Advertise on podcast: Bro Research Radio

If you want to support the creation of this content you can find all the show notes and citations HERE. or you can purchase either of our fully referenced case-study-based courses found HERE. 

Many of you likely know that I love Rogue One type content. Where one line said in passing morphs into a much longer piece of content.  Down the rabbit hole we go… You may have seen the two paragraphs below on Deconstruct Nutrition and this week’s conversation with Dr. Grant Tinsley and HERE is a deep dive into nuances of body composition metrics. He crushes it and I felt this content is so important I elected just to give this conversation away on the podcast. “It is important to note that given the likely glycogen loss and accompanying fluid loss that comes from a significant energy deficit and early phase weight loss [1, 2], the potential edema of starting a resistance-training program [3], and the potential for day-to-day variance in lean body mass measurements via different body composition metrics [4-6] there is a considerable amount of noise in muscle data from the studies above, especially those that utilized untrained participants.” From How Do We Actually Lose Body Fat? “In practice, what this means is that if someone is pushing a caloric deficit in order to shed body fat while simultaneously starting or increasing their resistance training schematic I think we can expect to see a lot of chaos on the scale in the first few weeks and in most scenarios it is probably not really worth measuring any body composition metrics for at least 8 weeks and even then we likely can’t pick up significant changes in LBM because the error rates in LBM of the measurements are generally higher than the amount of muscle untrained individuals can gain in those timeframes [4, 7-11] (someone may be able to convince me that in certain scenarios skinfold or ultrasound measurements of subcutaneous fat every two to three weeks could be helpful.)” From Is Weight Loss Without Exercise Unethical? My main takeaways from this conversation: ·         Rigorous standardization is fundamental to attaining useful body composition data.  ·         If someone is not consistent with their diet, fluid intake, and training they will very likely lack the ability to collect precise body composition data.  ·         The ability of these technologies to detect significant/real changes on the individual level will get more and more difficult as the degree of change becomes less and less. In most scenarios, dramatic weight loss and recomposition will very likely surpass both the technological and biological error, whereas it will likely be hard to say if someone gained 1 kg of FFM and lost 1kg of FM is significant.  ·         You can be more certain you are moving in the intended direction if multiple lines of data are showing similar trends.    Other references we mention in the podcast [12-14]. REFERENCES: 1.            Heymsfield, S.B., et al., Voluntary weight loss: systematic review of early phase body composition changes. Obes Rev, 2011. 12(5): p. e348-61. 2.            Muller, M.J. and A. Bosy-Westphal, Effect of Over- and Underfeeding on Body Composition and Related Metabolic Functions in Humans. Curr Diab Rep, 2019. 19(11): p. 108. 3.            Damas, F., C.A. Libardi, and C. Ugrinowitsch, The development of skeletal muscle hypertrophy through resistance training: the role of muscle damage and muscle protein synthesis. Eur J Appl Physiol, 2018. 118(3): p. 485-500. 4.          &

The full referenced accompanying Deconstruct Nutrition article to this podcast can be found HERE. You can listen to hours and hours of Dr Tommy and I talking science nerdery in the Advanced Blood Chemistry Course. 

If you like this kind of content sign-up for the Bro Research courses and you can catch up on way too many hours of Dr. Tommy Wood and Dr. Ben House trying to sell critical thinking and nuance over fear and myopic bollocks.  Food Fear has an objective price and we need to start controlling for it in our research designs and analyses.  Main Open-Access Paper Reviewed:  Faerch K, Alssema M, Mela DJ, Borg R, Vistisen D. Relative contributions of preprandial and postprandial glucose exposures, glycemic variability, and non-glycemic factors to HbA 1c in individuals with and without diabetes. Nutr Diabetes. 2018;8(1):38 Other Citations Discussed: Park C, Pagnini F, Langer E. Glucose metabolism responds to perceived sugar intake more than actual sugar intake. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):15633. Ehrhardt N, Al Zaghal E. Behavior Modification in Prediabetes and Diabetes: Potential Use of Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2019;13(2):271-275. Bailey KJ, Little JP, Jung ME. Self-Monitoring Using Continuous Glucose Monitors with Real-Time Feedback Improves Exercise Adherence in Individuals with Impaired Blood Glucose: A Pilot Study. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2016;18(3):185-193. Yost O, DeJonckheere M, Stonebraker S, et al. Continuous Glucose Monitoring With Low-Carbohydrate Diet Coaching in Adults With Prediabetes: Mixed Methods Pilot Study. JMIR Diabetes. 2020;5(4):e21551. Ehrhardt N, Al Zaghal E. Continuous Glucose Monitoring As a Behavior Modification Tool. Clin Diabetes. 2020;38(2):126-131. Vistisen D, Kivimaki M, Perreault L, et al. Reversion from prediabetes to normoglycaemia and risk of cardiovascular disease and mortality: the Whitehall II cohort study. Diabetologia. 2019;62(8):1385-1390.

