IGX

seeahill wrote:

Gin Master wrote:I like how Garrett said he wasn't going out like Josh Hillis (the poor bastard).

Since Josh Hillis is my absolute fav celebrity fitness guru, I'd love to know how he went out.

Pretty much on fire...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74Obm6bEH80[/youtube]

This thread is a perpetual hate machine.

So Couch and several others are slated to be presenting at the American Society of Exercise Physiologists conference.

Boy, I sure hope no one notifies ASEP of Couch's quotes like these:

My initial fear was that we might just add to the silliness of "exercise physiology" that is all to often not up to the expected rigors of the hard sciences and bizarrely indifferent to studying and advancing human performance or even discussing it in the kinematic terms universaly accepted, and demanded, for meaningful study of all movement.

Who might do such a thing? No one here, I'm sure.

Maybe there will be some science applied to understanding the safety and efficacy of crossfit...instead of just scientific like talk about the science applied to it. I do expect the science has already been done, which is why the world was not "crossfitting" already. Who knows, maybe the equipment companies lobbied to supress the science in an effort to increase sales, much like the auto companies squashed the use of rails in the US, that would be something!

Joe wrote:I do expect the science has already been done, which is why the world was not "crossfitting" already.

People have been "crossfitting" forever. Interval training, oly lifts, etc. are not new. They're just being rediscovered by the masses.

And you far overestimate the state of science in fitness.

Joe wrote:The re-cap was just a few pages back...but it looks like he is still going strong, even without the support of cooch:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeNQuAmgAr0[/youtube]

I wonder how much her feet grew though.

nafod wrote:

Joe wrote:I do expect the science has already been done, which is why the world was not "crossfitting" already.

People have been "crossfitting" forever. Interval training, oly lifts, etc. are not new. They're just being rediscovered by the masses.

And you far overestimate the state of science in fitness.

Yea I do overestimate. I know an exercise physiologist. They try to do valid studies, from what I can tell, too many variables, not enough data, not the strongest math or statistics. There is more to it than psuedo intellectual scientific-like blather though.

Resident Quack wrote:So Couch and several others are slated to be presenting at the American Society of Exercise Physiologists conference.

Boy, I sure hope no one notifies ASEP of Couch's quotes like these:

My initial fear was that we might just add to the silliness of "exercise physiology" that is all to often not up to the expected rigors of the hard sciences and bizarrely indifferent to studying and advancing human performance or even discussing it in the kinematic terms universaly accepted, and demanded, for meaningful study of all movement.

Who might do such a thing? No one here, I'm sure.

Your hate is coming along nicely. That ax should be sharp any day now.

nafod wrote:

Joe wrote:I do expect the science has already been done, which is why the world was not "crossfitting" already.

People have been "crossfitting" forever. Interval training, oly lifts, etc. are not new. They're just being rediscovered by the masses.

And you far overestimate the state of science in fitness.

Does the science involve such gems as:
"The curve, that's our workout, the area under the curve, that's fitness, & if you rotate it on it's axis, that's CrossFag"?

Couch is such a drunk.

MarcoFP wrote:Does the science involve such gems as:
"The curve, that's our workout, the area under the curve, that's fitness, & if you rotate it on it's axis, that's CrossFag"?

Couch is such a drunk.

This crap reminds me of my first physics class. We couldn't get our heads around special relativity until we got through a case of Shaeffer and discussed things one night. "So, dude, if you're on the hood of a car traveling at 'c-1 mph'...and you start running, then you will fucking disappear!"

That's exactly what Couch sounds like.

Sofa King,
Aw shucks. Thanks for noticing. I do what I can.

BTW, I hope one of you lawyer types are taking time away from something (gosh, maybe even IGx) to work on the anonymous FTC submission...

EDIT:
Shafster,
Will keep what you consider my BS off this board, unless BS questions are directly asked of me.

RQ, this is IGx, you can lay off the fucking "shucks" and "goshes".

Gin Master wrote:

MarcoFP wrote:Does the science involve such gems as:
"The curve, that's our workout, the area under the curve, that's fitness, & if you rotate it on it's axis, that's CrossFag"?

Couch is such a drunk.

This crap reminds me of my first physics class. We couldn't get our heads around special relativity until we got through a case of Shaeffer and discussed things one night. "So, dude, if you're on the hood of a car traveling at 'c-1 mph'...and you start running, then you will fucking disappear!"

That's exactly what Couch sounds like.

Fuckin' right.
Same as any other drunk.

Couch is enamored of his pseudoscientifical kinesiological psychobabble. When the gin gets flowing, so do the ten-dollar words. It's enough to keep the housewife and exercise-challenged crowd punchdrunk and weak in the knees.

Then you've got the guys who know better hitching their wagons to the money train, hoping it won't crash before their name becomes a household one and they've sold enough "certs" to retire comfortably back in Wichita Falls.

We could start a second thread detailing all the health quackery that our own resident quack has recommended over the years.

Nothing, however, gives me such a good chuckle as his insistance that back squatting will cause degenerative disease in the cervical vertebrae.

