What's with the out of place music? Annoying as fuck.

So, the conclusion is that exercise science is not science and is totally useless, self regulation is king, and there's a lot of PhDs arguing over absolutely jack shit

The only true science is bro science

I get mine from Dom Toretto

He did win the Olympics.

The special Olympics ​@@blueferret98

Dom Mazzetti is so sage the pump chases him.

52? Santa does 69. Just saying. 😅

@@IntelligentProbethat’s why no one will remember my name.

On the first day of Squatmas…

😂😂😂

@@shawnpatten6515 lol no joke, all my other drafts were based on an attempt to reconcile that paper with everything else that has come out of the field. It got so ridiculous that I scrapped two weeks worth of work and wrote this instead.

Lol, I didn’t catch that. Nice. 😅

And 'dearth' is pronounced like 'earth' with a D on the front, not like "Darth".

@@WorldsUnhealthiestFitPerson let me see your horoscope so I can get the joke.

That's just your opinion -- some chick at the coffee house last week. 😂

@@FloatingLeaf1111 🤣

It's great that you emphasize enjoyment. I can recall Jeff Nippard and Dr. Mike Israetel bringing up enjoyment and "psychology for lifitng" as important points in a few of their lectures. Probably, Alex Bromley and many other lifting youtubers can be cited saying similar things. It's definitely a positive mindset: enjoy going to the gym, enjoying some serious stimulation, leaving the gym, and enjoying the rest between gym sessions. This helps an incredible amount towards making lifting a long-term lifestyle.

Imagine how far your athleticism would’ve gone if you had prioritized competence over enjoyment

@@soonahero Enjoyment and competence aren't antithetical.

@@Paraselene_Tao it absolutely is antithetical. You can do great things when you sacrifice enjoyment.

What's funny is that studying one's enjoyment of exercising would require a qualitative approach, which Bromley doesn't seem to think very highly of going by his slating of the social sciences.

Dr Mike's content on fat loss and specifically maintenance phases changed my life

Dr. Mike is the best. THE best.

Glock Glock 9000

He’s your favorite KZfaqr. He isn’t the ‘greatest of all time’ in any way, in any topic related to training. Chill with the fanboying.

Hard agree. He even says at some points to not stick into analysis paralysis. "Not optimal? Fine. I don't care. You shouldn't either. Have some fun. Lift heavy. But try to train smart!"

The problem is that most exercise science is not nearly as rigorous as mechanical engineering. So even if you did get into individual primary literature you could easily come away with contradictory conclusions.

This is an empirically-supported approach. The variables that science has shown matter the most for training are interoceptive - namely intensity and adequate recovery. Obsessive rigidity is not an empirically-supported way to gain muscle.

Love your approach I do the same now.

Ive always done and encouraged such. ie listen to your own body overtime and learn via trial and error from your own experience and adapt where needed and you'll ALWAYS find what is optimal for YOU

That’s the RPE based workout approach.

Doing it all of course, for the nookie

That's what the bros do...

Then you should watch Dr Mike (RP)'s videos on steroids and you'll rethink that.

@@jessickalush3305 🤣

His video on steroids is probably one of his worst, which is saying something​@@MaximilianBerkmann

Not the first but one of big youtubers to finally do it

Agreed. If nothing else, continuing to practice something will make you better at it, even during a plateau of apparent progression (provided you aren't doing it totally wrong and the plateau isn't unreasonably long).

I was more jacked before watching these so called influencer clowns. It's all bs.

Backed up with logic 😂😂😂, these people wouldn’t even be able to understand a goddamn abstract 😂😂😂😂

@@comfortablyad2164 Who are "these people"?

Facts! 💪

See layne norton vs dorian yates

Let’s go

Always, bro

@@Ezratal we're all gonna make it

Thanks for this. A lot of people in the field get triggered because they think I'm "coming for science!", but my focus really is on making sure people aren't walking around with unearned certainty about something very complex.

