I appreciate you helping me to think critically about statements coming from people who are very smart and very good at convincing other people, like Dr. Mike.
Except I doubt ur thinking critically of milo. Some people just aren’t born to think critically. They jump from on “mentor” to another. Ur not thinking critically of others if u need someone else making a video for u. And this is why people get one sided with things instead of thinking about how every expert has their own experiences and opinions which doesn’t necessarily mean they’re wrong They hear one member produce good argument against their current mentor. Completely switch sides. Start believing what the next guy says but is now all of a sudden critical of the previous mentor. Expecting their mentor to be geniuses rinse and repeat
@@googlefaps5883 100% In the self-help space its known as 'guru-hopping.' This is not a critique of Milo (his channel is small enough where I doubt there are many 'haters' here) but just something that everyone needs to be aware off before they get too excited about anything/anyone in particular. People get addicted to novelty and 'eureka' moments in a perpetual search for silver bullets.
The way your hunger goes up to 11 when you go to maintenance from a deficit is crazy though, and most people will go ham on a cheat day and undo the whole weeks worth of deficit. I personally having lost 40 lbs find it easier to just stay in my deficit, for instance this past thanksgiving turned into a diet break unintentionally and turned into basically a diet break for all of december because my hunger went haywire. The hardest part is really not the diet but when your body is ready to rebound. It suuuuuucks.
@@alaaentabi7879 There is more to his comment than just cherry picking a study, read my other comment below. This is actually common with diet coaches, there are valid critiques of cheat days and diet breaks because they often don't really do much except delay your weight loss goal. If you are dieting so hard that you need a break, it would be better to just do a smaller deficit rather than a punctuated one.
You're also giving your mind and body some time to readjust to a new equilibrium and get out of "famine mode" where if you keep a deficit going for too long it will start to cannibalize muscle along with fat. I learned the hard way that my body does not like being in a deficit for longer than 12 weeks if I'm to only lose fat and not destroy muscle as well.
I absolutely loved this video. Dr. Mike has been my main source of hypertrophy related info for a long time, so getting your opinions on subjects where you and he respectfully disagree is super valuable to me. I'm sure a lot of people agree. Keep it up, man.
@@GerardMauvoisin He actually made a recent video of him reviewing a review of him reviewing. Greg does videos like this all the time. The main positive of his channel is that he admits to being wrong.
@@GerardMauvoisin which is why I ended up unsubbing from Greg, Johnni, and Mike. The recurring circle jerk got so tiresome. Also I noticed things like them all doing videos on the same topic within a week of each other (like the diet soda videos), dunno if they were copying one another or if the drama is all fake kayfabe to begin with and they coordinate behind the scenes.
@@zerrodefex Fake kayfabe...very meta, or something. Eric Weinstein is a troubled dork, & Dr. Mike simply does not belong in the same sentence as Greg, or Jonni...though I do dig Jonni. Dr. Mike is actually smart, & actually critically thinks. Actually.
It's very interesting the language you use when when disagreeing with people about injury, when it's someone you know and have rapport with, VS someone you do not. One you disagree with, one you claim they are fearmongering.
They were kind of thoughtlessly claiming that cheat reps were more likely injurious. They weren't warning against an exercise, because it will injure ppl for sure.
According to this sports dietician Elle kelly I follow on the grams, one of the best ways to keep your total energy expenditure from crashing is to simply feed your activity. So if you're working out, make sure to have a good amount of carbs before hand so your body isn't shocked and thinking it needs to conserve energy. AKA no fasted workouts.
hence the reason for low fat to be popular among dieticians, because it fuels workouts better than higher fat diets and one thing or another has to go when you are int a deficit.
I do full-body twice a week as that fits my schedule and my exercise style best and definitely found that high carb on the day before and day of plus some intraworkout carbs in my water bottles provided a huge benefit. I had drawn inspiration from Steve Reeves for my programming and listening to old interviews of his he talked about how he found long ago that what he ate the day before mattered most for performance which makes sense given what we know now about glycogen storage and carb loading. I make sure to always have at least a light breakfast before any morning workouts or to do it an hour after lunchtime when possible, fasted always resulted in miserable performance. As I'm in a recomp right now I let my calorie consumption go higher on the workout days than on the rest days and my weight has remained stable while strength and definition have continued to improve, the extra calories helps my recovery.
@@BigBADSTUFF69 yes given that fat contains more than double the calories reducing fat makes more room for protein and carbs. Not too low fat though, get at least 0.3g/lb bodyweight for best hormonal health.
For those of us who are 60 + years of age and are not able to have our body utilize protein as we used to, would 1 gram of protein per pound of body weight be a minimum, especially if resistance training 5 days a week and cardio workouts are 3 days a week at the end of resistance workouts and where a VO2 Max workout is once a week?
I'm sometimes tempted to bulk - not dirty bulk, but go into maybe a 2-300 calorie surplus for awhile to make some gains - but I don't do it because adding fat just seems to be a dumb thing for me to do, given my age, and given that I'm at a reasonably athletic body composition, which I'd be lucky if I could sustain for the rest of my life. So I was happy to hear Milo say that there's only a "marginal" benefit to bulking vs eating at maintenance for muscle gains. That removes any temptation I might have to think eating at maintenance means basically forgoing any gains. That was a very valuable insight for me. Thanks, Milo.
then try short bulk period for like 4 months at 2-300 calories and cut after that for 2-3 months. recomp is valid approach but you need to know what you are doing otherwise you end up spinning the wheels.
He didn't say bulking was a marginal difference. He said the size of the surplus doesn't need to be tremendous. 200-300 calories like you want to do isn't a tremendous bulk. He even said as long as you're gaining .5% bodyweight per month, then you're fine.
@@salvarunatortuga5396 Here's what Milo said, word for word, @11:46: "I think the research on actual bulking and how big your surplus should be ... doesn't suggest that there's as much of an effect on your hypertrophy as Mike suggests it. There is an effect, but that is achieved with a pretty small surplus to potentially no surplus. So the effect of going from maintenance into a surplus is very marginal."
Anybody thats ever done a bulk knows from experience that there absolutely is not just a marginal benefit. I'd like to see any studies that support that.
@@Twm532 I don't have studies because, unlike everyone else on social media, I don't pretend that I have the skill set to properly analyze nutrition/exericse studies. But I have done 3 successful bulks and from my personal experience it is a marginal benefit to bulk on more than ~250 calories a day. Milo saying this just furthers my belief that what I'm doing is correct. No need to do a tremendous bulk but you do need some surplus.
I think your best shoulder exercises video left out potentially the best front delt exercises. Dips and flat-low incline presses done with maximally tucked elbows (and potentially a neutral, shoulder-width grip) give a much greater stretch on the front delts and greater tension in a lengthened position compared to your recommended seated vertical pressing. Have you considered these movements for front delts?
I think the Hollywood/fitness industy’s ideal body type while lying about steroid use is way way worse than a natty or not videos. The body ideal looking like a jacked superhero isn’t really any different than the “heroin chic” body ideal that women dealt with in the 90s.
Love these three but especially how our greek king Leonidas beard (Milo) quantifies everything with actual literature, Still a huge fan of Mr Potato head (Mike) and Jeff
Spannend, eure dzt. Standpunkte zu diesen Themen zu hören. Danke für's Teilen! Sag mal, Milo, veröffentlichst du irgendwo auch Videos/Artikel o. Ä. auf Deutsch? Kräftige Grüße Stavros
Question - maybe a video topic: Is muscle growth just a pain tolerance equation? Meaning if my nutrition is good - am I (or you) guaranteed to grow if I can just push 4 - 6 very very intense sets (after warmup sets) on a muscle 2X per week? My legs are growing lately but shoulders and arms have plateaued. Arms stuck exactly 16" cold & 16 7/8 full pump - for about 6 weeks.
