starting strength gym
Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 73

Thread: Follow the Science

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    660

    Default

    • starting strength seminar april 2024
    • starting strength seminar jume 2024
    • starting strength seminar august 2024
    I was part of a group of researchers who had received an equity position in another researcher’s start-up company after transferring our patent for a multi-ingredient supplement to his company. That position has not and may not ever yield any income for the other researchers or for me
    How demure, considering the vast potential of the patent:

    A multi-nutrient composition comprising a protein source, creatine, vitamin D, calcium and an n-3 fatty acid source
    Groundbreaking. No restrictions are placed on either the origin of these ingredients or their ratios. Think twice about selling royalty-free protein shakes in Canada.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2022
    Location
    Scottsdale Arizona
    Posts
    143

    Default

    Bret Weinstein has some interesting observations about the corrupt “research” industry and the financial motivations for stretching the truth. His Dark Horse POD is not as entertaining as Rip’s but it is informative.

    Same problems. Phony research and exaggerated impact from findings all to justify funding.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    53,557

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shiva Kaul View Post
    Groundbreaking. No restrictions are placed on either the origin of these ingredients or their ratios. Think twice about selling royalty-free protein shakes in Canada.
    They patented milk? Worth a try, I guess.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    4,610

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    Santana found it. And he's an academic. Kinda.
    Kinda sorta. This one was unsurprising but it was nice to find his own people confirming what we already knew. Pretty sure he told one of us to piss off when we challenged his paper 6 years ago.

    Professional research is poorly understood by the general public and that includes "educated" people. For starters, nobody ever stops to think about all of the assumptions that go into a research project from the research design and methodology all the way to the publication. Hell, people often ignore the most obvious detail that humans are carrying these projects out. They are designing them, managing them, funding them, implementing them, and reviewing them. At the end of the day research papers are a big giant self report and you are assuming that what is written reflects what happened. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't, and you really don't know, just like you really don't know if a program works from reading it in a fitness publication. I like to check what I read against what's happening in the world. Meta-analyses say progressive overload = increases in muscle mass regardless of rep range. That seems to check out. We can all agree it has to get heavier. It won't get much heavier for too long if the reps get too high though, so a line must be drawn somewhere. No difference in strength acquisition between bench pressing on a bosu ball and bench pressing on a solid bench just doesn't seem to check out, and since we are going off the word of another human, I'm going to call bullshit until demonstrated (don't hold your breath). People really have really forgotten the simple advice to "trust but verify."

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Kent, UK
    Posts
    425

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CommanderFun View Post
    Personal anecdotes are more trustworthy than "peer-reviewed" research at this point.
    I mean science is the best way we have for figuring out reality, but it's mediated by scientists and they are as fallible as any other group of humans. If you ignore that you're a dummy.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    92

    Default

    I have never seen a formal retraction across all platforms of a personal anecdote. A scientist lied. Other scientists figured it out. Journals retracted the papers.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    442

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John Fioravanti View Post
    A person I know objected to the program as I was explaining it to them—that anything that is not evidence-based and peer-reviewed can’t be proven to work and that a program without accreditation from a national institution of experts immediately raises “red flags.”

    That all the successful cases are mere anecdotes, even a million of them!

    It wasn’t a pleasant dinner…

    tl;dr: not everyone shares this point of view
    What peer reviewed, nationally accredited method of lifting weights does this person use, I wonder.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    53,557

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mbdonner View Post
    I have never seen a formal retraction across all platforms of a personal anecdote. A scientist lied. Other scientists figured it out. Journals retracted the papers.
    And yet for 6 years it was included in "The Literature."

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    604

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CommanderFun View Post
    There is in fact common knowledge that is accepted and based entirely on a wealth of anecdotes. Sticking your bare hand in a fire burns your hand. We did not need an elaborately crafted mengele-esque experiment where people were forced to barbeque their hands under controlled conditions to determine this. We've used the scientific method to understand WHY it burns our hands, but we did not need it to know that it does.

    Science ignoring a wealth of anecdotal evidence seems more anti-science than anything to me. If there is a wealth of anecdotes that cannot be explained by the current body of scientific knowledge, that means science needs to be investigating the fuck out of the phenomenon, not waving it away.

    But this is part of how they use science to craft narratives and push agendas. "No studies have shown X." Well, has anyone even tried running one? How about anyone who doesn't stand to have their own interests significantly impacted by whether X is true or not?
    Observation and reality are sometimes in alignment, but not always. I went to elementary school with a girl who has congenital insensitivity to pain. She literally burned her hand on the stove but did not observe it that way. If the planet was filled with such people we might all be stovetop burning denialists claiming the few who can feel it are hysterical, melodramatic idiots.

    We generally accept common anecdote such as: Farts stink; Stoves burn our hands; and the sky is blue, because we almost universally perceive certain phenomena the same way. This does not necessarily mean that our observations of reality are all accurate, or for that matter, inaccurate.

    There is a fallacy, argumentum ad populum, which is basically defined as that which is popular opinion doesn’t mean it’s right. I am not saying common anecdote or popular opinion is always wrong. Indeed, it’s very useful and sometimes accurate. That said, we would be unwise to take something as true simply because it is popular or has a lot of accolade. After all, CrossFit and fucking around in the gym are far more popular than SS.

    I do believe individuals can and should utilize the scientific method on their own and don’t need a panel of scientists to agree with them so they can add 5 pounds to the bar.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    4,610

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    And yet for 6 years it was included in "The Literature."
    Stu Phillips is an "expert" too, keep in mind.

Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •