Nutritional myths

Page 2 of 4 First 1234 Last

  1. Quote Originally Posted by bdcc View Post
    I know some of the articles I wrote several years ago.

    Reading them again now makes me cringe lol.
    I know exactly what you mean. Shows how much is actually unknown and despite scientists best efforts, something will always throw a spanner in the works lol
    Serious Nutrition Solutions Representative
    X-gels for strength, Focus XT for mental performance & Joint Support XT for pain free mobility


  2. I think that is the polite way to put it.

    In retrospect, I think I used to be at least 80% potato.
    PEScience Representative
    http://pescience.com/insider
    http://selectprotein.com
    •   
       


  3. Quote Originally Posted by Jiigzz View Post
    I know exactly what you mean. Shows how much is actually unknown and despite scientists best efforts, something will always throw a spanner in the works lol
    This is a bit of a side rant but I hate people that believe in science/scientists without question-- "Oh he's published and peer reviewed, it must be accurate..." All you need is a 'scientific' stamp of approval and people will believe just about anything. BB's on the other hand are walking, breathing examples of their knowledge of fitness, nutrition, biology, physiology, chemistry etc and yet people still categorize them as meatheads.

    It was poor science in the 80's that lead us to believe that fats are unhealthy (for example), and that still lingers on to this day. Guys in the golden era knew that fats are perfectly healthy and good for the hormones and brain functions, and that excess carbs can make you bloated. The public is still catching up to them because we're taught to believe the guy in a white lab coat with a PhD because he's gone through societies hoops and the scientific method.

    I'd say that the better portion of scientific research is incorrect, even with all of our technology and previous knowledge, just based on the fact that science can be influenced by politics and money. Scientists have to conform to the studies they are handed in order to get funded, that's the fundamental flaw in such a practice. Scientists are generally *seeking a certain result to meet the criteria of the beneficiaries involved. That is why I believe in broscience/BB's a lot more in many ways because their manner of experimentation and research is based strictly on a providing results, if it doesn't work, they won't continue to do it.

    It's not necessarily the scientific method or scientists themselves that are at fault but the fact that science/scientists can be influenced by money in order to produce a certain result which is in vogue at the time. Money makes good science.

  4. Quote Originally Posted by mattvdh View Post
    This is a bit of a side rant but I hate people that believe in science/scientists without question-- "Oh he's published and peer reviewed, it must be accurate..." All you need is a 'scientific' stamp of approval and people will believe just about anything. BB's on the other hand are walking, breathing examples of their knowledge of fitness, nutrition, biology, physiology, chemistry etc and yet people still categorize them as meatheads.

    It was poor science in the 80's that lead us to believe that fats are unhealthy (for example), and that still lingers on to this day. Guys in the golden era knew that fats are perfectly healthy and good for the hormones and brain functions, and that excess carbs can make you bloated. The public is still catching up to them because we're taught to believe the guy in a white lab coat with a PhD because he's gone through societies hoops and the scientific method.

    I'd say that the better portion of scientific research is incorrect, even with all of our technology and previous knowledge, just based on the fact that science can be influenced by politics and money. Scientists have to conform to the studies they are handed in order to get funded, that's the fundamental flaw in such a practice. Scientists are generally *seeking a certain result to meet the criteria of the beneficiaries involved. That is why I believe in broscience/BB's a lot more in many ways because their manner of experimentation and research is based strictly on a providing results, if it doesn't work, they won't continue to do it.

    It's not necessarily the scientific method or scientists themselves that are at fault but the fact that science/scientists can be influenced by money in order to produce a certain result which is in vogue at the time. Money makes good science.
    An interesting and relevant point of view. I have a close friend who is a registrar at a hospital and ha just submitted his PhD. He has admitted to me that he spent much of his time selecting, playing and manipulating data to prove his hypothesis.

  5. Quote Originally Posted by mattvdh View Post
    Everything about this is just wrong ....

    It doesn't matter if you consume frequent small meals or large and spaced out, the only thing that matters is that your caloric intake is less than expenditure in order to loose weight ..............."
    I understand you believe this, however, there are important implications as to optimizing insulin and glycogen that can be better dealt with via more frequent meals.
    •   
       


  6. Quote Originally Posted by saggy321 View Post
    An interesting and relevant point of view. I have a close friend who is a registrar at a hospital and ha just submitted his PhD. He has admitted to me that he spent much of his time selecting, playing and manipulating data to prove his hypothesis.
    Yeah I believe it. PhD= Patiently Hoping for a Degree...Permanent Head Damage...Piled High in Debt etc

