In my last article, I pushed back against the idea that being “science-based” automatically makes a training method superior. That piece (which you should definitely check out for the full context) made it clear that research and evidence have their place, but they aren’t infallible. In this follow-up, I’d like to argue that bro science deserves a place in your training toolbox as part of a holistic approach towards fitness.
Science-Only Training? Not So Fast
“Science-based training” has become the holy grail in fitness circles. Don’t get me wrong, using scientific research to inform your workouts is a good thing. What’s not so good is the attitude that anything not verified by a study is worthless (and what's even worse is the idea that anything verified by a study is somehow useful).
Let’s push back on the notion that only lab-validated methods “count.” Science is an amazing tool, but it’s not a one-size-fits-all instruction manual for every individual. If you’ve spent any time around serious lifters, you know they often figure out what works through trial, error, and experience. Dismissing all of that hard-earned wisdom just because it isn’t written up in a journal article is a mistake. There’s a difference between being scientific and being dogmatic.
The goal should be effective training, not just feeling superior about being “science-based.” So yes, read the studies and learn from them – but don’t forget that gains ultimately come from what you do in the gym, not just what you read on paper.
Exercise Science Has Huge Research Problems
If we’re going to trust science, we should also acknowledge its limitations. The world of exercise science is not as ironclad as some may think, and ironically, many of those shouting “science only!” haven’t looked too closely at the research they idolize. Here are a few reasons the science itself can be flawed, incomplete, or not universally applicable:
- Tiny sample sizes: A huge number of fitness studies have very few participants – often under 10 people in a trial. That’s a ridiculously small group to base “universal” training recommendations on. What works (or doesn’t) for eight college dudes over 8 weeks might not hold true for the broader population of lifters.
- Untrained or atypical subjects & artificial conditions: Research often uses convenience samples (hello, college freshmen). Results from untrained beginners may not apply to experienced athletes who’ve been grinding for years. Moreover, studies try to isolate variables in tightly controlled settings – useful for science, but far removed from the messy reality of real-life training. In a study, everyone might eat the same meals, do the same workout, and sleep 8 hours. Real life isn’t like that. Your lifestyle, genetics, and stress levels aren’t replicated in a lab, so a study’s findings might only tell part of the story.
- Flip-flopping findings and fads: Scientific knowledge is always evolving, but it also means today’s “evidence-based optimal method” might be tomorrow’s outdated news. We’ve seen it time and again: a new study comes out and gets hyped as the new gospel of training, only to be tempered or contradicted by later research. One month everyone is preaching heavy slow lifts because a study said tempo is key; a few months later, a new paper says tempo doesn’t matter and now it’s all about volume (or insert whatever trend). If you’ve watched the fitness space over the years, you know these pendulum swings. Science-based influencers trumpet a finding, then quietly backpedal when the next study nuances or negates it. It’s hard to keep up!
The point is, science is an ever-moving target. Many exercise studies are building blocks, not final verdicts. They often raise as many questions as they answer. So while we absolutely should respect scientific research, we also shouldn’t act like it’s infallible scripture. Even researchers will tell you their findings are just pieces of a puzzle. In the meantime, where does that leave someone looking to get jacked today? This is where anecdotal evidence and bro science step in.
The Wisdom of Bros
“Bro science” is the catch-all term for gym lore, training tips, and nutritional strategies passed around by lifters, usually based on experience rather than scientific studies. It’s often used derisively, but let’s give credit where it’s due: anecdotal evidence has value. For one, it’s practical and immediately actionable. Science-based research might take years to catch up to what lifters already know works through experience. Gym wisdom is built from trial and error. If something has worked for thousands of lifters over decades… there’s probably something to it.