Because more volume has way stronger correlation with increased muscle growth than going to failure spread out over an actual program. That's why. You might grow more muscle on a per set basis or even in an entire workout but when that doesn't allow you to do as much next week and the week after that because you are accumulating more systemic fatigue it doesn't make a lot of sense. Now doing 60 sets isn't practical either so there is a balance we all have to reach individually within our own programs on volume, load, and rep totals.
Hey Dr. Wolf. I tried out the Hamstring curl + Reverse Nordic curl superset from you leg training video yesterday. The Reverse Nordics felt kinda awkward on the knees. Does this go away eventually or am I probably doing it wrong (although I don’t think so, since I copied the form used in your video)?
i do bro split like this 4 day 1 Incline curl 3 set 8-10 rep 2 Preacher Curls 3 set 6-8 rep 3 Bench press 3 set 4-6 rep 4 Incline DB bench 3 set 8-10 rep 5 weighted Dips 3 set 6-8 rep 6 DB Flye 3 set 10-15 rep 7 Push ups 3 set to failure 1 Hatfield Squat 3 set 4-6 rep 2 RDL 3 set 8-10 rep 3 Leg Curl 3 set 8-10 rep 4 Hammstring Curls 3 set 8-10 rep 5 split squats 3 set 8=10 rep 6 Jefferson Curl 3 set 8-10 rep 7 Neck cable Curls 3 set 12-15 rep 1 Cable push downs 3 set 8-10 rep 2 cable overhead extension 3 set 8-10 rep 3 Barbell Row 3 set 8-10 rep 4 Weighted Neutral grip pull ups 3 set 5-6 rep 5 DB-Shrugs 3 set 8-10 rep 6 Seated Cable Low-Row 3 set 8-10 rep 7 Cable pulldown 3 set to failure 1 Single Arm Dumbbell Press 2 Sets x 4-7 Reps 2 Behind the Neck Overhead Press 3 Sets x 8-10 Reps 3 Seated pin press 3 Sets x 8-10 Reps 4 Dumbbell Lateral Raise 3 Sets x 8-12 Reps 5 Single Arm Cable Side Lateral Raise 2 Sets x 8-10 Reps 6 Lying Face Pulls 3 Sets x 8-12 Reps 7 Ab wheel 3 Sets x 8-12 Repsm
I mean .. If Phd people give opposite idea wouldn't it means that everything all of you guys said was subjective on your own interpretation of the studies you based your knowledge about ? So would it means that maybe 25-50% of what the sciences guys said are irrevelant and biased on your own understanding ?
Having a PHD in this industry typically means that person is arrogant but has no idea what they're talking about. As per most of Milo's recent videos unfortunately.
Exercise science is still understudied so in practical application there is a lot of hand-wavey grey area that still has yet to be discovered. They aren't really disagreeing on the science they are disagreeing on things like whether a pump is important or practical. That said, scientific consensus is about statistics, you will never have 100% of people agree with your interpretation, but it becomes accepted if enough experts accept your interpretation. Science is much more fluid than you think and understanding changes over time.
@@BigBADSTUFF69 Lots of things are open to interpretation sure. Some things aren't as open to interpretation. Such as Milo saying the best lat exercise is a DB Pullover (which isn't a lat exercise) and when Dr Mike says one set to failure is too fatiguing (not backed up in the data whatsoever)
Completely misrepresenting what Dr Mike said on soreness, You Would think That a ”Dr” could listen to an argument spoken in perfect english and get the main points🤔
He never Said it should be your focus or anything like that, only if you’re not progressing, adding volume, growing or pushing yourself hard enough TRYING to get sore can be useful since those factors are going to cause growth (not the soreness itself)
Dr Jim Stoppani is a knowledgeable biochemist with a background in bio mechanics with a Facebook page that has transformed hundreds if not thousands of people. He provides a lot of great information but I would love to see another doctor or professional critique his advice.
That was a bit of a misrepresentation of Mike's pump argument. He said it can tell you that you're hitting the target muscle(s), which is absolutely true. He didn't make any magical hypertrophy claims there.
As Nippard pointed out recently, it's still the case that most elite-level bodybuilders do bro-splits (and that certain includes some who participate in tested events fwiw, like Adam Powe). I would even put it thusly; the amount of gymgoers who seriously train for hypertrophy >1 a week on most muscle groups is actually really small indeed i.e. probably in the single digits percentage-wise. I agree bro-splits probably aren't optimal, though actually I think arguments can be made that they are quite utilisable for casual lifters who want to look good in a t-shirt, or even naked. I also think they don't need a lot of modification to be really quite good - a bit of added accessory work to hit shoulders and arms on other days, a bit of cgbp and vertical pulling on arm day, a few leg extensions at the end of chest day even - what NH would call a gentleman's bro-split I guess. Ppl are going to be able to get jacked just fine this way.
it's really going to depend how heavy and how much volume you are lifting. If one guy is doing sets of 12 at 325 vs a beginner doing sets of 12 at 125, the weaker person will be recovered sooner in general. Pro bodybuilders are also likely doing the amount of sets in one day than a novice will do in 2 or three.
@@BigBADSTUFF69 That's true but they're still going to get adaptations because they're beginners so once a week would still be fine. Though again, if you look at say Adam Powe.... is he really doing much more than 10-12 working sets in a session? Admittedly some of hiswarm-up sets probably do contribute to volume, but that's a controversial point.
@@alanfarquharhillyeah beginners are fine with low volume but quickly adapt and then need to add more volume. The amount of days per week really isn't the key thing, it's sets per week and overall volume.
@@BigBADSTUFF69 Tbh I think the emphass on weekly volume theory in the yt fitness meta is too big, but 6-8 hard sets per week should be enough to stimulate growth for the bigger muscle groups in most cases. If it's a weakpoint, yes you might want more and yes you might want to 2x a bodypart, but there are ways to accommodate that whilst essentially retaining a bro split.
It keeps getting ignored that the bro split became common with the pros when PEDs became common with them as well. Without the juice keeping protein synthesis going past 48 hrs the bro split doesn't make sense. There's a reason the pre-steroid era was dominated by whole body workouts three times per week.
Did Mike ever say that though? In the context of Mike's other videos it sounds like what he was trying to say is that soreness and pump, while lacking in direct evidence proving they indicate growth, are still good indicators of stimulus. You're not getting sore or pumped in a muscle you've not worked. In comparison to say mind muscle connection which they both deemed overrated.
Oh before I watch, I predict a big beef. Long back and forth feud. I've definitely watched a lot of Dr. Mike and learned a lot of fundamentals and programming from him, but I do also think he has maybe relatively more opinions about training than other exercise science educators, while presenting them as facts based on the evidence. Or being more provocative, hard to draw the line, but he's usually more steep and strict about his takes on exercise science and training methods (in his content, seems like in discussions he's rather friendly and open to different takes). So I've come to learn to take him seriously when he talks about exercise science, but also with a grain of salt and slightly in my mind rounding out his takes. And of course always comparing it to what others in the field say and try to construct a reasonable opinion how to apply it myself. Fairly regularly there's also the caveat of talking strictly about muscle building whereas I've grown more interested about more towards applications, for example facilitating sports performance and suddenly the rules of training change. What's interesting is how relatively old this original video is. It's not old in absolute terms, but there's been quite a bit of research in these topics since, that has given somewhat strong update on it towards one way or another, giving more detail for sure. I wasn't aware Pak was in the ice bath study, but then again he has probably a long list of them that I don't know about.
if ur trying to work a muscle, and you get a pump in that muscle, you can assume that the target muscle is being worked. that’s what mike said and he’s correct
pump ftw ! PRO tip for free: if you move weights around and don't get pump in the muscle you are trying to train but get a pump in some other muscle, you are most likely not training the muscle that you think you are 😉 even if pump does not correlate at all with hypertrophy it is at least an indicator that shows you that you are doing at least something that is good. There is 100% no way that you get to failure or close and not feel any pump. Scientifically, it would be impossible to study pump since there is not many ways to measure it accurately and it's just a "trust me bro, I feel really pumped now", but from that until saying that pump is not an indicator that at least you are trainig the muscles that you are actually trying to train, it's just holding the cow by the horns and insisting there is no evidence that the cow has horns.
