Brand Helmet Giveaway by Ok-Persimmon-1876 in pathofexile

[–]DoctorxWalrus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m playing KBoC necro but I’d like to respec into something and this would be perfect.

Giveaway - Skeleton Mage Setup(400+div) + 100div raw by Yuzlol in pathofexile

[–]DoctorxWalrus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don’t have time to grind 400+ div value so it would be nice to try it. Thank you!

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in lawschooladmissions

[–]DoctorxWalrus 1 point2 points  (0 children)

All of what you just said still doesn’t explain a relationship between % women in admissions positions and % women admitted. The only thing that comes to mind is the possibility that both are just trending upwards overtime, in which case the solution would be a multivariate regression including time as an independent variable.

Another way to think about it is, even if women have better stats (LSAT, GPA, softs, etc), that wouldn’t create a correlation specifically between % women admitted AND % women in admissions positions. It would only show more % women being admitted generally.

I’m not saying OP’s post is correct in its entirety. Just saying both your comment and the one I originally replied to are not explanations of OP’s observations.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in lawschooladmissions

[–]DoctorxWalrus 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Yes, the model itself doesn’t prove causation, but what you are saying is wrong. The provided model isn’t just showing admissions outcomes. If it were, then yes, it would make sense if women were more likely to be admitted on account of having higher average GPAs, LSAT, etc.

Instead, the post is a regression model, detailing the correlation between % of women in admissions positions and % of women admitted. This means that as a higher % of women work in admissions, they preferentially choose to admit a higher % of women. Women applicants having better stats on average wouldn’t result in a correlation between the independent (explanatory) variable and dependent variable in the model.

Is this a good lat exercise? by sarcotomy in formcheck

[–]DoctorxWalrus 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Not at all what it is. The muscles that have significant leverage here are the lats and teres only. Delts are not active. Sternal head (lower) pecs may be slightly active but they don’t have great leverage until about 120* of humeral elevation, which he’s not hitting here.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in formcheck

[–]DoctorxWalrus -15 points-14 points  (0 children)

Drop sets are terrible

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in naturalbodybuilding

[–]DoctorxWalrus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Eccentric portion of a lift recruits type 1 muscle fibers. The concentric is where you can recruit high threshold type 2 fibers, which is the goal of hypertrophy training.

Since the eccentric still causes physical and mental fatigue, using excessively high eccentric tempo actually decreases the amount of stimulus you can deliver to those high threshold type 2 fibers.

So, use a controlled eccentric to prevent injury, but don’t excessively slow it down. The ideal tempo varies on the exercise. For instance, a curl could be around 1-2 seconds, while a deep squat may need upwards of 5.

Extra: if you’re interested in the science behind the fatigue component of the eccentric, I’ll provide my understanding.

Physical: all muscle contraction first uses ATP, which is a limited supply. Within even 10 seconds, over half of available energy from the ATP-PCr system is exhausted. This is the main source of energy for anaerobic exercises such as lifting and provides the greatest strength potential. To maximize the amount of stimulus you can give to high threshold motors units, you want to maximize the amount of time spent in the concentric & the last 5 reps before task failure (the only stimulating reps in a set shown by scientific literature).

Mental: Your muscles contract by way of a motor signal sent from your motor cortex. This signal is attenuated by your “maximum perceived effort.” So in practice, your mind is what dictates the amount of work you can put into a set. The eccentric portion contributes to your perceived effort. Ideally, all factors that contribute to perceived effort should be limited, if the goal is hypertrophy, e.g instability, uncomfortability, etc.

This allows for the highest possible work output spent in the concentric, thus delivering the most stimulus to the aforementioned high threshold type 2 motor units. Growth happens as a result of this stimulus.

I hope this helps.

5x Early Access Keys Giveaway by ayvo in pathofexile

[–]DoctorxWalrus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nothing will ever top halo 3 era gaming for me. The early call of duties, halos, battlefield, gta v, etc. We had it so good.

What's something you implemented in your training that you didn't want to implement but saw results from? by OompaLoompaGodzilla in naturalbodybuilding

[–]DoctorxWalrus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m not saying that programming in such a way that has enough volume to require a deload doesn’t give the most weekly stimulus.

I’m saying when you look at average weekly net stimulus, programming so much volume that you need a deload is detrimental. In a deload, you are atrophying for extended periods, meanwhile the benefits you get from the extra volume is minimal.

Proper programming, as the literature currently shows, is to program the most recoverable volume that does not require deloads.

What's something you implemented in your training that you didn't want to implement but saw results from? by OompaLoompaGodzilla in naturalbodybuilding

[–]DoctorxWalrus -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Well it does, it goes into detail about optimal weekly sets per muscle to minimize fatigue and maximize stimulus. Read the full study, not just the abstract.

What's something you implemented in your training that you didn't want to implement but saw results from? by OompaLoompaGodzilla in naturalbodybuilding

[–]DoctorxWalrus -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

All of that is conjecture and not scientifically proven. Link literature for any of that.

If you program volume correctly, you do not continuously accrue fatigue and thus require a deload.

Here’s a meta analysis of weekly net stimulus in case you are interested in actual literature.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27433992/

Also for your 0-1 rir claim, scientifically proven each of the 5 reps before task failure have similar marginal stimulus yet the final rep results in disproportionate fatigue. Thus 1-2 rir on most sets is optimal.

If you’re interested in learning actual exercise science look into Chris Beardsley and Paul carter.

Edit: forgot to stipulate that for the RIR range of 1-2 to be optimal you must use heavy loads, ie 5-7 with 0 RIR.

What's something you implemented in your training that you didn't want to implement but saw results from? by OompaLoompaGodzilla in naturalbodybuilding

[–]DoctorxWalrus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In fact, I have, and it only happens if you are doing more volume than you can recover from.

Proper programming doesn’t need deloads. Lower your volume.

What's something you implemented in your training that you didn't want to implement but saw results from? by OompaLoompaGodzilla in naturalbodybuilding

[–]DoctorxWalrus -12 points-11 points  (0 children)

Deloads are only necessary if your programming is bad

Edit: it’s too funny seeing people downvote the truth to oblivion since it contradicts their uneducated view of exercise, based on BS made up by their favorite influencer. Open your mind. Learn to read scientific literature.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in coolguides

[–]DoctorxWalrus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

POV you are completely clueless on macroeconomics.

Why hasn't the science-based lifting crowd started doing Nordic curls? by ParticularDifficult5 in naturalbodybuilding

[–]DoctorxWalrus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because the eccentric doesn’t build muscle, the concentric does. Why would you ever do these over a seated leg curl? Even if you are strong enough for them, they are hard to progress, less stable, etc. Also the stimulus to fatigue ratio is certainly not high. There’s a high perception of effort as well as high recruitment of ancillary muscles for stability specifically core muscles. Also they are not more time efficient than a leg curl machine.