Check Out Episode 93 on the Cult and Then Peep This!

Does this title make you puke a little in your mouth? If so, you should definitely listen.  In this episode we jam on… For trainers or health professionals that struggle with the idea of selling what’s the play? If someone’s business is location dependent or geogeaphically limited what should they focus on to gain new customers? Is it even worth it to spend time on social media for business purposes? According to SmallBizTrends 83% of new business comes from word of mouth referrals. How key are word of mouth referrals in this new online fitness business space? The power of polarization and why no one cares about tooth brushes. If you’re for everyone you’re for no one. How key is defining your client avatar? If our goal is getting more clients why do so many of trainers try to look cool in front of our fitness friends and clients with fancy vocab and arguing about the minutia when we should be offering solutions to problems our current and potential clients care about? How has COVID changed the fitness landscape? Is the best play to follow the masses and start offering online programming? A subscription monthly newsletter? Razorblades! Or would we be better off swimming the other direction, thinking outside the box, and opening microgyms or buying a u-haul and filling it with equipment and driving around town? Or maybe we all just start mowing lawns? How do you avoid burn out working online? What still gets you excited about this fitness and nutrition space?

In fitness and nutrition, minute details can drive us apart, but looking practically at this beautifully intricate question of getting more bigger can help bring us together. Metabolic stress is masochistically fun and mechanistically complicated. And yes we don't really know if these strategies will have an independent effect outside of the mechanotransduction model. BUT around 30-40% of 1RM is very likely going to equate on a set volume basis to higher loads in terms of hypertrophy so you don't have much to lose outside of weight on the bar in lower rep ranges and may potentially have a lot to gain by differentiating your training stimulus. Therefore, if you are extremely "risk" averse and want to only train in the muscular tension bean counter rep and weight model go for it! If you want to NOT even "waste" some portion of your training year experimenting, having fun, and playing with different strategies you can be very confident that you will not shrivel up and die...in fact at the very least you may even be able to build a better pump and you may potentiate your ability to drive more adaptation via the mechanotransduction model. References: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29564... https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...   Coach Kassem of N1 Education also has some fantastic charts and tools that he uses to break this complex subject down into logical pieces and fun practical applications.

This episode is a banger and we get right into it. You may want to read through the questions and the Trello board first before listening. Ryan and I are just dumb enough on this topic to ask the right questions. Trello Board provided by Evan. https://trello.com/b/nir9R2O0/bro-res... Outline of the Episode: What is wrong with the classic reductionistic view of energy system training?  Ie: less than 10s=phosphagen system; 10s-2mins=glycolytic, 2mins=oxidative what is really happening? What is the true role of lactate?  Why do you think Shulman’s glycogen shunt hypothesis didn’t go viral in the early 2000s? It’s hardly cited which is quite odd to me.  Is this conventional mode view of energy systems even helpful to use for programming purposes?  How does this new model change how you train your endurance athletes? Hypertrophy “athletes”? How do you respond to those who NIRS without doppler measurements of blood flow is not very useful and NIRS is may only be getting superficial readings? There seems to be a push recently to avoid “glycolytic” training as it is proposed to be more “damaging” and less adaptive when compared alactic and aerobic methods….thoughts?  Thoughts on why some Crossfitters get huge and how their limitations may explain their hugeness  A case for local hypoxic (BFR) training for hypertrophy Bjorsen, 2019--Type 1 fiber hypertrophy w occlusion training. Refer to metabolic stress podcast Would some people benefit more than others?  Capillarity and hypertrophic potential?  Sjinders, 2017 Capillary to fiber distance predictive of hypertrophy in older males Any trends with MOXY that may support this  My hypothesis: anecdotally seems like the muscles that grow the most in people are the ones that they get a pump in the easiest… Cardio for hypertrophy  If metabolic stress is hypertrophic could we just do 1min echo bike repeats for quads?  WHY do some cyclists have such massive quads BRO?!