HELP..... I broke both arms in a car accident. How do I try and minimize muscle loss while I heal? I'm 46, 6'2", 210 lbs and probably 12-15% body fat now.
As much as i like them both, they do sometimes like to pass of their own personal anecdotes as "science" For example jeffs recent best back exercises using science. Then proceeds to rate lat pulldown as better than pull-ups because he "feels it" more. Thats not science jeff. Sometimes i feel like superman, doesn't mean i am.
His video was not "rank them using science" it was "We’ll be judging the exercises based on three criteria: 1) stretch and tension, 2) good feel, and 3) simple progression". so how it feels is part of his criteria. That said, "feel" was not the reason it was ranked a tiny bit higher than pullups.
But they put those words in quotations, I assume to let you know that it's a biased list? They even clarify at times that if you find something that isn't "optimal" for the average person but gives you great results, then to KEEP DOING IT. Of the many dozens of fitness influencers out there, I think those two do a pretty good job of explaining their POV while also saying "figure it out for yourself".
I also have to disagree with Dr. Mike here. I think there's a lot of factors probably going into getting a muscle sore and I can at least speak from experience that in my quad training I don't usually get that sore anymore. It's not like that when training hamstrings. Doing hamstrings I usually get sore for a couple of days, but my quads usually only get maybe slightly sore for one or two days. Even when I increase the number of sets by two or three, which I have done test-wise, it usually doesn't make a big difference in muscle soreness for my quads. Yet my squat numbers are consistently going up.
I think when it comes to pump and muscle soreness it's more about comparison of two versions of training where one gives you clearly more pump/soreness then the other while keeping both optimal. I would suspect that if no other factors are changed, then the version which gives more DOMS/pump COULD be better. Definitely not good signs to base your judgement on but could be useful when it comes to really narrowing down your exercise selection or deciding which way of training works for you better. Just thinking out loud really but still some food for thought ;d
That's the funny thing about literature, anybody can interpret it the way that they want it interpreted if they themselves aren't the author. Just as this video claims quite a few times that he thinks, Dr. Mike is incorrect In certain instances, we could say the same thing back about Milo's opinion on his interpretation of these topics. I think they're all correct, just depends on the direction of your thought process as you interpret each of their statements. Thought he was too critical of Dr. Mikes views, claiming them incorrect as opposed to seeing their validity and how they could both be correct in nuanced ways. After watching a 2nd time, it honestly feels like you need to put some respect on Mike's name. He invited you on and had polite disagreements but the way you're referring to him comes off wrong. Don't let that official piece of paper in your hands that you finally earned inflate your sense of being an all knowing encyclopedia of correct.
Really, its all correct at different times in our lifting career and for different people. I dont think there are any absolute principles apart from the very basics... ie lifting safely and gradually increasing weight.
Let's run through Milo's points since we are all about rating shit. This is the problem when you have someone who literally won't listen to anything that can't be observed in a lab and measured and therefore thinks it is incorrect to have an opinion on anything that can't be verified with direct evidence. So in reality, Milo should be training with about the six exercises that are regularly performed in lab settings. 1. Not a lot of injury risk for uncontrolled concentric/eccentric. Dipshit take. Just because a study of a bunch of untrained folks doesn't show it doesn't mean we can't make very basic inferences. Like the greatest force in most lifts occurs at the transition point between the two stages and if you move through that transition at a high velocity and without control you are exacerbating the risk for injury. 2. Soreness and Pumps. Same as above. Can't be observed in a lab, so must be fake. No one is saying that if you do RDLs and dont feel your hamstrings or dont get sore that you didn't lift. Learn your body. Strong case for their use as a proxy. Weak case for using them as a determinative factor in evaluating. Which no one that is saying use it as one of multiple proxies for evaluating your real world workouts is suggesting. 3. Going to failure. Again, just dumb semantics. yes, everyone agrees going to failure is gonna grow more muscle. There is also general agreement you should occasionally go to failure. Milo admits that we dont know how much, we dont know the bell curve of the effect, we dont know how it impacts programs where you are doing even a medium amount of volume spread out across even 3-4 workouts (Something Milo himself recommends). So again, hasn't been done in a lab so we can't have any opinions, even ones that are logical inferences from what we have direct evidence for. 4. Bulking/Cutting vs recomping. Again, semantics. Recomping is where you aren't actively trying to maintain even a small surplus. Which the literature shows is not only good, but necessary. Criticizing recomping is not an endorsement of massive bulk surpluses. 5. Diet breaks. I personally don't think studies are ever going to accurately reflect reality here because when not participating in a study, their is imo a much higher tendency for genpop folks to give in to their diet fatigue. This is again a limitation of the "only look at studies and turn off your brain" approach. The argument is not that diet breaks make a given diet phase more effective or have some kind of impact on your metabolic rate. The argument is they significantly help adherence over the long run, measured in months and years. Which is way outside the confines of most studies 6. Clean eating. Again, dumb semantics. The research doesn't look at population level data over a long period because no one cares that much to pay for that kind of study. Eating clean is not a mandate to never eat anything you enjoy. it is saying that generally avoiding calorically dense high palatability foods puts you in a better position to succeed. This is especially true when you consider the opportunity cost of fucking up once a week and how quickly that erases everything you have done the other 6 days. Again, just not something studies can easily get at because of the conditions and funding/man hour limitations Milo clearly trains. He clearly does a lot of shit there is not sufficient direct evidence for but he makes inferences along logical lines. It is what makes some of his videos so incredibly frustrating because it is just "I need content so lets get into extreme semantics"
Feels like Greg Nuckols and Menno Henselmans points are usually more backed up by direct research than someone like Mike. Greg is honestly really underrated
Mark wildman has a few videos about it. Take some of the advice with a grain of salt, I think his outlook on barbell training is flawed, but otherwise he has great ideas on training deconditioned individuals.
us old fat guys arent all that dissimilar to others. do a lot of walking, focus on technique when lifting and keep plenty of reps in reserve, higher frequency and moderate volume.
14:44 How the hell it is possible to be micronutrient deficient if you eat clean? Clean foods are whole foods with the most nutrient density!? What kind of study is that ?
I haven't yet watch that video fully. I am at 1:45ish. I really like your reaction videos. Great format. And I need to say that this looks like a wrong video format to react to. Kind of like you would like to be a part of the discussion but you are unwanted there. I know this is not a case and that you did coop with Mike as well. But it looks kind of lame.
I feel like Dr. Mike is coming to the topic of pumps through science-based approach (our general understanding how body works), while Dr. Milo is looking for direct evidence, which is absent at the time.
Shouldn't pay attention to pump? I'm not saying one should chase the pump at all cost, but once the targeted muscle is pumped is 1. a very good feeling and 2. a good indicator of high stimulus and of how much work there's left to be done for that body part. Isn't it a kind of direct feedback from your body? But yeah I can't provide a citation of untrained individuals training to volitional failure on leg extension where pump was measured with Bayesian statistics to substantiate my claim.
IMO Mike Israetel's book "Scientific Principles of Hypertrophy Training" has more pseudo-science in it than science. It was a waste of almost 50 quid but it was an important lesson. People seem more likely to accept something if it's dressed up in scientific jargon - but sometimes that jargon makes very little sense when you really think about it.