  7. Quote Originally Posted by Beau View Post
    I understand you believe this, however, there are important implications as to optimizing insulin and glycogen that can be better dealt with via more frequent meals.
    glycogen and insulin responses are more related to the types of food rather than the portion sizes. If you eat a large bowl of green salad, a huge steak and eggs and a huge jug off water, there's really nothing in there to spike insulin levels. A small handful of cookies and a soda pop on the other hand will spike it like a volleyball

  8. Quote Originally Posted by mattvdh View Post
    Yeah I believe it. PhD= Patiently Hoping for a Degree...Permanent Head Damage...Piled High in Debt etc
    Oh, I get that. I have two sons who have JDs.

    Do you disagree there are important implications as to optimizing insulin and glycogen that can be better dealt with via more frequent meals?

  9. Quote Originally Posted by mattvdh View Post
    glycogen and insulin responses are more related to the types of food rather than the portion sizes. If you eat a large bowl of green salad, a huge steak and eggs and a huge jug off water, there's really nothing in there to spike insulin levels. A small handful of cookies and a soda pop on the other hand will spike it like a volleyball
    On that part we agree (+1 for the good guys).

  10. Quote Originally Posted by mattvdh View Post

    This is a bit of a side rant but I hate people that believe in science/scientists without question-- "Oh he's published and peer reviewed, it must be accurate..." All you need is a 'scientific' stamp of approval and people will believe just about anything. BB's on the other hand are walking, breathing examples of their knowledge of fitness, nutrition, biology, physiology, chemistry etc and yet people still categorize them as meatheads.

    It was poor science in the 80's that lead us to believe that fats are unhealthy (for example), and that still lingers on to this day. Guys in the golden era knew that fats are perfectly healthy and good for the hormones and brain functions, and that excess carbs can make you bloated. The public is still catching up to them because we're taught to believe the guy in a white lab coat with a PhD because he's gone through societies hoops and the scientific method.

    I'd say that the better portion of scientific research is incorrect, even with all of our technology and previous knowledge, just based on the fact that science can be influenced by politics and money. Scientists have to conform to the studies they are handed in order to get funded, that's the fundamental flaw in such a practice. Scientists are generally *seeking a certain result to meet the criteria of the beneficiaries involved. That is why I believe in broscience/BB's a lot more in many ways because their manner of experimentation and research is based strictly on a providing results, if it doesn't work, they won't continue to do it.

    It's not necessarily the scientific method or scientists themselves that are at fault but the fact that science/scientists can be influenced by money in order to produce a certain result which is in vogue at the time. Money makes good science.
    You have studies confused with science. The role of insulin, pgf alpha 2, testosterone etc. is not influenced by money.

    Just be because a scientist wrote something, that doesn't make it science.

    I also lol'd when you said bbers are walking examples of their knowledge of physiology and biology
    Serious Nutrition Solutions Representative
    X-gels for strength, Focus XT for mental performance & Joint Support XT for pain free mobility

  11. Sigh..
    PESCIENCE.COM

    "The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance." - Socrates

  12. Someone had an epic quote on here which said "bodybuilders have always been decades ahead of the scientific community".

    I sent it to Cyrus. I am pretty sure he had heart palpitations lol.
    PEScience Representative
    http://pescience.com/insider
    http://selectprotein.com

  13. Quote Originally Posted by bdcc View Post
    Someone had an epic quote on here which said "bodybuilders have always been decades ahead of the scientific community".

    I sent it to Cyrus. I am pretty sure he had heart palpitations lol.
    Lol i can imagine.

    People confuse mass and aesthetic with knowledge. Sure, they know what to do to put on size (eat, sleep, progress) but that is only the surface. The reason why those protocols elicit growth is true physiology (i.e neuromuscular adaptations etc.) and many bbers do not understand these things, nor do they need to.

    They just know what works and wnat doesnt, not necessarily the why aspect.
    Serious Nutrition Solutions Representative
    X-gels for strength, Focus XT for mental performance & Joint Support XT for pain free mobility

  14. Quote Originally Posted by Jiigzz View Post
    You have studies confused with science. The role of insulin, pgf alpha 2, testosterone etc. is not influenced by money.

    Just be because a scientist wrote something, that doesn't make it science.

    I also lol'd when you said bbers are walking examples of their knowledge of physiology and biology
    I'm not sure what to reply to that... I was referring to scientific studies. But I agree just because someone is published doesn't make it factual.

