All please read! Once and For All: "Scientific Evidence"

[Nelson Montana]

I don't want to hyjack this thread but I feel Silents remarks deserve a response.

One big regret I have is the fact that some of the more advanced bodybuilders will be turned off by the hard-sell promo. (Most of which I didn't write). But in a business where everyone promises the world, subtlety goes unnoticed. It's an unfortunate part of business. If you want to get peoples attention, you have to come on strong.

One thing I do not do is just state an opinion as unequivical. The entire premise of my books is to present cogent arguments as to WHY, I say what I say. If someone can provide an equally cogent argument to oppose something, I'm all ears. If I can learn, it only helps me. However, most of my detractors are people who react to certain concepts without absorbing the logic behind it.

I hope that some of the more knowlegable bros can get past the fact that a little hype is a necessity and in the long run, it's the message that counts.

Now let's get back to the original post. It's a good one.

 

[jacshelb]

Actually Nelson,

I think that I've seen a few posts (not necessarily articles) where, what seems to be an arrogant, "no-one can compare to my knowledge" attitude is presented. I'm not saying that that is what was intended. But, I think that's how some of your statements come across to readers on this board.


Again, good original post!

Jacob

 

[ichabodcrane]

Good point Doc! We all know the double-blind placebo controlled studies are the gold standards when it comes to research. But that is all they are, just research studies. It is ultimately left for the end user (reader) to decide what to do with that information. Many things need to be considered when evaluating studies as well. Just because the authors conclude their study to be "correct" doesn't necessarily mean it applies to all subsets of people. Like stated before, real world experience and first hand experience is also key. Something to note is that when a drug is going through its phases of research it may seem a cure all, but the real truth isn't told until it is distributed to the masses and postmarketing studies are conducted. So that is why I tell people not to just to skip to the conclusion of the research article, but to read the whole thing and think about how this may apply to different settings. Clinical research studies are an invaluable tool, but need to be evaluated cautiously. And sometimes this can be rather hard to do.

 

[liftsiron]

boldman, just once, try understanding what you read before opening your mouth.

This is an excellant post. It's also something that I've tried to get across to people for years. Just because something hasn't been stated in a study doesn't mean it isn't true. People will ignore logic in the absence of any "clinical stdies." It works the other way around too. If some researcher makes a deduction, it's treated as indisputable proof.

There's so much that still isn't known. Until then, I'll continue to examine the reasearch, but I'll take common sense, experience and real world evidence over a research study every time.


__________________

I agree with Nelson 100% on this issue, there just hasn't been enough or in some cases any clincial studies done on topics discussed on this board.

Buffdoc, your original post was excellent, as were your follow ups, I give you a great deal of respect, to view your ideas regarding research, as only one of several tools one should use to make an educated decision. Self experimentation has lead to more cutting edge knowledge than studies ever will as far as streoids and related compounds are concerned.

 

[Zoomster]

I agree with Doc's comments and those that reinforce them. I have been in the bodybuilding game/ Lifestyle for 20 years. It amazes me when I see these posts where someone went out on the net, copied and pasted information and then become experts on the subject. I really am only interested in what people have actually experienced with certain AS cycles and other natural supps.

I do not think that it is right to single out one or two members on this board that like to post data to edify their knowledge. It happens all the time.

There are a few people on this board that are not competing for thread space or trying to see how many posts they can do in one hour or trying to think of subjects that will get some type of reaction from the rest of the members. Those are the members that I like to read, the one's that have actual experience. It simply amazes me when people become self proclaimed experts on a subject that they have only read about. How about the people that have never done a cycle or certain types of AS trying to give advice!

I would like to thank all of the members that share their real world experience and knowledge with the board. This is what is invaluable to me as a new user. It doesn't't take long to figure out who the real people are on this board.

 

[jboldman]

Somehow I knew that you would chime in here nelson! Seems like you are trying to make this personal again but since you brought it up, you are one of the worst offenders on the board of" i said it so it must be true no matter what studies say that suggest that I am wrong", a great example of this would be your nettle thread wherein you made an assumption that has never been supported, then or now.

I have NEVER said that just because someone has done a study that one study makes it a fact. As we all know, studies can be biased, ill designed, not valid, and just not to the point. What I believe is that we must, as has been pointed out above, take into fair consideration ALL the information provided us, scientific, theoretical, anecdotal, whatever and weigh it in the balance of critical thinking and personal experience without letting our personalities get in the way of making the right decision.

It seems I must have missed a thread or two where someone was bludgeoning someone else or acting as a supposed expert, if so, I apologize.

BuffDoc, I see your point, i was just trying to point out that there is a place for research in all this as well.

jb
=================

boldman, just once, try understanding what you read before opening your mouth.

This is an excellant post. It's also something that I've tried to get across to people for years. Just because something hasn't been stated in a study doesn't mean it isn't true. People will ignore logic in the absence of any "clinical stdies." It works the other way around too. If some researcher makes a deduction, it's treated as indisputable proof.

There's so much that still isn't known. Until then, I'll continue to examine the reasearch, but I'll take common sense, experience and real world evidence over a research study every time.

 

[jacopomiller]

Excellent thread. From the perspective of a different discipline, it reminds one of the Sokal scandal in science studies.

 

[Silent Method]

Nelson has brought us far more than one truly original and insightful ideas. He can't be accused of selling snow to Eskimos at this point.

I agree. It is the marketing drivel I object to.

Originally posted by Nelson Montana
One big regret I have is the fact that some of the more advanced bodybuilders will be turned off by the hard-sell promo. (Most of which I didn't write). But in a business where everyone promises the world, subtlety goes unnoticed. It's an unfortunate part of business. If you want to get peoples attention, you have to come on strong.

I'm with you 100% here. We've actually had this discussion before. Like I said then, your book may be great, but your marketing turns off a good deal of people. I understand how bussiness works and I realize that you cannot target all of the people all of the time. That being said, your contributions to this board do far more in regard to selling me on your book than any add I have seen.

Originally posted by Nelson Montana
One thing I do not do is just state an opinion as unequivical.

You very well may have not done so. I may concide that my argument is with your marketing person(s). Unfortunately your name is tied to the marketing of your products.

 

[HardbodLawyer]

....

 

[Silent Method]

The scientific method may not be perfect, and the medical/scientific bureaucracy may be monolithic and slow, but it sure beats the hell out of any other system. Its better than any system they have in South America, thats for sure. And BuffDoc, if you are suggesting that a majority of medical/scientific procedures are not backed by proper research, you are completely wrong. If that was the case, these procedures could not be performed because of litigation risks.
Regards,
Anthony

I think you missed his point. I'm not buying you as a lawyer as one would assume a lawyer would be more practiced at extrapolating the ideas expressed in a statement.

I think (and buffdoc agreed) that I summed up his point well when I said "hard scientific support for an idea is great, but using the cloak of "science" to argue against observable, real world phenomena is ignorant."