Right? I am trained as an economist (currently a data scientist) and it’s shocking to me that exercise science is just plowing ahead as if the replication crisis never occurred.

Well obviously since WW2 ethics has defanged all human trials

As a truck driver all of the stuff yall are saying also shocks me equally

@@FloridaManGraham economy isn't a science at all though

If you forced 100 engineers to be sports scientists these problems would be solved in a matter of weeks

Luminous beings are we. Not this crude matter.

How about hitting an optimal routine with passion?

@@slee2695 perfect is the enemy of the good. Nothing will ever be optimal and seeking it can hamper results.

I have no doubt that there are a lot of great researchers (I have respect for just about everyone in this video, even if I levied a criticism at them). I wanted to make a firm point, but it's hard not to come off 'scorched earth' on the topic. I am skeptical that funding will ever be sufficient, partly because I don't think there are enough humans to run the studies needed to make conclusions that will actually improve on what we do now, and partially because I think the benefit would be too small to merit the investment. Just my pessimism though. Appreciate all of the insight!

Person in field thinks field is doing a great job. Lol.

I'm savvy to the scientific method. I've trained high volume/higher intensity for 2 1/2 years and have within 2 weeks altered to a low volume/high intensity method and have faster and more visual gains. By visual I don't just mean muscle growth but rather strength growth faster and more efficiently than high volume/higher intensity. I conclude in my own observation that recovery into growth is paramount and likely a usable concept in all body training. I've been a mechanic and sometimes things are welded on with rust and you give it all you got then frustratingly walk away only to come back revitalized and full of concepts not previously thought of and likely successfully remove the rusty part. This in a weird way demonstrates the same concept

​@@cujopujato5681"I'm savvy with the scientific method" so you're good at trying different things? Lmao

@@thewisemanpaulHow is that funny in any way? I guess I need a logical reduction to laugh at it....

Imagine if we treated any other field that way. Interested in chemistry? Drop all the textbook reading jump straight into published research

Vegans do this a lot

It's almost starting to look like a theme with the highest performers! Appreciate it!

you said you'd never implement a new technique that 95% of advanced trainees clearly benefit from it, to at least see if you might respond better to it? that sounds like an awful training style. ...

cool man. It is. It made me the best 👍 who are you? @@tyler4840

@@tyler4840 It's crazy how you put words into his mouth and commented in such obviously bad faith

And if you do it consistently, you'll likely still be able to do it into the "golden years."

Agreed, but the higher you go in bodybuilding/pl/wl, the more these small things matter.

You could but it would likely be illegal

100% Israetel is a great resource, his book on scientific strength training principles is a great book.

If you watch Mike Israetel other videos with pak and wolf they talk about how there is so few scientific studies so there is definitly limited data on the human body. Basically we have to work with what we got. Plus the amount of variables between people is just crazy but it is great that everyone is discussing these studies and data making more widely known.

Long, long before Mike Israetel was born, men had built huge strong physiques, many thousands of times over. We don't need him at all for muscle building information. It's a well travelled road and ton's of information on how it's done.....from decades ago. What MIGHT be useful, is how to navigate & use the current range of PED drugs available and ways to optimize their use via training. He definitely knows how to do that.

⁠@@Mr._Fit_Atheistyes and no - its totally a well traveled road but the amount of utter garbage advice on social media is still astronomical. The good folks like Bromley and RP aren’t presenting anything new, but its good to have north stars. 100% agree on the PED front tho. Mike always defers to the EvilGSP stuff there

@@hjewkes In 1978, when my buddy was manager of a local gym, I met his assistant manager, a world class 165 lb. powerlifter. He deadlifted 650, squatted 550, bench pressed 350 and could do a 450lb ONE hand deadlift. It's a well travelled road my friend. I've seen it long before Dr. Mike was around. But I guess I was lucky to know such people. True, mega crapola on the net today, and I guess I forget how gullible people can be.

