All posts by ScienceGuy

One man must stand in the way of over-priced supplement tat. One man must object to misleading health claims. One man must scour the literature for the truth. That man is...ScienceGuy

Do diet pills actually work?

Diet pill concept: How lazy can we get?

.

The idea of losing weight fast is so appealing and generates the supplement industry countless millions of pounds every year. It plays so well into human nature. We are always looking for a quick fix.

Why change my lifestyle when I can just take these pills and melt away the fat?

However, the diet pill industry is not just a scam its a potentially fatal one. More than just a few people have died after taking diet pills filled with a re purposed herbicide known as DNP. All the victims were normal people, usually quite young, looking for a way to quickly drop a few pounds. What did they get for their cash? A gruesome end, which I cover further down the article. It’s tragic but unfortunately not that uncommon for people to literally die after taking dodging supplements and weight loss aids bought online. As I’ve said before, the supplement industry is poorly regulated and the internet is awash with scams that fall under the radar of law enforcement.

It has never been more important to be aware of what these sort of products contain and that you could be putting yourself in serious danger by buying into these ‘quick-fix’ ideas. I’ve written this article in the hope that you re-consider buying dubious items online that you intend to put into your body.

There is an important distinction to be made between ‘Diet Pills’ and ‘Anti-Obesity Pharmaceuticals’. Pharmaceutical drugs specifically designed to combat obesity often target receptors and systems involved in appetite control, fat deposition, blood glucose regualtion and energy expenditure. These drugs target important and delicate parts of your physiology and are designed and tested through a development process usually costing 10s of million of dollars. Obesity is big business after all. The compound I am working on during my PhD for example, currently falls into this category. It is a drug which mimics the actions of natural PYY in the body. PYY is released after we eat to signal us to stop eating. It is a very powerful anorectic hormone and induces the satiety response.

Diet pills on the other hand, tend to have far less or no developmental costs, are scams, are dangerous or have dubious science backing them up. Examples would be over the counter tablets or supplements bought online – Green Tea Extract, being a prime example, which I have written about extensively here. There is a big difference, of course, between diet pills that simply don’t work and pills which contain toxic chemicals, I talk about these dangerous pills a bit later on. The issue with cheap internet products is you simply never known for sure what is in the pill.

.


Examples of diet pill and their physiological function

.

Actual medications

Orlistat – A well known anti-obesity medication. Works by reducing intestinal fat absorption. The end result is that you poop out more fat. Due to the way it works, side effects are mainly restricted to gastro-intestinal disturbances, the most common being extreme flatulence and oily bowel movements. Not life threatening by any means but a fairly heavy price to pay when you could just eat less fat! Orlistat has been available over the counter for a around a decade but used to be prescription only. Does actually appear to work based no available studies with participants losing modest weight when taking the drug (x).

Is it worth the oily poop?

.

Liraglutide – A long acting analogue of GLP-1, primarily used in the treatment of type 2 diabetes. GLP-1 produces a number of physiological effects useful in the treatment of obesity. For example, it reduces the rate of gastric emptying and promotes a feeling of satiety – the satisfying fulfilled feeling after a big meal (1). The draw backs of form of this drug is that weight loss is not observed in all patients and nausea is a common side effect (2).

.

Metformin – Also primarily used in the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Metformin limits the amount of glucose produced by the liver whilst increasing muscle uptake of glucose (3). Naturally this serves diabetics well, who need to manage glucose in the blood closely. Metformin has also been shown to reduce weight in diabetic patients but is not prescribed specifically for that purpose (4).

Although a few years old, this endocrinology review details the efficacy of current anti-obesity therapies, going into detail regarding the available data.

 

Diet pills

Green tea extract – Currently very popular as an ‘alternative’ weight loss aid and can be found both online and in almost any health food shop you walk into. The science suggesting green tea can actually reduce your weight is dubious at best and usually comes from poorly designed studies. Take a look at this article I’ve written for an in-depth look at why green tea is an expensive waste of money. The upside of green tea pills is that they aren’t dangerous. They simply don’t work as they say they should.

Utter crap

.

DNP tables – I talk about this further down the article. DNP is a toxic compound mainly used in the industrial manufacture of pesticides and herbicides. It also has an ‘uncoupling’ effect on mitochondrial energy production which means instead of calories ultimately making energy for use by your cells, the calories go towards generating heat. You essentially burn through extra calories  through increased heat production. Despite what a lot of shameful, cheap websites tell you, DNP is fucking dangerous and has directly led to the deaths of numerous people. NEVER TAKE THIS.

