Eric Helms on Interpreting and Using Training Research, for Gainz ;)

Podcast • by

Also on Spotify.

How can we stay up to date with training research? What is the point of even trying to do so when we have studies coming out that seemingly contradict one another so often?

Fresh off of finishing up his Ph.D., I welcome Eric Helms back on the podcast to explain why these seeming contradictions exist, how research can be useful, and the tools we can use to stay on top of it.

We begin with a story of the hard realities of conducting the type of studies we want – those that will tell us how to get more jacked and ripped. Eric, as always, totally crushes this. I hope you enjoy this conversation with my friend, co-author, researcher, geek, powerlifter, bodybuilder, and highly sought-after coach, Eric Helms.

Selected links

Show notes

  • Eric talks about his Ph.D. work. – Eric is feeling confident in his upcoming defense of his Ph.D. based on RPE. [2:00]
  • Are scientific studies on training garbage? – There seems to be a conflict in the studies that are being released without a long-term approach. Eric sees people struggling with the conflicting scientific studies that have been completed. The media will often grab onto one new study that contradicts previous studies or the norm. Unfortunately, you cannot conduct a study on a Facebook group. Finding a large group of highly trained individuals that are willing to partake in a long study with a likely sub-optimal program is very challenging. Eric reflects on a challenging powerlifting study he completed in New Zealand. Eric agrees that an untrained or elderly population study is likely not nearly as applicable as a study using trained individuals. [4:30]
  • The funding gap between recreation and health. – The funding simply is not available for something considered to be recreation when there are more critical problems with human health. [11:00]
  • Instagram skewing perspective. – 500lbs squats and 365lbs bench presses seem like an average level of strength because of social media. However, if you can squat 315lbs and bench press 225lbs, you are likely in the upper 10% of trained individuals. [12:00]
  • Eric talks about Bryce Lewis. – Eric talks about how he believes Bryce Lewis is the best “105er”, in the context of powerlifting. [13:30]
  • Latching onto a specific study. – People tend to gravitate to studies that support what they are already following. Sometimes these studies are popularized through the media without really having substantial scientific support. Or, as Andy mentions, there might be some shady supplement funding going on. Eric speaks to a number of scientists that have admitted to skewing studies favorably due to external influence. [14:50]
  • Specific examples of scientists that have not been honest. – Ancel Keys did the Minnesota semi-starvation study and the Seven country study on saturated fats. Ancel Keys really believed in the hypostasis and picked the relevant data. [18:00]
  • How Eric keeps himself honest. – Eric focuses on his goal to help people as an evidence-based researcher. There is a constant balance between double checking yourself and making sure you are not becoming someone’s guru. [20:00]
  • On Gary Taubes. – Eric suggests that scientific data is very inaccessible to the average person. Andy reflects on calling out Gary at the Epic Fitness Summit. [21:30]
  • Belief vs. Evidence. – If you have a belief, it doesn’t really matter what the evidence shows. Religion is good to tell you how to live, but not an explanation of how things work. Really focus on changing your language to science-based. [23:00]
  • MASS. – This is the first time Andy has ever promoted something like MASS (Monthly Application in Strength Sport), a monthly research review. Andy admits he does not have the time or the skill to review all the scientific studies. MASS really helps put all the research into perspective. There is video content to make the content more accessible, in addition to written articles. [25:15]
  • Spot fat loss study. – A recent study has come out showing that there can be regional fat loss based on muscle activity in the same region. However, how does a study like this get interpreted? DEXA was used in this study, but even this method is not perfect. Eric suggests that this could be a real finding, even though it is divergent from the other six studies. The key difference is that cardio was performed after the weight training sessions. If the blood flow can be improved to an area from weight training, followed by cardio, it is conceivable that more fat might be burned on a regional basis. However, would this study really apply to trained lean individuals? Consider the interference effect of cardio after weight training. [29:30]
  • Mechanistic study versus speculation. – There was a mechanistic study that came to the conclusion that adjacent adipose tissue to an exercising muscle, will receive greater levels of blood flow. The study on regional fat loss was not mechanistic and was seemingly speculative as to why the regional fat loss was happening. [39:00]
  • Eric’s advice based on the regional fat loss study. – Unless you are shredded, this study does not really apply. If you are shredded and have proven stubborn fat loss areas, there may be something to take away from the study. That said, it is not highly actionable data. [40:20]
  • Watch out for the big media outlets. – Andy thinks that the big fitness magazines will pick up this story. However, for someone who is subscribed to MASS, it would be easier to stay on track with what’s really important. Be a smart bro. [43:00]
  • Competition in the evidence-based fitness industry. – Eric doesn’t see MASS as a competitive product from other evidence-based fitness resources. The market is simply too small to compete and he feels like MASS will work synergistically with other research reviews. [45:30]

Thank you for listening! – Andy and Eric

Share this on Facebook & join in the conversation

Got a question? Ask me below

Please keep questions on topic, write clearly, concisely, and don't post diet calculations.

guest

Privacy policy.

0 Comments
Scroll to Top