Much appreciated!

Your training program should start with what life will allow you to do; real block periodization for competitors centers around the competitive season and it shouldn't be different for people with stressful work or school obligations. For periods you know are going to be stressful (or even if life is just generally demanding), I would bias towards a minimal program that uses fewer sets and focuses on fewer exercises. You can absolutely get strong and grow without staying in the gym too long or adding to burnout, and if you find a few months where things calm down, you can add volume and benefit from your sensitivity to it. I always appreciate hearing from people who ran my programs, but it's CRUCIAL to remember that your immediate needs take precedent above whatever I or anyone else wrote down on paper, having never met you. A lot of ways to skin a cat, so find one that fits your life and milk it for all it's worth! You won't hate training and you will be less likely to spread yourself thin.

I'm currently running what is BASICALLY a one lift per day program per Dan John. It's a bit more of two lifts per day, but the second lift is 1-2 sets and really just some pump work. Each session CAN NOT take me longer than 30 minutes. It's a six day split but off days can be added when needed for life interruptions. I'll run it for 5-8 weeks as a volume resensitization program as well as a general deload block after 4 months of higher volume hypertrophy work. It's super low stress! and honestly fun. Today I'm just doing 3 work sets of BP in the 7-10 range and 1-2 sets of direct tricep work. Should take 25 minutes, including warmup. 2 sets heavier SQ tomorrow with 2 sets delts. Seated rows the next day with 1-2 sets biceps. You get the idea. Consider something like this until life give you more energy and drive and recovery time. At the very least, you wont regress.

Your the man for replying to your supporters Alex! For OP, sounds like your fatigue just got too high. The cup was full my friend! I'm guilty of this so often, to the point where I question why I am even training. Which I have learnt that's a symptom of too much fatigue, because I've loved training more than anything for 12 years. Funny story, I tried to adapt superior deadlift to train other lifts too, squat, log, bench and I threw wenning warm ups in too and heavy yoke and farmers weekly. Yeah it didnt work too well. I'm now doing the idea of 6x6 that JM blakely advocates, starting off with only the main lift and milking it until I dont progress then I'll add another exercise and later another day for the lift. I feel alot better with less volume.

Blindly agreeing with someone purely based on a video title isn't usually something to brag about. But hey hurrah for blind following without critical assessment I guess.

@@PowerPerPoundor it was just a joke but being the deep thinker you are I’m sure you’re correct.

​@@PowerPerPoundcareful getting down that high horse

I thought the same thing when I came across the videos, "Auto mechanics are destroying my car." and "Medical doctors are destroying my health." So I started taking my car to my MD and going to my mechanic for my annual health checkup. I'm getting much better results. The MD found no problems with my car and the mechanic found no problems with my health.

@@PowerPerPound it was a joke, calm down there little guy

For real, the more I dive into modern workout videos I have to wonder how much of this 'science' is complete bs or too complicated for the normal person to understand. I think there needs to be a push to old school methods. OBVIOUSLY they knew what they were doing, we wouldn't have guys like Ed Coan, Ronnie Coleman, Arnold, or Louie Simmons without the 'basic' methods. If anything, I respect the old lifters a lot more

I think that people do not know how to apply the science. From day 1 I started lifting about 9 months ago the first thing I did was search up what the science said on lifting so I could understand what I was doing. That eventually lead me to knowing how I should eat, why it's important to sleep and how doing so can greatly reduce the amount of fat you gain on a bulk, knowing why I felt sore, what proper form was for the exercises I was doing, what an injury was, how given my naturally skinny genetics I would have to eat far more than I did before, how many sets to do, how the number of reps affected muscle development, how it varied from different individuals, what training to failure was, how effective certain exercises were for different muscles and how to correctly superset them. All that stuff coming from scientific research and scientific explanations as to why the fundamentals of lifting are fundamentals of lifting, of course though, many "science-based tips" here on youtube were literally just people taking a single study or straight up making up things to get to a conclusion. Hell, I even saw a video that cited some random study and twisted the words to conclude that bicep curls were not good for biceps growth, hence, I believe that your friends are not so much following science as much as they are blindly listening to what people think the science says without questioning or knowing if it even is right.