    BB's are definitely underrated or not as respected in the rest of normal world as they should be. When you mention BB's to people they think it's somehow easy to lift weights and take steroids, I've been studying BB's and their lifestyle for a few years now and it's amazingly technical and complex, not to mention it requires extreme discipline and work ethic. I've heard guys say that boot camp in the marines doesn't hold a candle to getting in shape for a BB contest.

  15. Quote Originally Posted by Jiigzz View Post
    Lol i can imagine.

    People confuse mass and aesthetic with knowledge. Sure, they know what to do to put on size (eat, sleep, progress) but that is only the surface. The reason why those protocols elicit growth is true physiology (i.e neuromuscular adaptations etc.) and many bbers do not understand these things, nor do they need to.

    They just know what works and wnat doesnt, not necessarily the why aspect.
    I disagree, go watch some Dorian Yates interviews, or Frank Zane. Both are scientific in their approaches.

  16. Quote Originally Posted by mattvdh View Post
    I'm not sure what to reply to that... I was referring to scientific studies. But I agree just because someone is published doesn't make it factual.

    BB's are definitely underrated or not as respected in the rest of normal world as they should be. When you mention BB's to people they think it's somehow easy to lift weights and take steroids, I've been studying BB's and their lifestyle for a few years now and it's amazingly technical and complex, not to mention it requires extreme discipline and work ethic. I've heard guys say that boot camp in the marines doesn't hold a candle to getting in shape for a BB contest.
    You kept saying science is influenced by.. or poor science in the 80's... that wasn't science, that was someone's study. They are not one in the same.

    BBing and Boot camp are ENTIRELY different.. Comparing the two makes no sense. That's like saying I've heard people say that jumping on a trampoline doesn't hold a candle to walking on the moon. Would you expect them to be similar?

    Quote Originally Posted by mattvdh View Post
    I disagree, go watch some Dorian Yates interviews, or Frank Zane. Both are scientific in their approaches.
    Do they represent the entire BBing community? Where do they get there knowledge from? Many BBers know absolutely nothing about physiology. They might say "Carbs make the body secrete insulin" and that's about it. Ask them about Cellular signaling and they wont know the answer. Or ask them about hormonal interactions and they won't know anything outside the basic.
    Serious Nutrition Solutions Representative
    X-gels for strength, Focus XT for mental performance & Joint Support XT for pain free mobility

  17. Quote Originally Posted by Jiigzz View Post
    You kept saying science is influenced by.. or poor science in the 80's... that wasn't science, that was someone's study. They are not one in the same.

    BBing and Boot camp are ENTIRELY different.. Comparing the two makes no sense. That's like saying I've heard people say that jumping on a trampoline doesn't hold a candle to walking on the moon. Would you expect them to be similar?



    Do they represent the entire BBing community? Where do they get there knowledge from? Many BBers know absolutely nothing about physiology. They might say "Carbs make the body secrete insulin" and that's about it. Ask them about Cellular signaling and they wont know the answer. Or ask them about hormonal interactions and they won't know anything outside the basic.
    So you don't think that science is or has been influenced by politics?

    Both BB and boot camp are testaments to physical/mental strength and endurance, as well as discipline and motivation.

    I think you'd be surprised how much the pro's know about the body. Layne Norton for example has several degrees and has won BB competitions.

  18. Quote Originally Posted by mattvdh View Post
    So you don't think that science is or has been influenced by politics?

    Both BB and boot camp are testaments to physical/mental strength and endurance, as well as discipline and motivation.

    I think you'd be surprised how much the pro's know about the body. Layne Norton for example has several degrees and has won BB competitions.
    Again, you misinterpret what Science actually is. The study of the human body is a science and that cannot be influenced by money; what can be influenced by money is how data is interpreted,what results are left out or included, what parameters we use to study variables and so on, but that is just the process in which we conduct a study. We know, for example, the role of skeletal muscle or cardiac muscle but yet a scientific study may be used to determine how certain hormones, supplements etc. interact with that muscle to elicit different effects. The role of the muscle does not change though.

    Different types of mental strength and physical strength. A Powerlifter can outlift many BBers, but does that discredit the work of a BBer? I know people who train by pushing cars and trucks (or pulling them) yet I never see a BBer work this way.