Amphetamine-based tablets – Amphetamine based products have a legitimate use in treating ADHD and narcolespy. Aside from that they should be avoided. They are well known performance enhancers and are of course banned at sporting events and competitions. Amphetamine use is associated with weight loss due to appetite suppressant effects. However, amphetamines are addictive and mess with numerous aspects of physiology not to do with weight and appetite management. There is also evidence that long term use may interfere with normal dopamine signalling in the brain. Avoid!

 

So do they work?

The answer is both yes and no depending on the drug. Under the umber all of pharmaceutical anti-obesity therapies, some patients do show modest weight loss. However, these sort of drugs are rife with side effects and many have been pulled after only a few years on the market, rimonabant being one example. So in one sense they can help with weight loss, but they cannot be taken indefinitely and the risk of side effects likely outweighs the benefits of weight loss in a lot of cases.

Now if we then look at cheap over the counter or internet pills then the answer is a firm no and if they do help with weight loss then the reasons for this are usually sinister and or damaging to your health. Most diet pills that can actually lead to weight loss contain some sort of stimulant to achieve these effects. Caffeine is a well known appetite suppressant and also a physical performance enhancer. It stands to reason that a caffeine pill and a gym session might help you lose more weight in the long run. Caffeine has been well studied in regards to human fitness and health and I’ve written about it here. Caffeine is a safe stimulant. Other pills might contain derivatives of amphetamines – addictive stimulants that should always be avoided. The point remains that you simply don’t known what these pills contain so even if weight loss were possible you would be better off with a coffee before your gym session.

.


.

.Why should you avoid them?

.

Aside from numerous side effects associated with pharmaceutical interventions, the internet is littered with cheap and often dangerous diet pills. Every year or so a news story will crop up about someone who has died due to taking dodgy diet pills.

This story from last year  highlights the dangers of a substance found in a number of diet pills called dinitrophenol or DNP for short.

In fact a shocking number of other deaths  have been attributed to DNP. Here, here and here are just a few examples over the past two years. Unsuspecting people trying to boost their fat loss, bought innocent looking pills online and suffer a truly horrible death as a result. This is serious and those responsible for manufacturing and selling these pills should be utterly ashamed of themselves.

The common theme in these stories is that the victim is described as ‘cooking’ or ‘boiling’ from the inside. Although an over-simplification, this is a grim and horrible truth.

DNP is an organic compound most commonly used as a pesticide and antiseptic (5). It is also used to make a number of herbicides and wood preservatives. Not exactly the sort of thing you want to be eating right? Well, DNP has been used in high doses as a weight loss aid with disastrous consequences (6) In mammalian biology, DNP inhibits ATP production in mitochondria-containing cells (7). That is mental. ATP is essentially the life source of all cells, powering innumerable operations in the cell (8). Mess with ATP production and it will end in disaster. Interestingly, cyanide poison also interferes with cellular respiration and ATP production and we all known how deadly that is (9).

So why are these people who died from DNP pills described as cooking alive? It’s down to how DNP effects you on a cellular level. It acts as a protonophore, quite literally allowing protons to leak across the inner membrane of mitochondria, the site of respiration and ATP synthesis. As the protons leak where they shouldn’t they avoid interacting with a peptide called ATP synthase – a critical component in the system that makes ATP. Energy production therefore becomes much less efficient as part of the fuel to make it is leaking. In response to this inefficiency, the metabolic rate continues to accelerate to produce enough ATP to keep the body working. It does this by burning more and more fat tissue – which is very rich in calories. This is proportional to the amount of DNP taken.  In a nutshell, DNP ‘uncouples‘ ATP synthase from oxidation. Uncoupling is very important for rodents-it allows them to generate heat instead of ATP when they are very cold. Humans rely far less on this. Uncoupling leads to heat generation. Large doses of DNP lead to massive uncoupling and therefore large amounts of heat are generated (10).

Due to this, DNP causes fatal hyperthermia. Adding another terrible aspects to this is that the process isn’t instant. Instead, the body temperature rises gradually followed by coma and death. In  a sense your truly do ‘cook to death’. In a few harrowing stories, victims are told nothing can be done for them once they have been admitted to hospital. The drug is in the system, the ATP process is disrupted and a massive body temperature increase is unavoidable.