An oldie but a goody.

That one even had Rip's girlfriend saying "What the fuck are you babbling on about?"

The Bastard Son of the Shafman wrote: Nothing, however, gives me such a good chuckle as his insistance that back squatting will cause degenerative disease in the cervical vertebrae.

Oh man...more of this. This is platinum membership level info.

It's because, despite supposed years of lifting, RQ hasn't been able to find that groove on the back to get the bar comfortable.

I suggested gently that perhaps it's time to move out of the 135# weight class ~5'10", but he was having none of it.

The Bastard Son of the Shafman wrote:Nothing, however, gives me such a good chuckle as his insistance that back squatting will cause degenerative disease in the cervical vertebrae.

This is great news! I already have SBO in the sacral and degenerative disc in the thoracic. Now I can squat with impunity.

Kinda like screwing people with the same diseases you already have.

Keep going Shaf. Me wanna here more gems. Go get 'im.

Is RQ -s-?

If something crazy was posted on mercola, then -rq- would start talking about it either on @F or the Pmenu.

Like microwaves, drinking your own urine and ejaculate, coprophagy, obscure and completely unvalidated alternative treatments for ailments. I'll give him this, he did help one or two folks, but this may have been entirely accidental. Eating everything raw was amusing. IIRC he got sick a little while after that.

And the Crusade against nightshades. Tying together of completely unrelated papers with some obscure and often completely wrong conclusion based on 1-2 lines in the results.

Get this, though, I've got no real ill will, right, it's just that I prefer to take a moderate stance on stuff, especially healthnuttery.

I always start with this question: Is something actually going wrong?

Healthnutters start with this question: Oh my fucking god is XXXX killing me because Mercola or that faggot Trudeau said so??!?!?!?

The Bastard Son of the Shafman wrote:If something crazy was posted on mercola, then -rq- would start talking about it either on @F or the Pmenu.


And the Crusade against nightshades. Tying together of completely unrelated papers with some obscure and often completely wrong conclusion based on 1-2 lines in the results.

Just realised I've read some of this. It was the stuff that made me stop reading anything at Pmenu. Dietary obsessions with flour/sugar is possibly excusable (if you're a fatty), obsessions with wheat is weirder, and obsessing over a naturally occuring whole vegetable is just stupid. Eat the fecking tomato. It's not crystal meth.

The PM crowd really got behind the evil "nightshade" madness. I remember it happening at @fit as well.
Couch may have pwned him, but his minions were lapping up the crazy from quacky like it was magic manna.

I mostly gave up on the PM after the thread on the dangers of chewing sugarless gum.

A lot of obsessive-compulsive types do seem to be drawn to alt-heath fields.

That said, it is often prudent to start with the elimination of what might be harmful in problem solving an issue. I think what makes it difficult is that some poeple ARE far more sensitive to some things than others.

For instance, in spite of not having the greatest sense of smell, I am very sensitive to fragrances, and prone to seasonal allergies, etc. Crap like scented candles, bathroom sprays, dangly crap in taxi cabs, etc, send me into a tizzy, while the others around me are fine. Tell someone who isn't affected by that stuff that it's bad and they think you're a quack-fag. Different people are sensitive to different things.

So taker the little boy next store, who's had swollen adenoids for months with the parents considering everything from steroid sprays to surgery. Their dryer vents close to my driveway... based on my sensitivity to scents, they need to quit with the three sheets of Bounce in every wash load and put the kid on some fucking Cod Liver Oil. The kid's immune system is weak because they rushed to the doc for antibiotics for every little thing, his motor skill development is delayed, and despite of being bright, he's spacey as anything. Weak immune system, weak neural response. The last thing the kid needs is more and stronger medicines. Something is compromising his system (be it an overload of a toxin or deficiency of a nutrient) and they just keep upping the consequences with stronger and stronger crap instead of stripping things back to egt at the heart of the matter.

The problem isn't the 'noids, it's the weak immune system. Adenoids are part of the immune system, and they are so overloaded they can't defend themselves, let alone the rest of his body. They gotta find out what is so aggravating to the kids system and eliminate that, and at the same time they need to make sure the body has enough of what it needs to do the job for itself.

I recommended they see my son's pediatrician who's versed in "integrated" or "complimentary" medicine ( the integrated use of both allopathic and alternative meds) but they were afraid to go against the advice of their regular pediatrician - the one who says it's okay that he was obese by 5, and who's orchestrated this mess where every time the kid is sick it goes on for weeks.

I honestly think I, with no training at all, could get their kid healthier faster, and to a broader degree, than their doctor. I should also mention my kid is the same age (almost 7) and hasn't been sick for years. When he was 2 and a half he had a double ear infection (both ears concurrently) and I refused the doctors recommendation to give antibiotics. That, plus daily Cold Liver Oil, and my kid hasn't been sick for more than a day or two at a time in four years.

Sure, there are a lot of "alternative" fruitcakes out there, but I've found the standards to be just as low or lower amongst the general population of drug pushing MDs as well.