<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">never said you had to follow science, but to decry it because you cannot decipher things from it is a bit rich</div> I never advocated using anecdotal evidence to the exclusion of science, and I believe that science does have it's place; but you continue to say that anecdotal evidence is worthless. I and others are living proof that you are incorrect. <div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Anecdotes are worthless because they are associated with a large amount of bias.</div> So are scientific studies which are inundated with ad hoc hypothesis and trial and control groups full of subjects who are not bodybuilders. <div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">If I get an anecdote from BigbodybuilderA that he gained 20lbs from upping his protein to 3g./lb, what caused this effect?</div> Which is why you never take anything at face value, but investigate. As aforementioned, it's easier to investigate anecdotal evidence than it is to analyze scientific studies, many of which don't provide much information on the groups they study. <div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">But then on that tangent, Who is the best bodybuilder in the world? Doe he train HST?</div> Who is the best exercise scientist in the world ? Does he recommend HST ? <div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Both sports have something else in common, rampant use of drugs... hmmm I wonder where the application of massive protein intakes fits with that? Oh and in terms of PL, you would be surprised how low protein some of the strongest men in the world eat... but drugs work well.</div> High protein is rampant in both natural and unnatural bodybuilding. You might be surprised at the incredibly high level of protein used by powerlifters, particularly those who are not trying to stay in their weight classes, although the ratio of powerlifters consuming low levels of protein to powerlifters consuming high levels might be lower than bodybuilding due to the fact that muscle size is not important to them, as they train strictly for strength. Many who are dieting and on low protein are trying to stay in their weight classes. <div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">of course, which is where the biases come into it, just as the people who are eating multiple times per day look at the bbrs doing it and conclude this is part of the reasons bbrs look like they do.</div> You should always base your conclusions on what you see in the mirror after doing it. <div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Two things can be correlative, but does not mean that is the cause of it.</div> So, if I follow a scientific study and achieve success, it's not necessarily due to science. It might just be coincidental. <div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Of course, which leads to fantastic Bro-logic that abounds on Bbing.com and similar websites. It also leads to fantastic quantities of money being spent on pointless supplements, but thats anotehr industry.</div> Hmmm...interesting that you equate "bro-logic" to spending money in the supplement industry. Seems to me that most of those useless ads for cell tech and other 'scientifically approved' powders always point to the superior science they used to develop this "awesome revolutionary powder that is the new legal steroid." The reason I never use any of those supplements is that I used "bro-logic" to ascertain that they were worthless.