Сегодня битва с дураками (с)
Хороший совет, как вести дискуссию с мудаками из околофитнесовского мира.
Lets say I claim: "I use a special new series of abdominal exercises that exclusively targets and burns (spot reduces) belly fat."
You say: "But science shows we can't spot reduce."
I reply: I don't care what the science says, I've seen it work."
You say: "You're wrong! You're behind on the science"
I say: "No, the science hasn't looked at my special new approach to spot reduction. Research is always behind trainers (like me) who innovate; I'm ahead of the research."
You say: "Here are a bunch of studies that show that spot reduction doesn't occur in any meaningful way." (And you provide some links to studies).
I say: "You can find a study to support anything. Plus, there are plenty of experts who've written books and teach courses who have great success with spot reduction methods like I use."
You say: "That's an erroneous comment - 'You can find a study to support anything' - because science works on a consensus basis. Meaning: It's not what "one" study says, it's about what the predominant amount of research says. And, the predominant body of research says that spot reduction is myth, making your claims most likely (if not definitely) false. Also, mentioning that 'experts' say 'they're winning with this' is an appeal to authority: a logical fallacy, which doesn't provide any good evidence of validity. Especially when we have good science saying otherwise."
I say: "You're not qualified to comment on my techniques because you've never used them. Plus, the science hasn't looked at my special method, and I'm not going to wait for the science to eventually come out just to show me that what I'm doing is working when I see it everyday."
You say: "I'm not giving my opinions, I'm showing you the evidence. Of course these studies haven't looked at exactly the exercises or precise method you're using, but since no other method has been shown to work for the purpose of spot reduction, it's safe to say that it's unlikely yours does either. Not to mention, this isn't a question of your special method; it's a question of human physiology. And, it goes against the principles of human physiology that any exercise method will work for spot reduction. That is, unless you believe that the principles of physiology cease to exist when people use your special method?"
I say: "You're just a negative person who has insulted me, and the many other smart people who have a similar training approach. Are you saying they're all crazy, too? And, you're a contrarian who's closed-minded to all new ideas. I'm over here trying to help people while you're just hating and providing nothing of use for anyone."
You say: "I never insulted anyone, not did I call anyone crazy or claim to be smarter than anyone; I just explained that because of your claims (that you can spot reduce belly fat) have been falsified in scientific evidence and go against the principles of human physiology, they are most likely false. And, you've yet to provide any good evidence to dispute this except for INTERNAL validation like saying that other experts use it and that you see it working. In this world, we need EXTERNAL validation (objective evidence); otherwise your claims are no different than anyone else's who use different methods and claim that they "see" their clients getting better results than yours. How could you prove them wrong w/o external evidence? Also, you're the closed-minded one because you
1) refuse to acknowledge any disconformity evidence,
2) you've convinced yourself you're right because you keeping telling yourself and others that "science hasn't caught up with my genius yet."
3) In addition to the evidence being against you, you also fail to consider the high likelihood that your experiences along with the other "experts" you mentioned are loaded with a variety of cognitive biases (like confirmation bias).
So, you're not only saying you're ahead of the research community, but that you're also impervious to any cognitive bias or self-delusion. By the way, how would you know that you weren't delusional w/o external validation through scientific testing? Furthermore, I'm not at all being negative, in fact I'm 'contributing' to the betterment of the fitness field. In that, by bringing up that your claims have been falsified, I'm helping trainers to avoid confusion about whether spot reduction is a real thing, and saving them (and they're clients) from wasting their valuable training time (and money) on a concept that intuitively sounds good, but doesn't hold up to scientific rigor."
I put this (imaginary exchange) together to give you some perspective on what it's like to be me (or Jonathan Fass or Jason Silvernail) in discussions like this, because the arguments that "I" made above (erroneously defending the position that spot training works) are exactly the same arguments I get here on FB almost daily from smart trainers who argue against an evidence-based approach, and/or attempt to justify their beliefs and practices based on poor or non-existent evidence. Just take out the words "spot reduction" in my arguments portion above, and simply and plug in the name of any other training practice/claim that are based on poor or nonexistent evidence, and you'll have almost the exact argument I hear repeatedly from trainers. In other words, although the discussion topic (training practice/claim) may change along with the individuals arguing for them, when you're basing beliefs about a particular training practice/claim on poor or non-existent evidence, the arguments are always the same. And, they STINK every time! The example I provided above highlights that very well!
Nick Tummilello