Milo is coming off as pedantic in all his most recent videos. Getting jacked is not like sending rockets to space. We don't need 10 studies on every subject before we can have a rational opinion on something. If someone with a PHD in a relevant field is discussing "rocket shit" I'm going to shut the fuck up and listen, because I don't build or launch rockets. But I, and millions of other people, can go in a gym and lift heavy shit and get bigger muscles. Using DOMS and Pump as proxies for stimulus, for the purpose of measuring potential hypertrophy, has worked for decades, for countless people. Is it 100% perfect? Nope. What short term metric is available for the average person to use that is 100% accurate? Keep in mind I said short term measure, and available to the average person. If you are putting in your best effort, approaching failure, get a great pump and experience some soreness, you are almost certainly getting a stimulus that will trigger hypertrophy. That is all Dr. Mike says. How that opinion could possibly be "wrong", just because we don't have enough studies for Milo, is beyond my understanding. Even in areas where we have studies in this field they often contradict, or are at least not in agreement on all their finding. So, I hope Dr. Milo changes his approach and tone in future videos. I hope he offers a more generous interpretation of the statements/opinions of others, and demonstrates more humility in the expression of his own.
just like doctors prescribe treatment for illness, the goal with exercise science is to provide evidence that training works. No one is attacking you bro, he's just trying to understand what works and what doesn't in a way that's repeatable and backed with evidence. You seem to be offended by that somehow but it has nothing to do with you.
@@BigBADSTUFF69 Hey there. I don't think Milo is attacking me; he doesn't even know I exist. Also, I'm not offended. I simply dislike how pedantic he is becoming and this hubris when comparing and contrasting his opinions with others. Not liking some aspects of his presentations, and being "offended" are not the same thing. Have a great day.
The problem with these videos is that studies in every field are corrupted. Like anything else, there is always a study that agrees with you if you look for it. Using "meta" studies for anything is not usually a good idea. Taking ten or so (usually bad) studies and claiming that when put together, they equal one good study, isn't how the world works. The vast majority of the studies that he points to are meta.
Watching Milo’s videos has sort of illuminated how much of dr. Mikes and other evidence based influencer types are based on their own personal experience. That’s not a bad thing necessarily but it’s good to know where the “rules” can be bent without being counterproductive. Even though all agree that results would be better with higher frequency, I actually do just one whole body hypertrophy session once per week, for the exclusive reason that I only have time and recovery capacity for that amount of hypertrophy training. Thanks for arguing with people, realDR. 🐺
as a fatty that has lost 40 lbs in the last year, I do find that certain "palatable foods" do trigger my hunger and avoiding them does help me stick to my diet. I'm just a lot less hungry when I eat simple and (relatively) boring. I'm not sure how much it actually has to do with "processing" though because I eat protein bars every day and they are fine, it seems more based on the holy trinity of fat/salt/sugar in things like salted caramel ice cream
It’s fascinating to me that Paul Carter would agree with pretty much everything Dr. Wolf said but there r like one or two takes not in the video that’s the cause of all their debate. Keep up the great videos 🤝
Hey Milo, are you aware of the negative evaluations made of you by TNF and especially Paul Carter on TikTok? I saw Paul call you some not so kind words in a comment on a TNF video. Just wondering what your thoughts are on the explosion of layman influencers seemingly thinking they understand exercise physiology and science better than scientists
Dr. Wolf, count me incredibly disappointed that you didn't cover any recent meta-analysis of the NO FAP method. Clearly an error of omission that can be reconciled. Otherwise, great video.
The difference between Dr. Mike and Dr. Milo is that Milo can only read studies, while Mike incorporates his own experience based on the real world into his points of view
It’s clear he sees Mike as his competition, so he jumps at every chance to disagree with him. It’s also clear he idolizes Jeff as a UA-cam celebrity, so he jumps at every chance to agree and be supportive.
Milo, if I can critique your content here in the hopes it continues to improve. This is a tough video to watch, not because of you or your additions, but because I have already watched the video in question. Your reaction video could have been much, much shorter and better if you had cut out some parts of the video that are not necessary to react to. I know that i'm nitpicking and that removing three to five seconds at a time sounds bullshit, but it would have made for a better video that would appeal more to a wider range than it already does. It mostly feels like i'm rewatching the video and every minute or two it jump cuts to you to respond. I think the better format would have been for you to also immediately responded with your own rating, condense their explanation and leave just enough context and then add your own opinion with evidence. Really small changes but I hope you are receptive and don't dismiss it as an attack
Training twice a week is only beneficial in the short term…which is what these studies cover….but….over the long term once a week to once every 2 weeks is optimal as you get stronger... You just have to look at the silent graveyard of failed physiques who try to train a muscle 2 to 3 times a week. Not sustainable for the average genetic lifter.
wut? Dont you guys (you, Mike, Dr Pak, jeff) all come from the Schoenfeld stable? this reminds me of Ben Shapiro critiquing Trump's presidency, or Stephen Colbert critiquing Biden.
Imo it's better you handle other people than Dr.Mike. He is a very good source, where there are very bad sources. I believe Dr.Mike over you. I stop watching your videos now.
i felt like my parents were fighting watching this video
Exactly bruh😂
But it didn't end with your mom taking....I'll stop.
I appreciate you helping me to think critically about statements coming from people who are very smart and very good at convincing other people, like Dr. Mike.
Thank you Warren! Glad you enjoyed it king 🙏🏻
They're a good duo
Hello
Except I doubt ur thinking critically of milo. Some people just aren’t born to think critically. They jump from on “mentor” to another. Ur not thinking critically of others if u need someone else making a video for u. And this is why people get one sided with things instead of thinking about how every expert has their own experiences and opinions which doesn’t necessarily mean they’re wrong
They hear one member produce good argument against their current mentor. Completely switch sides. Start believing what the next guy says but is now all of a sudden critical of the previous mentor. Expecting their mentor to be geniuses rinse and repeat
@@googlefaps5883 100% In the self-help space its known as 'guru-hopping.' This is not a critique of Milo (his channel is small enough where I doubt there are many 'haters' here) but just something that everyone needs to be aware off before they get too excited about anything/anyone in particular. People get addicted to novelty and 'eureka' moments in a perpetual search for silver bullets.
When it comes to diet breaks it's not about the energy expendeture benefits, but rather about reducing diet fatigue, about increasing adherence.
its a theme in milo's opinions where he takes the papers to the tee and "forgets" how human behavior and nature can effect that
The way your hunger goes up to 11 when you go to maintenance from a deficit is crazy though, and most people will go ham on a cheat day and undo the whole weeks worth of deficit. I personally having lost 40 lbs find it easier to just stay in my deficit, for instance this past thanksgiving turned into a diet break unintentionally and turned into basically a diet break for all of december because my hunger went haywire. The hardest part is really not the diet but when your body is ready to rebound. It suuuuuucks.
@@alaaentabi7879 There is more to his comment than just cherry picking a study, read my other comment below. This is actually common with diet coaches, there are valid critiques of cheat days and diet breaks because they often don't really do much except delay your weight loss goal. If you are dieting so hard that you need a break, it would be better to just do a smaller deficit rather than a punctuated one.
You're also giving your mind and body some time to readjust to a new equilibrium and get out of "famine mode" where if you keep a deficit going for too long it will start to cannibalize muscle along with fat. I learned the hard way that my body does not like being in a deficit for longer than 12 weeks if I'm to only lose fat and not destroy muscle as well.
The more I watch/listen to Dr Wolf the more I realize he likes to argue semantics, while basically agreeing on the main point.
very much so
I think he just likes to clarify what exactly there is evidence to support. Dr. Mike hardly ever cites studies/evidence
I absolutely loved this video. Dr. Mike has been my main source of hypertrophy related info for a long time, so getting your opinions on subjects where you and he respectfully disagree is super valuable to me. I'm sure a lot of people agree. Keep it up, man.
Kingofweighted❤
Cant wait for jeffs reaction to you reaction to his reaction
This is like Greg Doucette critiquing Johnni Shreve's video (and vice versaà back from when they were buddies. Circle Jerk.
@@GerardMauvoisin
He actually made a recent video of him reviewing a review of him reviewing.
Greg does videos like this all the time.