In this episode, we take on... What does it mean to be a fitness or nutritional professional in our current fitspiration highlight reel social media world? The importance and danger of social proof. Dean's Incessant Pandering. Ryan's Resistance. Ben's regretful not selling selling and Jeb's Aging Out.  Defining your why for creating and sharing content? -Reciprocal Altruism is a constant and Ego is always there and that is OK.  Clarifying and sticking to your social media philosophies? Extreme Reach Barriers and Imposter Syndrome. You don’t have to be perfect? Do the work. Get the rough draft down on paper. Then you can hone the message and edit, revise, and decide if you want to actually share it.  In the face of cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias the importance of searching out and finding your own answer. The juxtaposition between click heavy myopic content and contextual integrity-driven content and deeply knowing both sides of the game so if you want to...you can play it well with limited REGRATS.  *Selling the shit out of the narrative with a thoughtful limitation and context section at the end.  The ladder of short, medium, and long-form content.  Find your medium! Discuss the positives and negatives of audio, video, and writing.  Finding your passion vs. finding your NOT passions.  In the end... "Make Good Art!" - Neil Gaiman because if you don’t get the money or the fame at least you have the work.

Or is the squat a decent exercise to develop the quads and glutes until it’s not? What is the muscular limiter for the barbell squat? Is it even a muscle? Episode 20 Notes  “From these data, it is unclear if strengthening a single muscle group (e.g., knee extensors) would increase squat strength, as the strength of one muscle group does not appear to relate more strongly to squat strength than another…Net joint moments observed during the squat do not approach 100% of what each joint can produce in isolation…The relationship between individual joint strength and multi-joint strength may be highly nonlinear and paradoxical, owing to the increased degrees of freedom of multi-joint movements…Humans may be less than the sum of their parts when it comes to multijoint force production” Vigotsky et al. 2018 It seems like counter to what people think that by putting the barbell further away from the center of mass you are probably allowing for a more upright torso…until you aren’t. Meaning we actually see more and more erector spinae activity as you move the bar further out so the likely limiter here is just your ability to hold the position under increased fatigue and loading. https://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr/Fu... and we probably can’t trust our eyes here for telling when people lose lumbar “neutrality” anyways. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2... The glutes aren’t really working much in the bottom of the squat (the hardest part of the lift) in their lengthened position…it looks like that is primarily adductor magnus. So the glutes really wouldn’t be the limiter to extend the hip ever in the squat and wouldn’t even be used much until after 90 degrees and their force output above 90 is likely way more than anything we could put on the bar anyways. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3... https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti... https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti... https://www.researchgate.net/publicat... https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2... Could the muscular limiter in a barbell squat variant ever really be the quads? We generally see people tip forward as they start to fatigue out later in

Is 9,8,8,8 across four sets of your 10 rep max better than 10,7,6,5? If so I know at least one thing the difference is not going to show up in an 8-week study on recreationally "trained" subjects. I also don’t think you would see a difference in hypertrophy at even 16 weeks in highly trained individuals...you might see a significant difference in dropouts or injuries, but that is just conjecture on my part. But, I still think the majority of your training on compound lifts should be done in this manner. On isolation lifts you probably have more leeway to break out the fancy shit. Let’s face it, you can always do more volume. You can drop the reps and/or drop the weight and in theory train forever accumulating all the "effective" sets ever. But, there has to be a point where it just becomes junk reps and junk volume, where what you are doing is potentially worse than nothing...blasting up your RPE in the name of increased recovery time. We also don’t really know if you equate hard sets if actual work volume completed is critical or if so how critical, but given the research on strength and exercise order, it likely has some implications over the long-term in highly trained lifters. Therefore, we at BroResearch are willing to take the stance on albeit tumultuous ground that if you are training with the primary goal of increasing muscular tension it is likely best to structure your training in a way where you have the least amount of rep drop-offs at the highest training weight for your target rep range (especially on multi-joint high-skill movements). *It is worth stating that this total work volume over the session may not matter and likely none of this matters for untrained subjects because they have more or less cooked the system at one or two sets closish to failure per muscle group.   References for Episode 19 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28965198/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29112055 https://journals.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/japplphysiol.00775.2016 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26308090 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14715039 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22510801 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4763829/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23438229 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17461391.2020.1733672 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31188644/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27941492 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30248269 https://www.strongerbyscience.com/effective-reps/