Probably the most useful RP video on training I ever saw was the one on listening to big guys - how big guys sometimes have just showed up and trained hard and ate hard for years and dwarf you while not knowing the exact right angle for chest flys.

Absolutely correct. The 3 biggest factors in making progress are sleep, nutrition and workout intensity. Once you get those 3 things dialed in then there's room to make adjustments based on science.

@@jfried6754 that last sentence brings up a good point, it doesn't matter how specific these studies are and how exact a lift 'should' be performed, these videos never take into account that everybody reacts differently to certain stimulus based on their physiology and genetics. I really don't give a shit if some KZfaqr claims that a pec fly should be performed on a 43 degree bench with arms above you at 87 degrees, I'm going to do it how I know my body best reacts to it, fuck what the 'science' says. Hell, if you've ever seen a Jay Cutler video his lifts defy any 'proper form' some expert says but the guy is a 4x Mr Olympia, you can't argue what he's doing is wrong FOR HIM. I think a lot of these expert claims are basically throwing spaghetti against a wall to stand out from what the other experts are saying, that way it'll grab more attention and clicks even if their information is complete bullshit

actually people are generally the same genetically, there CAN be generalization that will apply to a broad range of people. The issue is that a lot of people don't seem to be able to take that information and apply it to their situation, it requires thought being put into the information provided.

@@Cenot4phLooking only at the genetic code I would agree with you. However, when you consider the diverse mix of epigenetics and environmental conditions (including climate, diet, work, activity, rest, relationships… basically life) you quickly discover that people are more like snow flakes. Everyone is unique but everyone can fall into a broad similar category and can be considered as part of one or more groups of similar people. This is terrible for scientific study which attempts to isolate variables. While people can be lumped into a common group the variances between individuals is great enough to skew study results between duplicative studies. This is why repeated research has such a high failure rate. The way around this is to have large enough samples of participants to be able to make the commonality amongst the group stronger than the individuation. But no one has the money for that so we have smaller studies that are very often not reproducible.

Such a Virgo thing to say

I used to think like you. Then I met,and married a very special lady. She has shown me things that I can't explain via the sciences. Plus other things I won't get into to.... I'll just say there are people who seemingly have abilities and understanding of spirituality that most don't.

I'm going to hazard a guess that the majority of people who quit, do so because they never learned the lifts and programming required to make any big changes to their strength and physique. The cost/benefit ratio didn't work for them. The 'serious lifter' population that watches Bromley is the minority of people in gyms, and the information out there for the average person is mostly total garbage.

I'm now 55 and my friends stopped lifting years ago because their excuse is getting older and telling me I'm to old to hang it up! Yet, I still look like I did in my 30s and they look way older than me as well as health problems, they tell me it's genetics and Im lucky giving Zero credit to years of eating healthy and never stopped weight lifting, I feel really good when girls in there early 30s want to get together or me to train them and flip out when they hear my age.

>stuff that gets you the fastest results also gets you injured Which is why recovery management is important.

Unfortunately many of the people who are doing it for fun are doing it in a way that negatively affects their training longevity.

​@@arihaviv8510exactly. I feel like people overlook what you said here. Personally, I have the most fun throwing around the heaviest weights I can manage (which isn't much, I'm still a noob lmao). It feels so cathartic and satisfying. It feels like what weightlifting should feel like! Lifting heavy shit! But you know what else it feels like? It feels like I'm treating my joints as if I was driving a car with no oil. I can feel it in my body, there's no way I can do that long term and every time I lift heavy I hold my breath because I'm wondering if the next rep will be the one to snap my shit up and destroy my progress in the gym. Doesn't help that I have pre-existing shoulder issues either. Point is, I agree with you. Doing "what's fun" has to be balanced against reality.