    I think you are misunderstanding. Layne also has a PhD. Yes, he represents about 0.00001 of the Bbing population. You'd also be surprised at how little they know. If anecdotal evidence to live by is anything, many Bbers in my gym seem to think that squatting down an inch is enough to stimulate growth.
    Serious Nutrition Solutions Representative
    X-gels for strength, Focus XT for mental performance & Joint Support XT for pain free mobility

  19. Layne is definitely an anomaly in the fitness industry.

    Using Layne as an example though he regularly calls out the bad science which trainers and other bodybuilders parrot. He is very outspoken in this regard.

    This would tend to support Hayden's point.
    PEScience Representative
    http://pescience.com/insider
    http://selectprotein.com

  20. I think the biggest nutritional myths are the ones that are believed implicitly but not stated explicitly. For example, "avoid sugar", as if sugar has some special fattening property that calories don't.

  21. Quote Originally Posted by jmiyamoto View Post
    I think the biggest nutritional myths are the ones that are believed implicitly but not stated explicitly. For example, "avoid sugar", as if sugar has some special fattening property that calories don't.
    Simple sugar does does impact your body in several unpleasant ways.

    An instant insulin spike changes the insulin/glycogen ratio and has negative implications on fat burning.

  22. Quote Originally Posted by Jiigzz View Post
    Again, you misinterpret what Science actually is. The study of the human body is a science and that cannot be influenced by money; what can be influenced by money is how data is interpreted,what results are left out or included, what parameters we use to study variables and so on, but that is just the process in which we conduct a study. We know, for example, the role of skeletal muscle or cardiac muscle but yet a scientific study may be used to determine how certain hormones, supplements etc. interact with that muscle to elicit different effects. The role of the muscle does not change though.

    Different types of mental strength and physical strength. A Powerlifter can outlift many BBers, but does that discredit the work of a BBer? I know people who train by pushing cars and trucks (or pulling them) yet I never see a BBer work this way.

    I think you are misunderstanding. Layne also has a PhD. Yes, he represents about 0.00001 of the Bbing population. You'd also be surprised at how little they know. If anecdotal evidence to live by is anything, many Bbers in my gym seem to think that squatting down an inch is enough to stimulate growth.
    You should accept that science can be influenced money and politics, thus influencing the outcome of what that particular investor is looking for.

    The top BB's have always been ahead of the pack in terms of intuition and understanding. Just because they express it in layman's terms,l doesn't mean they don't understand how it all works and how to build muscle and strength. That's the difference is that BB's are DOING it, labcoats are studying the theory of it.

    I've never heard any BB say that squatting an inch is sufficient for muscle growth, that's absurd.

  23. Quote Originally Posted by bdcc View Post
    Layne is definitely an anomaly in the fitness industry.

    Using Layne as an example though he regularly calls out the bad science which trainers and other bodybuilders parrot. He is very outspoken in this regard.

    This would tend to support Hayden's point.
    We are talking about the same Layne Norton that writes articles for the top BB websites and we a guest host on the last Olympia, right?

  24. Quote Originally Posted by mattvdh View Post

    I've never heard any BB say that squatting an inch is sufficient for muscle growth, that's absurd.
    Lol, have you ever watched most top level BBers train? Not a full ROM in sight.
    Quote Originally Posted by mattvdh View Post

    We are talking about the same Layne Norton that writes articles for the top BB websites and we a guest host on the last Olympia, right?
    No, the other Layne Norton with the Ph.D. who bodybuilds.

  25. Quote Originally Posted by jmiyamoto View Post
    I think the biggest nutritional myths are the ones that are believed implicitly but not stated explicitly. For example, "avoid sugar", as if sugar has some special fattening property that calories don't.
    That special fattening property is called insulin, and sugar stimulates it's release, thereby influencing fat storage. Sugar in fruit is slightly different because it requires more digestive processing such as fibers and carbs, so the fructose isn't as easily absorbed, or blunts the insulin response.
  •   

      
     

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Top 17 Food / Nutrition Myths of 2017
    By The Solution in forum Nutrition / Health
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-23-2017, 06:41 PM
  2. debunking the debunked “Top 10 Nutrition Myths.”
    By Quinc in forum Nutrition / Health
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-30-2007, 09:48 PM
  3. T-Nation: The Top 10 Post Workout Nutrition Myths
    By The Godfather in forum Weight Loss
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 06-23-2005, 05:10 PM
  4. Nutrition Myths That Just Wont Die
    By YellowJacket in forum Weight Loss
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-15-2003, 02:34 PM
  5. 11 Nutritional Myths
    By YellowJacket in forum Weight Loss
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 02-01-2003, 12:00 PM
Log in
Log in