Still waiting on the coverage of the ergogenic effect of facial hair that the Great Bearded One promised in the distant past. Like the Liver King you can't hide the truth from us any longer, Greg!!
As for the crazy internet propaganda, I am a middle of the road person with a good education and my BULL SHIT meter is usually a good indicator for me. Eat many things, eat a variety of things and most in moderation.
When Eric was talking about low fat and said "it's difficult to avoid fat" and I was thinking "I don't know about that, when I eat veggies and fruits, full grain and chicken, I accidentally get into 50 gram ranges". Then Eric said "it just finds its way in when you're trying to stay in 15-20 grams". But I think that's way beyond my minimum suggested intake anyway. Also I found it hilarious how Eric failed job test for preworkout meth, and as a solution they sent it to another lab that gave him a pass! Doesn't that hold some deeper meaning about our culture? I'm so happy Greg touched the assumption that if you achieve more reps, it means you grow more. That's been bugging me for at least a year. It immediately sounded odd to me. Like my base knowledge was that getting close to fatigue is optimally hypertrophic when your sets sort of act as a control for recovery for the next session (for maximum efficiency of stimulus). And at the same time I knew that training too hard might 1. lead to compromised recovery and thus affect the future training sessions negatively 2. hinder your hypertrophy development for spending resources and time fixing the damage rather than building anew. From these two pieces of, to my understanding quite widely accepted, mechanisms it sounded weird that if you find a way to do more reps than you would with your regular 1-3 RIR assuming that the training didn't get easier, it was a huge question to me why it would be more beneficial. I would see it as going over the optimal training and into the territory of training too much for being efficient with your program. I couldn't intuitively see how you'd 1. train harder while at the same time 2. increase your recovery capacity and response to stimulus, assuming you already train as hard as you should. The only instant way of this working out to me was that, to my understanding, it's possible to "overreach" for a while without paying too much for it, or you might have recovery capacity in tank regarding your other training. But if you were already pushing your limits and then you managed to increase your volume without decreasing effort, you'd somehow push over muscle fatigue (without paying for it like when someone screams at you and you manage 5 more reps from your max reps but you pay for it in recovery) and have more adaptation without hurting your recovery. The equation just wouldn't add up in my brain. Where does the extra adaptation and recovery capacity come from unless you were training "lazy" or started overreaching. With creatine, as Greg brought up, I figured that since it supposedly improves recovery a bit, creates a bit of extra adaptation and helps performance, the factors add up to 1. doing more 2. adapting more 3. not hurting the recovery. But I'm not even sure that the extra performance brings extra adaptation with creatine. Could it not be that the increased performance just demands more work for equal stimulus, and that at the same time creatine by itself brings a bit of positive adaptation. That the extra performance doesn't equate to more adaptation even with creatine, but both are present at the same time (not out of causation but because of requirement for adaptation).
"I got a ready to drink beverage that's pee based" - Eric Trexler
Can we get this on a shirt we can buy to support SBS?
22:12
Greg's eyebrows at "More arousal isn't always better" ^^
Thank you so much for answering my question on the podcast !
Loving the recent thumbnail choices.
Re: misinformation "A lie gets half way round the world before the truth even gets its boots on"
"There are a lot of journals out there that will gladly accept a thousand dollars to publish whatever you'd like".
Squat U has entered the chat 😂
Not a doctor
Or financial advisor
But got a cool katana
Ryan humiston is gonna be really sad to hear Gregg’s thoughts on emg. He’s so into his emg thing on his channel
Only if it's Pantera.
Greg is for student loan forgiveness, likes to pump up Rage Against The Machine when going for PRs. Commie confirmed 😅
200% gobless
Rage on Behalf of the Machine
@Chris well, if there is no bill in the first place....
@@neandrewthalgood gym music if you don’t think about how insufferable they are, which is impossible
Sick beanie Eric 😂
Still waiting on the coverage of the ergogenic effect of facial hair that the Great Bearded One promised in the distant past. Like the Liver King you can't hide the truth from us any longer, Greg!!
Those beet Freudian slips are your vegetarian subconscious speaking to you
As for the crazy internet propaganda, I am a middle of the road person with a good education and my BULL SHIT meter is usually a good indicator for me. Eat many things, eat a variety of things and most in moderation.
For the algorithm
Oh, yeah!
1:00:
When Eric was talking about low fat and said "it's difficult to avoid fat" and I was thinking "I don't know about that, when I eat veggies and fruits, full grain and chicken, I accidentally get into 50 gram ranges". Then Eric said "it just finds its way in when you're trying to stay in 15-20 grams". But I think that's way beyond my minimum suggested intake anyway.
Also I found it hilarious how Eric failed job test for preworkout meth, and as a solution they sent it to another lab that gave him a pass! Doesn't that hold some deeper meaning about our culture?
I'm so happy Greg touched the assumption that if you achieve more reps, it means you grow more. That's been bugging me for at least a year. It immediately sounded odd to me. Like my base knowledge was that getting close to fatigue is optimally hypertrophic when your sets sort of act as a control for recovery for the next session (for maximum efficiency of stimulus). And at the same time I knew that training too hard might 1. lead to compromised recovery and thus affect the future training sessions negatively 2. hinder your hypertrophy development for spending resources and time fixing the damage rather than building anew. From these two pieces of, to my understanding quite widely accepted, mechanisms it sounded weird that if you find a way to do more reps than you would with your regular 1-3 RIR assuming that the training didn't get easier, it was a huge question to me why it would be more beneficial. I would see it as going over the optimal training and into the territory of training too much for being efficient with your program. I couldn't intuitively see how you'd 1. train harder while at the same time 2. increase your recovery capacity and response to stimulus, assuming you already train as hard as you should. The only instant way of this working out to me was that, to my understanding, it's possible to "overreach" for a while without paying too much for it, or you might have recovery capacity in tank regarding your other training. But if you were already pushing your limits and then you managed to increase your volume without decreasing effort, you'd somehow push over muscle fatigue (without paying for it like when someone screams at you and you manage 5 more reps from your max reps but you pay for it in recovery) and have more adaptation without hurting your recovery. The equation just wouldn't add up in my brain. Where does the extra adaptation and recovery capacity come from unless you were training "lazy" or started overreaching. With creatine, as Greg brought up, I figured that since it supposedly improves recovery a bit, creates a bit of extra adaptation and helps performance, the factors add up to 1. doing more 2. adapting more 3. not hurting the recovery. But I'm not even sure that the extra performance brings extra adaptation with creatine. Could it not be that the increased performance just demands more work for equal stimulus, and that at the same time creatine by itself brings a bit of positive adaptation. That the extra performance doesn't equate to more adaptation even with creatine, but both are present at the same time (not out of causation but because of requirement for adaptation).
wtf was that after the testosterone question, lmao
Netichackz… reliable source no scamming……
Netichackz……….
ON telegram……..
like...? I mean...? like...? I mean...? I mean...? like...?