It’s becoming clear that a lot of published research is unreplicable and untrustworthy. How do incorrect findings occur, and how can we predict whether the results of a particular study are likely to be sound?
There is a lot of debate about training frequency for muscle growth. See what the data actually say.
There’s a lot of debate about the effects of training frequency for strength gains. However, the data are surprisingly clear.
How do factors like age, strength, or sex impact strength gains in competitive powerlifters (not just untrained subjects in a lab setting)? I analyzed the data of almost 20,000 competitors, and these are the results.
Due to the significance of systematic reviews and meta-analyses, we’ve put together a list and short take-home message of many recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses so you can cut straight to the chase of the results.
There are a lot of misconceptions about strength training for women. This article clearly lays out what the research says about male vs. female strength and muscle growth, and the inferences we can draw from those findings.
Bodybuilders preach the importance of the “mind-muscle connection.” However, when you’re actually putting full effort into your reps, does that focus on the target muscle actually affect muscle activation?
In Part 2 of this concurrent training series, we will cover the molecular exercise physiology of concurrent training and provide some application for concurrent programming.
In all but one fringe case, knowing about the labeling error on foods is fun trivia, but doesn’t actually affect the utility of tracking calorie intake in the real world.
Before discussing periodization, you should have a thorough understanding of what the research says. In this article, we provide a comprehensive, quantitative overview of the periodization research.