Seminarid tervislikust toitumisest, rasvapõletusest ja lihaste kasvatamisest

Mina. ” srcset=”/uploads/emoticons/smile@2x.png 2x” width=”20″ height=”20″>

Ma poleks neid ette võtnud, kui end äärmiselt enesekindlalt antud teemades ei tunneks.

e-ee …

mida see küll võiks tähendada?

Ntx mina tunnen end äärmiselt enesekindlalt astrofüüsikas – ma tean, et ma sellest värgist mitte midagi ei tea;

ma olen selles täiesti kindel.Enesekindel kohe,

Rotteri jutu jätkuks:

Convenient Science and Confirmation Bias

Author: markyoung ~ 30/06/10

Regular readers of my blog will know that I’m a little bit of a science geek. I read studies and try to report the science with as little bias as possible. However, I’m often criticized for putting a little too much stock in research.

People say things like “if we waited for science to tell us what to do we’d never be able to do anything” or ”just because it hasn’t been tested in a lab doesn’t mean it isn’t valuable”.

Personally, I agree with both of these statements. Often practice precedes scientific investigation in the fitness world and we can’t always wait around until research catches up. But when science IS done that contradicts some people’s practices many are quick to dismiss it by suggesting that science somehow has no application to their particular pet theory because “it works in the real world”.

In fact, some go as far as to say that they test theories on their clients and only use science to later confirm and support their ideas. They even regularly post numerous studies on their websites and blogs, but only those that are in line with their beliefs.

Interestingly, this is the exact OPPOSITE of what science is supposed to do. Studies are actually designed to TEST a hypothesis rather than to support it. If you’re just looking for support, you’re obviously going to find it.

However, this particular tendency (called confirmation bias) does little to advance practice as it doesn’t really doesn’t force you to critically evaluate your programs…especially if you’re quick to dismiss contradictory evidence.

As an example consider the recent article I wrote on the infamous Tabata protocol discussing the fact that it has actually no scientific backing suggesting that it is greater for fat loss than any other method. Despite this, people still claim to have “success” with the protocol.

Instead I might be inclined to suggest that if your fat loss program is a compilation of a number of things (including diet, resistance training, and Tabatas) evidence that one element may not be useful lends credence to the fact that the other two elements are probably effective, but the one you’re attached to could have little to do with the positive results you’re experiencing.

All in all, I guess I’m suggesting that instead of looking exclusively for things to support your theories, make sure to also seek out articles and studies that challenge the things you believe in. After all, it is this information that will allow you to form a unbiased opinion after considering all the facts.

See väike lõik ei ole suunatud otseselt kellegi vastu vaid lihtsalt jutujätkust Rotteri teema-arendusele. ” srcset=”/uploads/emoticons/smile@2x.png 2x” width=”20″ height=”20″>

Mis see aastaarv siia puutub?

Aga varblased ei hakkagi nii kõrgelt lendama kui kotkad.

Aastal 80 oli üks suur juht ja õpetaja ja teised väikesed varblased ” srcset=”/uploads/emoticons/wink@2x.png 2x” width=”20″ height=”20″>

Argo

Aastal 80 oli üks suur juht ja õpetaja ja teised väikesed varblased ” srcset=”/uploads/emoticons/wink@2x.png 2x” width=”20″ height=”20″>

Argo

Ja kes oli aastal 80 ülisuur õpetaja?