Is Too Much Exercise Science Killing Your Gains?
Summary
TLDRIn 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
😀 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.
📚 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.
🔬 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.
🤔 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.
📉 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.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Science
💡Misinterpretation
💡Exercise Science
💡Hypertrophy
💡Strength Training
💡Evidence-Based
💡Consensus
💡Uncertainty
💡Neurotic Behavior
💡Optimality
💡Certainty
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]
浏览更多相关视频
The BIGGEST Mistakes You Probably Make (ft. Dr. Mike Israetel)
How Many Sets YOU Should Do For MAXIMUM Muscle Growth (ft. Dr Mike Israetel)
Why The Volume Recommendations For Muscle Growth Might Be Wrong
The Differences Between Training for Size Vs Strength
Can You Change The Shape Of Your Muscles?
Skinnyfat To Ripped: How To Decide If You Should Cut Or Bulk
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)