The main positive of his channel is that he admits to being wrong.
@@GerardMauvoisin which is why I ended up unsubbing from Greg, Johnni, and Mike. The recurring circle jerk got so tiresome. Also I noticed things like them all doing videos on the same topic within a week of each other (like the diet soda videos), dunno if they were copying one another or if the drama is all fake kayfabe to begin with and they coordinate behind the scenes.
@@zerrodefex Fake kayfabe...very meta, or something. Eric Weinstein is a troubled dork, & Dr. Mike simply does not belong in the same sentence as Greg, or Jonni...though I do dig Jonni. Dr. Mike is actually smart, & actually critically thinks. Actually.
I already knew soreness doesnt mean hypertrophy bcz im subbed to dr wolf's E-newsletter😎
Soreness largely does correlate/mean hypertrophy, & it 100% means you had a great night. I'm not gay.
Well thats both a novel concept from milo and completely closed for debate. Let us close our minds and just have faith, yeah?
I'm glad Mike Israetel mentioned your channel about partials and both of you gives knowledge when it comes to bodybuilding.
I don't like when dad and dad disagree
It's very interesting the language you use when when disagreeing with people about injury, when it's someone you know and have rapport with, VS someone you do not. One you disagree with, one you claim they are fearmongering.
They were kind of thoughtlessly claiming that cheat reps were more likely injurious. They weren't warning against an exercise, because it will injure ppl for sure.
I'm glad to hear that tepid showers aren't hurting my gains.
Mike Jeff and Milo, the BIG THREE. Would love to see yall training together brodie or more colabs !
Eric Helms???
Barbell Medicine???
BM is a powerlifting channel
@@DarrenMcStravick Menno Henslemans
Lol Menno can eat a stick, he says so much bs
According to this sports dietician Elle kelly I follow on the grams, one of the best ways to keep your total energy expenditure from crashing is to simply feed your activity. So if you're working out, make sure to have a good amount of carbs before hand so your body isn't shocked and thinking it needs to conserve energy. AKA no fasted workouts.
hence the reason for low fat to be popular among dieticians, because it fuels workouts better than higher fat diets and one thing or another has to go when you are int a deficit.
Great point@@BigBADSTUFF69
I do full-body twice a week as that fits my schedule and my exercise style best and definitely found that high carb on the day before and day of plus some intraworkout carbs in my water bottles provided a huge benefit. I had drawn inspiration from Steve Reeves for my programming and listening to old interviews of his he talked about how he found long ago that what he ate the day before mattered most for performance which makes sense given what we know now about glycogen storage and carb loading. I make sure to always have at least a light breakfast before any morning workouts or to do it an hour after lunchtime when possible, fasted always resulted in miserable performance. As I'm in a recomp right now I let my calorie consumption go higher on the workout days than on the rest days and my weight has remained stable while strength and definition have continued to improve, the extra calories helps my recovery.
@@BigBADSTUFF69 yes given that fat contains more than double the calories reducing fat makes more room for protein and carbs. Not too low fat though, get at least 0.3g/lb bodyweight for best hormonal health.
For those of us who are 60 + years of age and are not able to have our body utilize protein as we used to, would 1 gram of protein per pound of body weight be a minimum, especially if resistance training 5 days a week and cardio workouts are 3 days a week at the end of resistance workouts and where a VO2 Max workout is once a week?
I'm sometimes tempted to bulk - not dirty bulk, but go into maybe a 2-300 calorie surplus for awhile to make some gains - but I don't do it because adding fat just seems to be a dumb thing for me to do, given my age, and given that I'm at a reasonably athletic body composition, which I'd be lucky if I could sustain for the rest of my life. So I was happy to hear Milo say that there's only a "marginal" benefit to bulking vs eating at maintenance for muscle gains. That removes any temptation I might have to think eating at maintenance means basically forgoing any gains. That was a very valuable insight for me. Thanks, Milo.
then try short bulk period for like 4 months at 2-300 calories and cut after that for 2-3 months. recomp is valid approach but you need to know what you are doing otherwise you end up spinning the wheels.
He didn't say bulking was a marginal difference. He said the size of the surplus doesn't need to be tremendous. 200-300 calories like you want to do isn't a tremendous bulk. He even said as long as you're gaining .5% bodyweight per month, then you're fine.
@@salvarunatortuga5396 Here's what Milo said, word for word, @11:46: "I think the research on actual bulking and how big your surplus should be ... doesn't suggest that there's as much of an effect on your hypertrophy as Mike suggests it. There is an effect, but that is achieved with a pretty small surplus to potentially no surplus. So the effect of going from maintenance into a surplus is very marginal."
Anybody thats ever done a bulk knows from experience that there absolutely is not just a marginal benefit. I'd like to see any studies that support that.
@@Twm532 I don't have studies because, unlike everyone else on social media, I don't pretend that I have the skill set to properly analyze nutrition/exericse studies. But I have done 3 successful bulks and from my personal experience it is a marginal benefit to bulk on more than ~250 calories a day. Milo saying this just furthers my belief that what I'm doing is correct. No need to do a tremendous bulk but you do need some surplus.
I think your best shoulder exercises video left out potentially the best front delt exercises. Dips and flat-low incline presses done with maximally tucked elbows (and potentially a neutral, shoulder-width grip) give a much greater stretch on the front delts and greater tension in a lengthened position compared to your recommended seated vertical pressing. Have you considered these movements for front delts?
I think the Hollywood/fitness industy’s ideal body type while lying about steroid use is way way worse than a natty or not videos. The body ideal looking like a jacked superhero isn’t really any different than the “heroin chic” body ideal that women dealt with in the 90s.
Do a reaction video to Eric Bugenhagen reacting to a nuclear reaction caused by his insane squatting.
On a personal note, I thoroughly enjoy Eric’s content (not for information, for the mentz)
@@WolfCoaching It's a mindset.
Love these three but especially how our greek king Leonidas beard (Milo) quantifies everything with actual literature, Still a huge fan of Mr Potato head (Mike) and Jeff
Love your stuff, can't wait for you to blow up!
Spannend, eure dzt. Standpunkte zu diesen Themen zu hören. Danke für's Teilen! Sag mal, Milo, veröffentlichst du irgendwo auch Videos/Artikel o. Ä. auf Deutsch?
Kräftige Grüße
Stavros
Question - maybe a video topic: Is muscle growth just a pain tolerance equation? Meaning if my nutrition is good - am I (or you) guaranteed to grow if I can just push 4 - 6 very very intense sets (after warmup sets) on a muscle 2X per week?
My legs are growing lately but shoulders and arms have plateaued. Arms stuck exactly 16" cold & 16 7/8 full pump - for about 6 weeks.
The answer is knock it off man...16" arms are more than enough...save some of that size for the rest of us, you selfish jerk.
I really don't like the argument thst "failure isn't better if you just do.more volume" yeah maybe but why would i do more volume if i don't have to
Because more volume has way stronger correlation with increased muscle growth than going to failure spread out over an actual program. That's why. You might grow more muscle on a per set basis or even in an entire workout but when that doesn't allow you to do as much next week and the week after that because you are accumulating more systemic fatigue it doesn't make a lot of sense.
Now doing 60 sets isn't practical either so there is a balance we all have to reach individually within our own programs on volume, load, and rep totals.
Hey Dr. Wolf. I tried out the Hamstring curl + Reverse Nordic curl superset from you leg training video yesterday. The Reverse Nordics felt kinda awkward on the knees. Does this go away eventually or am I probably doing it wrong (although I don’t think so, since I copied the form used in your video)?
For me it went away, but beware if your knees aren't ready for them.