There is a whole subfield of statistical built around methods for small sample size. It is generally more difficult but not impossible. That being said, I am not saying those methods are being employed in these studies, just pointing out that the N = 30 is just a heuristic for common class of statistical methods.

Thats funny, I agree with you but for me its the exact opposite as you mentioned above. it shows how different people are.

Ah yes, a bouncer and a learning disabled dropout The smartest people in fitness😊

real

@@soonahero 🤓

Yea, I learned this the hard way. Id do like the optimal 6-7 sets per muscle group per session and find myself stuck and would wonder why im not making progress on the bench or any other exercise even though I generally hit 0rir to 1rir. Ive only been working out on a PPL split for about 2.5 years, and even though I am bulking, my progress as stated before has halted. So since my recovery seems to be on point and I have barely had any stimulation on my chest since last session, I'm just going to incorporate more volume per session and see how that goes. I had been thinking about this for awhile now, and I don't know why this video just all of a sudden woke me up.@@TheBarbellBandit

@@TheBarbellBandit Which Mike?

I presumed he was talking about Mike Israetel@@b_geranis

After I've gotten my nutrition, sleep, hydration, etc down, I plateau much less. But it seems I still do around the 3-4 month period. When I so, I just change my approach until I get there again. I move from low volume heavier weight more often to higher volume med weight more often. Change up rest period between sets. May switch to more isolation. Point is, I know my body well enough after all these years (still learning) that I can figure out what change I can make for however long to start back progressing again. Doing the same thing for long periods has never worked for me. I think that's one of the most important things - try different approaches, change things up, and learn your body. It's always in a state of change so being able to adjust at any point in time is important.

That's because you weren't doing H.I.T right lol

there is obviously a wrong, technique/execution of movement can definitely be described in a way that is most optimal

Seconded. I have been training since I was 12 (im 25), just kinda doing what I was taught in school and the army. Which worked excellently, mind you. However. I started watching him after I took a break from training due to life and injuries and I gotta say, hes taught me a lot, and in just a few short months Ive managed to get back into it seamlessly and have been getting nothing but positive results.

@@voraxumbra1couldnt agree more. I would rather consume Renaissance Periodization (dr. Mike) even if I had to give up all other fitness content.

we need fewer youtubers claiming 'exercise science' not more, i guess you didnt even watch the video.

@donaldpump1282 why not try watching him for a bit, and maybe you'll see why we love him. Hes not like the other clowns youre thinking of. Dr. Mike is the real deal.

@@donaldpump1282 It's opinions to be honest, if that contenworks for the poster why has it not to share? To be honest that same channel did wonders for me so far, so i can safely disregard whoever or whatever tells me said content is " omygodnogoodforyou"

But both were juiced

You'd want to make better gains to be competitive in whatever field you're in.

@@Isaiah_McIntosh True. But I was mostly talking about newbie lifters. They don't have to analyse every movement they do. Working on form is good enough until you're an experienced lifter.

Watch a few of the old ones ..

Yikes, not the mistake you want for this video.... but yes, my editor is from Argentina. I usually don't sweat small spelling mistakes because he speaks better English than I do, but I should've proofed more closely

That’s the joke

Definitely makes sense.....I was like ?

No worries. It is just an old pet peeve so it caught my eye. @@AlexanderBromley

And not all social sciences are soft either. Most physical anthropologies, such as forensics and archeology, are completely based in verifiable and falsifiable scientific processes. Only the interpretation of the data is soft.

I'm going to be addressing this until the day I die lol. Astrology was from my editor, who lives in Argentina, which I should have caught but I proofed this on 2x speed early this AM (I know it doesn't look good on a tirade about scientific rigor). He's awesome and his occasional slip-ups are small, so I don't sweat him. For math, I've always heard it referenced as such (and I still see sources that call it a hard science).... but yes, technically hard sciences are applied mathematics but math itself doesn't use the scientific method..... I'll call that a draw.

@@AlexanderBromley well in my defence there were only like 5 comments under the video when I typed that out and none of them were about that, I didn't think that many people would notice it lol.

Agree. And if anybody digs through the research and comes to reasonable conclusions from them, those conclusions are always padded with heavy amounts of intuition and common sense from that real-world experience.

Social sciences are flooded with unexamined assumptions. If the field was self aware of the complexities you described, they would hold themselves accountable for treading carefully and avoiding oversimplified absolutes....as a characteristic of the whole field... they do the opposite As far as what you"re here for, Im sorry m'aam, you have me confused with the customer sevice desk at Target.

Reading your comments, made me think: how much do you know about social sciences? Do you have any training or degree? You make two points, and both gives the impression of someone having a very superficial view of social sciences. First, what are those assumptions of “the field”? Social sciences include history, statistics, geography, epidemiology anthropology, gender studies or economics. They all come with different, sometimes conflicting assumptions. Second, oversimplified absolutes do circulate on the internet, but that is not the same as reading. social science books or articles, which are quite specific and often esoteric. Of course, you can prove me wrong on both questions, just point me to those assumptions universally accepted by “the field”, or to the latest social science book or article you read. As of customer service: I am simply providing user engagement. You might be right though, why should I take you seriously(?)

Fair play, I didn't speak clearly. "Social Science" was referring to branches of sociology; I've taken a dozen or so sociology classes as part of my psych degree, some breadth requirements and some upper division. It was mind boggling in lower division classes to hear the certainty with which sociology professors would lay out the framework for their beliefs.... only to find out that the established psychology research was 180 degrees different. I remember my first 'race and racism' class, where the professor dealt with questions about poverty statistics by saying "the assumption is people will do whatever it takes to get out of poverty" (referring to the American economic definition, which is not a struggle for basic food and shelter). "Success at all cost" is not a psychological principle, but "learned helplessness" is (not a statement that poverty = learned helplessness, which should be obvious ). That was 15 years ago and my experience with 'unexamined assumptions' didn't get better. Blank slate theory was the example I gave directly in the video; even if it isn't explicitly taught, A LOT of people in the field believe it aggressively. Research around gender development is another one, not even touching the trans issue, it still causes outrage if you suggest anything like a masculine predisposition in males (MANY people think the behavior of young boys is purely socialized, despite a mountain of research around it). Sociology tends to have this same disconnect with criminal justice, where there are outright myths about incarceration permeating the space. I sat in on a criminal justice college lecture 4 weeks ago featuring Rafael Mangual, with a few others, and it was actually a bizarre experience to hear how other professors and students engaged with the data.... not that they disagreed, but the emotional non-sequiturs that would dominate the q and a. There is a trend of wild denial of things that they don't specifically study in their field, which are well established in the fields where it is studied. Forgetting stats isn't a social science, it's mathematics, the other fields you listed have similar problems (including psych). Anthropologists take liberties insisting on the specific social dynamics of tribes that pre-existed written language in a bid to prove how egalitarianism is our basic state. History itself is based on sources that diminish in quantity and context the further you go back, muddied by bad translations and the biases of the sources (people can't even agree on geopolitical narratives now). And surely, your stance can't be that economics is free from people over-representing their predictive abilities with government policy or in front of a camera?? As you said, ideas that are oversimplified (and wrong) are present on the internet, but they are also present in the field and in the spokespeople who make policy and spark movements. Just as with exercise science (and with patriotism, religion, etc.), I don't care about the no-true-scotsman that only looks at the esoteric writings or "correct application" of the idea. The thing that has impact is how popular culture engages with it and that was the reason for making this video. Long story short, I'm not writing the book on any of these topics, but I'm past the point of having to ask permission to incorporate these 'musings' into my videos.