Is it worth taking ‘diet pills’ bought online? A FIRM NO. At best, they fail to work, at worst they can be fatal. You simply cannot tell for sure what is in them.

What about specifically developed pharmaceutical drugs? Consult with your doctor but unless you are being treated for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus with a drug that also leads to weight loss, I would avoid any anti-obesity medications as they currently stand.

My stance on this will likely change in the future. We still have a largely incomplete understanding of how the brain and body ultimately control appetite and energy regulation. We know the basics and that’s a great start but until we uncover more we can’t develop truly effective anti-obesity medications with limited side effects. We are messing with a system that is absolutely fundamental to out survival – we must be careful.

 


Alternatives

.

There aren’t any quick fix alternatives! Like most things worth doing, there isn’t usually an easy or quick route. When it comes to your health, a quick fix is not what you should aim for – it’s like duct taping a damaged tire, it’s not getting to the route of the problem and it will get worse over time.

.

Moderation, diet and exercise – that’s the key to a healthy body. Some may find it much harder than others but it is possible for the vast majority of people.

.

The health food and supplement industry cleverly relies on standard human behaviour. Take this pill for X, this pill will grow your penis a metre, this will make you lose 10 kgs. It’s like if someone offers you an investment opportunity with 80% returns in a month – its almost always too good to be true and this is no different.

Losing weight (that stays lost!) requires a change to your lifestyle in general, including your eating habits, your sleep schedule and the amount of exercise you do. These pills sell in there thousands because the manufacturers known how daunting a ‘lifestyle change’ sounds.

If you are serious about getting in better shape don’t forget to check out these other useful articles including top exercises for muscle building at the gym or at home as well as reading up on popular supplement scams and why you shouldn’t waste your money!

.

Whey protein guide: A complete guide to popular whey protein supplements

Creatine guide: Learn all the science behind this popular powder and how it can help towards your fitness goals

TOP 5: Mass building exercises

.

Before you buy these popular supplements – have a look at the real science behind their use, it may surprise you:

Multivitamin Hoax

Green Tea Facade

.

Finally, don’t forget to check out the supplement shop that only recommends products that have been tested in well designed studies and which have worked for me personally.

.

Thanks for reading,

-ScienceGuy

5 gym ‘facts’ debunked

The gym is full of shit science. Also known as bro-science. Also known as bullshit. As funny as it is to hear, it ultimately signals ignorance of basic biology and training which isn’t all that funny. These sort of ideas seem to stick around and really spread their way through the gym community – especially young lifters. I’ve even heard popular trainers falling foul to these. It seems easier to spread bullshit then actual facts and science these days so in my never ending battle against pseudoscience and false facts I’ve put this article together so YOU, dear reader, can stand head and shoulders above everyone else with your vast, newly-acquired knowledge.

Don’t fall for this crap when you hear it in the gym. You are better than that. If you are feeling brave you may even want to challenge the gym-goon that spouts nonsense but that doesn’t always end well…

.

.

So here it is. A quick run through of some of the most commonly heard gym ‘facts’ which are either only true to some extent or completely made up.

.

#1 Perform sit ups and crunches to target tummy fat

.

This one is ALWAYS over-heard in my gym and almost certainly yours as well. I commend people smashing out ab work when they are perhaps a bit overweight but all that does is DEVELOP YOUR ABDOMINALS. It will have almost no bearing on the visibility of ‘abs’. Obtaining a sweet set of herculean abs all comes down to your body fat percentage. The simple truth is that you MUST HAVE a low body fat percentage to see definition in the abdominals and obliques. Abs are visible at a range of body fat percentages, usually from about 15% downwards – obviously the lower your percentage the tighter and more visible your abs become. If you are overweight or oven just holding a little extra, no amount of abdominal work alone will lead you to a washboard stomach.

.

The second important point here is that targeted fat loss through exercise isn’t really a thing. No single exercise burns fat from one particular area. Lots of shitty online fat-loss products will say something like ‘…burns through stubborn belly fat!’. They always go on about belly fat. The truth again, as always, is harder than what these arses would have you believe. In order to target belly fat you need to target ALL your fat reserves. That’s the only way – to reduce your overall body fat percentage. The best way to do this is frequent well rounded exercise involving cardio and weight training plus tighter control of your diet. Take a look at my big lift guide which can help you develop greater all-round strength as well as a really solid core. Alternatively check out this body-weight exercise guide – great for a quick and challenging workout.

