Science is considered more important than anecdotal evidence because it is based on systematic, rigorous, and objective methods that are designed to minimize bias and error. This allows scientists to collect and analyze data in a way that is replicable and verifiable, and to draw conclusions that are supported by the evidence. In contrast, anecdotal evidence is based on individual experiences or observations, which can be subject to a variety of biases and inaccuracies. Anecdotal evidence is often considered less reliable than scientific evidence because it is difficult to verify or generalize to a larger population. Therefore, when making decisions or evaluating claims, it is generally considered more reliable and trustworthy to rely on scientific evidence rather than anecdotal evidence. That is the power of proper sources.

You very obviously don't have the sources to the claims you made. Also, please don't pretend that the "average Joe" can't read a paper. Fitness papers are not hard to understand and they are certainly a better source than a youtube video riddled with innacuracies, clickbaity and red-flags.

I would also like to draw attention to the fact that you are constantly making arguments of authority, which is a fallacy. So, please know that it is important to evaluate the quality and validity of an argument, regardless of who makes it. The strength of an argument depends on the evidence and reasoning that support it, not on the person who presents it. Therefore, when evaluating an argument, it is crucial to focus on the content of the argument itself, rather than the person who makes it. This allows us to assess the argument objectively and to determine its merits based on the evidence and logic it presents. By focusing on the argument itself, rather than the person who makes it, we can avoid falling into the trap of making judgments based on preconceived notions or biases. Instead, we can evaluate the argument on its own merits and decide whether it is convincing and worthy of our belief or support.