Huge fan! Could you do a video on the recomposition study by Jose Antonio in 2015 or just recomposition in general?
i do bro split like this 4 day
1 Incline curl 3 set 8-10 rep
2 Preacher Curls 3 set 6-8 rep
3 Bench press 3 set 4-6 rep
4 Incline DB bench 3 set 8-10 rep
5 weighted Dips 3 set 6-8 rep
6 DB Flye 3 set 10-15 rep
7 Push ups 3 set to failure
1 Hatfield Squat 3 set 4-6 rep
2 RDL 3 set 8-10 rep
3 Leg Curl 3 set 8-10 rep
4 Hammstring Curls 3 set 8-10 rep
5 split squats 3 set 8=10 rep
6 Jefferson Curl 3 set 8-10 rep
7 Neck cable Curls 3 set 12-15 rep
1 Cable push downs 3 set 8-10 rep
2 cable overhead extension 3 set 8-10 rep
3 Barbell Row 3 set 8-10 rep
4 Weighted Neutral grip pull ups 3 set 5-6 rep
5 DB-Shrugs 3 set 8-10 rep
6 Seated Cable Low-Row 3 set 8-10 rep
7 Cable pulldown 3 set to failure
1 Single Arm Dumbbell Press 2 Sets x 4-7 Reps
2 Behind the Neck Overhead Press 3 Sets x 8-10 Reps
3 Seated pin press 3 Sets x 8-10 Reps
4 Dumbbell Lateral Raise 3 Sets x 8-12 Reps
5 Single Arm Cable Side Lateral Raise 2 Sets x 8-10 Reps
6 Lying Face Pulls 3 Sets x 8-12 Reps
7 Ab wheel 3 Sets x 8-12 Repsm
This was kinda like a Meta -analysis in video form 🤘 thanks for the video!
Who is this wolf guy? Does he howl while doing lengthened partials?
I mean .. If Phd people give opposite idea wouldn't it means that everything all of you guys said was subjective on your own interpretation of the studies you based your knowledge about ? So would it means that maybe 25-50% of what the sciences guys said are irrevelant and biased on your own understanding ?
I think Mike doesn’t read the studies he talks about, or he reads them with a bias. You see that when he interviews study authors.
Having a PHD in this industry typically means that person is arrogant but has no idea what they're talking about. As per most of Milo's recent videos unfortunately.
Exercise science is still understudied so in practical application there is a lot of hand-wavey grey area that still has yet to be discovered. They aren't really disagreeing on the science they are disagreeing on things like whether a pump is important or practical. That said, scientific consensus is about statistics, you will never have 100% of people agree with your interpretation, but it becomes accepted if enough experts accept your interpretation. Science is much more fluid than you think and understanding changes over time.
@@BigBADSTUFF69 Lots of things are open to interpretation sure. Some things aren't as open to interpretation. Such as Milo saying the best lat exercise is a DB Pullover (which isn't a lat exercise) and when Dr Mike says one set to failure is too fatiguing (not backed up in the data whatsoever)
@@berryvolcano3787 what is your basis to discredit db pullover as lat exercise?
Completely misrepresenting what Dr Mike said on soreness, You Would think That a ”Dr” could listen to an argument spoken in perfect english and get the main points🤔
He never Said it should be your focus or anything like that, only if you’re not progressing, adding volume, growing or pushing yourself hard enough TRYING to get sore can be useful since those factors are going to cause growth (not the soreness itself)
@@mac5917pretty similar to how mikes views on failure are misrepresented often. Time and place for failure means avoiding failure to smooth brains
Love your content Dr. Wolf.
Dr Jim Stoppani is a knowledgeable biochemist with a background in bio mechanics with a Facebook page that has transformed hundreds if not thousands of people. He provides a lot of great information but I would love to see another doctor or professional
critique his advice.
Great analysis earned a sub
That was a bit of a misrepresentation of Mike's pump argument. He said it can tell you that you're hitting the target muscle(s), which is absolutely true. He didn't make any magical hypertrophy claims there.
As Nippard pointed out recently, it's still the case that most elite-level bodybuilders do bro-splits (and that certain includes some who participate in tested events fwiw, like Adam Powe).
I would even put it thusly; the amount of gymgoers who seriously train for hypertrophy >1 a week on most muscle groups is actually really small indeed i.e. probably in the single digits percentage-wise.
I agree bro-splits probably aren't optimal, though actually I think arguments can be made that they are quite utilisable for casual lifters who want to look good in a t-shirt, or even naked. I also think they don't need a lot of modification to be really quite good - a bit of added accessory work to hit shoulders and arms on other days, a bit of cgbp and vertical pulling on arm day, a few leg extensions at the end of chest day even - what NH would call a gentleman's bro-split I guess. Ppl are going to be able to get jacked just fine this way.
it's really going to depend how heavy and how much volume you are lifting. If one guy is doing sets of 12 at 325 vs a beginner doing sets of 12 at 125, the weaker person will be recovered sooner in general. Pro bodybuilders are also likely doing the amount of sets in one day than a novice will do in 2 or three.
@@BigBADSTUFF69 That's true but they're still going to get adaptations because they're beginners so once a week would still be fine. Though again, if you look at say Adam Powe.... is he really doing much more than 10-12 working sets in a session? Admittedly some of hiswarm-up sets probably do contribute to volume, but that's a controversial point.
@@alanfarquharhillyeah beginners are fine with low volume but quickly adapt and then need to add more volume. The amount of days per week really isn't the key thing, it's sets per week and overall volume.
@@BigBADSTUFF69 Tbh I think the emphass on weekly volume theory in the yt fitness meta is too big, but 6-8 hard sets per week should be enough to stimulate growth for the bigger muscle groups in most cases. If it's a weakpoint, yes you might want more and yes you might want to 2x a bodypart, but there are ways to accommodate that whilst essentially retaining a bro split.
It keeps getting ignored that the bro split became common with the pros when PEDs became common with them as well. Without the juice keeping protein synthesis going past 48 hrs the bro split doesn't make sense. There's a reason the pre-steroid era was dominated by whole body workouts three times per week.
Finally someone disagrees with Dr Mike about soreness. I’ve never felt that soreness was good indication that you’re growing.
Did Mike ever say that though? In the context of Mike's other videos it sounds like what he was trying to say is that soreness and pump, while lacking in direct evidence proving they indicate growth, are still good indicators of stimulus. You're not getting sore or pumped in a muscle you've not worked. In comparison to say mind muscle connection which they both deemed overrated.
@@renyygade yes plus his app will up your volume if you indicate that you’re not sore.
Oh before I watch, I predict a big beef. Long back and forth feud.
I've definitely watched a lot of Dr. Mike and learned a lot of fundamentals and programming from him, but I do also think he has maybe relatively more opinions about training than other exercise science educators, while presenting them as facts based on the evidence. Or being more provocative, hard to draw the line, but he's usually more steep and strict about his takes on exercise science and training methods (in his content, seems like in discussions he's rather friendly and open to different takes). So I've come to learn to take him seriously when he talks about exercise science, but also with a grain of salt and slightly in my mind rounding out his takes. And of course always comparing it to what others in the field say and try to construct a reasonable opinion how to apply it myself. Fairly regularly there's also the caveat of talking strictly about muscle building whereas I've grown more interested about more towards applications, for example facilitating sports performance and suddenly the rules of training change.
What's interesting is how relatively old this original video is. It's not old in absolute terms, but there's been quite a bit of research in these topics since, that has given somewhat strong update on it towards one way or another, giving more detail for sure.
I wasn't aware Pak was in the ice bath study, but then again he has probably a long list of them that I don't know about.
I still grow without always getting a pump. My progress tends to build regardless.
To quote Rick and Morty, there's nothing more meta than watching people on UA-cam, watching people on UA-cam.
