody's trying to dispute

that yes exactly even with a length and

partial example 5 to 10% more growth

yeah if you look at what that means and

that's with disclaimers as well sure

you're talking about a fine detail with

um if sure you know sure 100% um two

things one where can people find you if

they want to hear from you more Dr Pac

on

YouTube is there another Dr Pac that

they could accidentally click on have

you looked at this J the the only one

and Dr pack.com worth it thousand bucks

I've been to

dr.net very different experience very

different experience and lastly just to

fuck with you guys Scott the video guy

is going to cook up the nasty thumbnails

for the next month to confuse you about

science pack great having you on nice

watch by the way thank you and your

tattoos tell me that you're a criminal

yes exactly Calvin and hobes and Lisa

Simpson the the Infamous Gang C and H NS

gang any anyone who talks to a gigantic

also talking animal and looks quite

aggressive I'm afraid of and consider a

potential criminal and also Lisa Simpson

looks like she's been on a couple of

couple of grams of Anadrol for a while

she has been as is well intended folks

don't quit your violin practice to start

taking steroids I've been Dr Mike see

you guys next time

[Music]