Will you release your training program in the future sir ?
if ur trying to work a muscle, and you get a pump in that muscle, you can assume that the target muscle is being worked. that’s what mike said and he’s correct
pump ftw ! PRO tip for free: if you move weights around and don't get pump in the muscle you are trying to train but get a pump in some other muscle, you are most likely not training the muscle that you think you are 😉 even if pump does not correlate at all with hypertrophy it is at least an indicator that shows you that you are doing at least something that is good. There is 100% no way that you get to failure or close and not feel any pump. Scientifically, it would be impossible to study pump since there is not many ways to measure it accurately and it's just a "trust me bro, I feel really pumped now", but from that until saying that pump is not an indicator that at least you are trainig the muscles that you are actually trying to train, it's just holding the cow by the horns and insisting there is no evidence that the cow has horns.
On the soreness, I always get sore after testing a one rep max and training hard cardio--neither of which is a good stimulus for hypertrophy
What are your thoughts on isolating the pec minor and serratus anterior via scapular protraction?
HELP..... I broke both arms in a car accident. How do I try and minimize muscle loss while I heal? I'm 46, 6'2", 210 lbs and probably 12-15% body fat now.
Squat
As much as i like them both, they do sometimes like to pass of their own personal anecdotes as "science"
For example jeffs recent best back exercises using science.
Then proceeds to rate lat pulldown as better than pull-ups because he "feels it" more.
Thats not science jeff.
Sometimes i feel like superman, doesn't mean i am.
His video was not "rank them using science" it was "We’ll be judging the exercises based on three criteria: 1) stretch and tension, 2) good feel, and 3) simple progression". so how it feels is part of his criteria. That said, "feel" was not the reason it was ranked a tiny bit higher than pullups.
But they put those words in quotations, I assume to let you know that it's a biased list? They even clarify at times that if you find something that isn't "optimal" for the average person but gives you great results, then to KEEP DOING IT.
Of the many dozens of fitness influencers out there, I think those two do a pretty good job of explaining their POV while also saying "figure it out for yourself".
I also have to disagree with Dr. Mike here. I think there's a lot of factors probably going into getting a muscle sore and I can at least speak from experience that in my quad training I don't usually get that sore anymore. It's not like that when training hamstrings. Doing hamstrings I usually get sore for a couple of days, but my quads usually only get maybe slightly sore for one or two days. Even when I increase the number of sets by two or three, which I have done test-wise, it usually doesn't make a big difference in muscle soreness for my quads. Yet my squat numbers are consistently going up.
Mike never said that you need to get sore all the time. He said that it's one good indicator of the target muscle being stimulated.
I think when it comes to pump and muscle soreness it's more about comparison of two versions of training where one gives you clearly more pump/soreness then the other while keeping both optimal. I would suspect that if no other factors are changed, then the version which gives more DOMS/pump COULD be better. Definitely not good signs to base your judgement on but could be useful when it comes to really narrowing down your exercise selection or deciding which way of training works for you better. Just thinking out loud really but still some food for thought ;d
That's the funny thing about literature, anybody can interpret it the way that they want it interpreted if they themselves aren't the author. Just as this video claims quite a few times that he thinks, Dr. Mike is incorrect In certain instances, we could say the same thing back about Milo's opinion on his interpretation of these topics. I think they're all correct, just depends on the direction of your thought process as you interpret each of their statements. Thought he was too critical of Dr. Mikes views, claiming them incorrect as opposed to seeing their validity and how they could both be correct in nuanced ways. After watching a 2nd time, it honestly feels like you need to put some respect on Mike's name. He invited you on and had polite disagreements but the way you're referring to him comes off wrong. Don't let that official piece of paper in your hands that you finally earned inflate your sense of being an all knowing encyclopedia of correct.
Do cold showers promote wakefulness or help cognitive sharpness?
Yes. No. Maybe. If you believe it does.
Really, its all correct at different times in our lifting career and for different people. I dont think there are any absolute principles apart from the very basics... ie lifting safely and gradually increasing weight.
Still my favorite person on YT!
Let's run through Milo's points since we are all about rating shit. This is the problem when you have someone who literally won't listen to anything that can't be observed in a lab and measured and therefore thinks it is incorrect to have an opinion on anything that can't be verified with direct evidence. So in reality, Milo should be training with about the six exercises that are regularly performed in lab settings.
1. Not a lot of injury risk for uncontrolled concentric/eccentric.
Dipshit take. Just because a study of a bunch of untrained folks doesn't show it doesn't mean we can't make very basic inferences. Like the greatest force in most lifts occurs at the transition point between the two stages and if you move through that transition at a high velocity and without control you are exacerbating the risk for injury.
2. Soreness and Pumps. Same as above. Can't be observed in a lab, so must be fake. No one is saying that if you do RDLs and dont feel your hamstrings or dont get sore that you didn't lift. Learn your body. Strong case for their use as a proxy. Weak case for using them as a determinative factor in evaluating. Which no one that is saying use it as one of multiple proxies for evaluating your real world workouts is suggesting.
3. Going to failure. Again, just dumb semantics. yes, everyone agrees going to failure is gonna grow more muscle. There is also general agreement you should occasionally go to failure. Milo admits that we dont know how much, we dont know the bell curve of the effect, we dont know how it impacts programs where you are doing even a medium amount of volume spread out across even 3-4 workouts (Something Milo himself recommends). So again, hasn't been done in a lab so we can't have any opinions, even ones that are logical inferences from what we have direct evidence for.
4. Bulking/Cutting vs recomping. Again, semantics. Recomping is where you aren't actively trying to maintain even a small surplus. Which the literature shows is not only good, but necessary. Criticizing recomping is not an endorsement of massive bulk surpluses.
5. Diet breaks. I personally don't think studies are ever going to accurately reflect reality here because when not participating in a study, their is imo a much higher tendency for genpop folks to give in to their diet fatigue. This is again a limitation of the "only look at studies and turn off your brain" approach. The argument is not that diet breaks make a given diet phase more effective or have some kind of impact on your metabolic rate. The argument is they significantly help adherence over the long run, measured in months and years. Which is way outside the confines of most studies
6. Clean eating. Again, dumb semantics. The research doesn't look at population level data over a long period because no one cares that much to pay for that kind of study. Eating clean is not a mandate to never eat anything you enjoy. it is saying that generally avoiding calorically dense high palatability foods puts you in a better position to succeed. This is especially true when you consider the opportunity cost of fucking up once a week and how quickly that erases everything you have done the other 6 days. Again, just not something studies can easily get at because of the conditions and funding/man hour limitations
Milo clearly trains. He clearly does a lot of shit there is not sufficient direct evidence for but he makes inferences along logical lines.
It is what makes some of his videos so incredibly frustrating because it is just "I need content so lets get into extreme semantics"
Feels like Greg Nuckols and Menno Henselmans points are usually more backed up by direct research than someone like Mike.
Greg is honestly really underrated
How about advice for old fat broken guys like me?
Mark wildman has a few videos about it. Take some of the advice with a grain of salt, I think his outlook on barbell training is flawed, but otherwise he has great ideas on training deconditioned individuals.
us old fat guys arent all that dissimilar to others.
do a lot of walking, focus on technique when lifting and keep plenty of reps in reserve, higher frequency and moderate volume.
14:44 How the hell it is possible to be micronutrient deficient if you eat clean? Clean foods are whole foods with the most nutrient density!? What kind of study is that ?
Define "eating clean". Also whole foods are not always more nutrient dense in the right micronutrients as fortified foods.
I haven't yet watch that video fully. I am at 1:45ish. I really like your reaction videos. Great format. And I need to say that this looks like a wrong video format to react to. Kind of like you would like to be a part of the discussion but you are unwanted there. I know this is not a case and that you did coop with Mike as well. But it looks kind of lame.
Mike's the man..
I feel like Dr. Mike is coming to the topic of pumps through science-based approach (our general understanding how body works), while Dr. Milo is looking for direct evidence, which is absent at the time.
Shouldn't pay attention to pump? I'm not saying one should chase the pump at all cost, but once the targeted muscle is pumped is 1. a very good feeling and 2. a good indicator of high stimulus and of how much work there's left to be done for that body part. Isn't it a kind of direct feedback from your body?
But yeah I can't provide a citation of untrained individuals training to volitional failure on leg extension where pump was measured with Bayesian statistics to substantiate my claim.
IMO Mike Israetel's book "Scientific Principles of Hypertrophy Training" has more pseudo-science in it than science. It was a waste of almost 50 quid but it was an important lesson.
People seem more likely to accept something if it's dressed up in scientific jargon - but sometimes that jargon makes very little sense when you really think about it.
Milo is coming off as pedantic in all his most recent videos. Getting jacked is not like sending rockets to space. We don't need 10 studies on every subject before we can have a rational opinion on something. If someone with a PHD in a relevant field is discussing "rocket shit" I'm going to shut the fuck up and listen, because I don't build or launch rockets. But I, and millions of other people, can go in a gym and lift heavy shit and get bigger muscles. Using DOMS and Pump as proxies for stimulus, for the purpose of measuring potential hypertrophy, has worked for decades, for countless people. Is it 100% perfect? Nope. What short term metric is available for the average person to use that is 100% accurate? Keep in mind I said short term measure, and available to the average person. If you are putting in your best effort, approaching failure, get a great pump and experience some soreness, you are almost certainly getting a stimulus that will trigger hypertrophy. That is all Dr. Mike says. How that opinion could possibly be "wrong", just because we don't have enough studies for Milo, is beyond my understanding. Even in areas where we have studies in this field they often contradict, or are at least not in agreement on all their finding. So, I hope Dr. Milo changes his approach and tone in future videos. I hope he offers a more generous interpretation of the statements/opinions of others, and demonstrates more humility in the expression of his own.
just like doctors prescribe treatment for illness, the goal with exercise science is to provide evidence that training works. No one is attacking you bro, he's just trying to understand what works and what doesn't in a way that's repeatable and backed with evidence. You seem to be offended by that somehow but it has nothing to do with you.
You dont have to watch him lol
@@watsonkushmaster3067 Fair enough.
@@BigBADSTUFF69 Hey there. I don't think Milo is attacking me; he doesn't even know I exist. Also, I'm not offended. I simply dislike how pedantic he is becoming and this hubris when comparing and contrasting his opinions with others. Not liking some aspects of his presentations, and being "offended" are not the same thing. Have a great day.
Sports scientists are are useful in figuring out why bro science works in the first place (or doesn't actually work sometimes) but that's about it.
very good video to make analysis on
The problem with these videos is that studies in every field are corrupted. Like anything else, there is always a study that agrees with you if you look for it. Using "meta" studies for anything is not usually a good idea. Taking ten or so (usually bad) studies and claiming that when put together, they equal one good study, isn't how the world works. The vast majority of the studies that he points to are meta.
On soreness bro misrepresented what mike just said immediately after he said it 😅
lol……nippard looked guilty when they were discussing natty videos
But... The videos of people hyperextending their knees on the left press 😳
Watching Milo’s videos has sort of illuminated how much of dr. Mikes and other evidence based influencer types are based on their own personal experience. That’s not a bad thing necessarily but it’s good to know where the “rules” can be bent without being counterproductive.
Even though all agree that results would be better with higher frequency, I actually do just one whole body hypertrophy session once per week, for the exclusive reason that I only have time and recovery capacity for that amount of hypertrophy training. Thanks for arguing with people, realDR. 🐺
please rate stephanie sancho workout
Bulking so you gain a percent of weight per MONTH of bodyweight is 95 percent of gains? That cannot be right
LET THE GAMES BEGIN!
My favourite fitness drama channel is back!
as a fatty that has lost 40 lbs in the last year, I do find that certain "palatable foods" do trigger my hunger and avoiding them does help me stick to my diet. I'm just a lot less hungry when I eat simple and (relatively) boring. I'm not sure how much it actually has to do with "processing" though because I eat protein bars every day and they are fine, it seems more based on the holy trinity of fat/salt/sugar in things like salted caramel ice cream
What is a 5 a day and a 10 a day?
9:44 Dont you mean 0.5% - 1% of bodyweight a week?
It’s fascinating to me that Paul Carter would agree with pretty much everything Dr. Wolf said but there r like one or two takes not in the video that’s the cause of all their debate. Keep up the great videos 🤝
Great
Looking like a jacked Milo Ventimiglia
Hey Milo, are you aware of the negative evaluations made of you by TNF and especially Paul Carter on TikTok? I saw Paul call you some not so kind words in a comment on a TNF video. Just wondering what your thoughts are on the explosion of layman influencers seemingly thinking they understand exercise physiology and science better than scientists
Dr. Wolf, count me incredibly disappointed that you didn't cover any recent meta-analysis of the NO FAP method. Clearly an error of omission that can be reconciled. Otherwise, great video.
The difference between Dr. Mike and Dr. Milo is that Milo can only read studies, while Mike incorporates his own experience based on the real world into his points of view
the hell are you talking about? Milo is pretty damn strong and has competed in bodybuilding.
Milo looks great. And he’s natural and about 6’2” so putting on muscle for him is more difficult than someone that’s short and on gear.
I very much doubt Milo is without real world experience from his owk or others training.
That was a grt video
How did you watch a 20 min video in 4 minutes?
4 TIME SPEED PLAYBACK GANG 🚀
I’m telling Dr Mike on you 😝
🙌🏻
Thank you Ali!
It’s clear he sees Mike as his competition, so he jumps at every chance to disagree with him. It’s also clear he idolizes Jeff as a UA-cam celebrity, so he jumps at every chance to agree and be supportive.
That's what I was thinking 😂 he thinks he's better than Dr.Mike
For the algorithm
Milo, if I can critique your content here in the hopes it continues to improve. This is a tough video to watch, not because of you or your additions, but because I have already watched the video in question. Your reaction video could have been much, much shorter and better if you had cut out some parts of the video that are not necessary to react to. I know that i'm nitpicking and that removing three to five seconds at a time sounds bullshit, but it would have made for a better video that would appeal more to a wider range than it already does. It mostly feels like i'm rewatching the video and every minute or two it jump cuts to you to respond. I think the better format would have been for you to also immediately responded with your own rating, condense their explanation and leave just enough context and then add your own opinion with evidence. Really small changes but I hope you are receptive and don't dismiss it as an attack
Poor guy obviously has a chip on his shoulder towards Dr. Mike.
FOR THINE ALGORITHM!!!
Cleaver manipulation of the manipulated algorithm 👏👏👏
Hello
✝️💪
I guess I'm just too old for the reaction to the reaction video thing. He's also faking that accent.
"natty" is a ridiculous trendy name. Just say natural.
When they said training to failure is overrated…I bursted out laughing 😂😂. These guys have no idea what they are talking about.
Natty.... Please... for the love of God, please stop saying natty.
Yawn
Training twice a week is only beneficial in the short term…which is what these studies cover….but….over the long term once a week to once every 2 weeks is optimal as you get stronger... You just have to look at the silent graveyard of failed physiques who try to train a muscle 2 to 3 times a week. Not sustainable for the average genetic lifter.
wut? Dont you guys (you, Mike, Dr Pak, jeff) all come from the Schoenfeld stable? this reminds me of Ben Shapiro critiquing Trump's presidency, or Stephen Colbert critiquing Biden.
yes, discussion is important to figure out what's important and meaningful
What a terrible attitude to have towards life
@@LePrimo420 It is but he's correct here, they all circle jerk the same misinterpretations of data like some boys club, it's bad for the industry.
@@berryvolcano3787I would love to hear your hot take on what they have misinterpreted.
@@berryvolcano3787Milo said quad extensions are like the worst for hypertrophy, when Dr Soko another dude with a PHD and Schoen disagreeing
Imo it's better you handle other people than Dr.Mike. He is a very good source, where there are very bad sources.
I believe Dr.Mike over you. I stop watching your videos now.
Did you even watch the video? They agree on a lot, dumbass
Dunno how anyone can watch Nippard tbh