.

So if you are spending ages ab crunching away you would be much better off hitting some big tiring lifts like squatting or dead-lifting (both of which help build a great core and burn way more calories than crunches and sit ups) or getting going with some Interval Training on the bike or treadmill.

.


.

#2 Creatine is a steroid

.

This is simple to refute. As someone who has studied endocrinology for years – creatine isn’t a steroid!

.

Who wouldn’t trust that face?

.

I’ve written a complete guide to creatine, what it is, what it does to your body and how it can positively effect your training. There is a HUGE amount of false information online regarding creatine (and all supplements for that matter). As a scientist, I cite and support any claims with solid peer-reviewed research and this linked article is no different.

.

Creatine is a nitrogenous organic acid. It’s main role is to recycle ATP – the universal energy currency of our cells. I won’t go into the details (all can be found in the article above) but put briefly, supplementing with creatine slightly increases the stores of available ATP in muscle cells, allowing you to train harder and longer. Due to this – people often think creatine is a steroid. After all the main training benefit of steroid is that you can train harder and longer with less recovery in between training sessions. Creatine can certainly help you in training and has been shown to primarily benefit anaerobic and repetitive work i.e. weight lifting. However, creatine will provide you with no where near the benefit that steroids will. Creatine use provides your muscles with a bit more usable energy, steroids can alter major aspects of you entire physiology – hence the inherent risk with using them.

.

Creatine is not a steroid but can certainly benefit your training.

.


.

#3 You need specific protein for specific body parts

.

This is definitely one of the more silly ‘facts’ I’ve over heard but unfortunately I’ve heard similar things more than once. The basic summary of what I heard was that if you train multiple muscles in one session and then drink a protein shake, either the protein gets ‘confused’ and doesn’t know where to go, or you are using the wrong protein for the muscles that you have trained. As stupid as this sounds it’s actually surprisingly hard to debunk directly with the literature as no studies (that I can find) have thought to explore this!

.

So, just by using common sense and a very basic understanding of biology we can debunk this fact. In regards to the idea that every muscle has specific protein – that doesn’t make sense. It is true that we possess different kinds of muscles. For example, cardiac muscle cells do differ to skeletal muscle cells in both form and function, smooth muscle differs even further. However we are primarily training skeletal muscle when we weight train. Skeletal muscles are made from the same components and this does not differ from muscle to muscle, so any protein you ingest can just as easily go towards building your legs as it does your back. The idea of a protein for each muscle also falls flat on it’s face when you consider that the human body has 640 muscles and that it is also, practically speaking, impossible to train a single muscle. Even when doing isolation bicep curls we are really utilising many muscles at once. Any protein you ingest will be broken down into amino acids and ultimately used to synthesis new muscle tissue at the required site.

.

The notion that protein gets confused about where it’s going throws up a number of red flags and I truly wonder what it must be like to live on this planet and genuinely believe things like that. Protein doesn’t have a memory, it isn’t alive and it doesn’t rely on chemo-attraction or some other sort of homing beacon to tell it where to go. It is perfectly fine to train multiple body parts in one training session and you will get stronger and bigger if you train hard and eat well. Protein will be transported to where your body needs it most. It won’t get lost on the way!

.


.

#4 Steroids shrink your dick and gives you ‘ROID RAGE’

 

This one is an absolute classic. Roid rage is usually the first thing people discuss when bringing up recreational steroid use. Specifically, the term roid rage is applied to muscle building, anabolic steroids. Those used by competitive body builders for example (and an increasing number of average gym goers). Now, on the surface the concept of roid rage is plausible. Many anabolic steroids are based on or mimic the functions of natural testosterone. Testosterone is a powerful anabolic hormone which is essentially  what makes men ‘manly’ and goes towards explaining why men, on average are bigger, stronger and more aggressive than women.

.

All natural baby!

.

Women do posses testosterone but at no where near the same level as men. Testosterone is a fantastic muscle builder hence the use of steroids in the gym. The term roid rage began to gain popularity following high profile crimes involving sports and wrestling personalities who were heavily muscled individuals and known to take steroids. Perhaps the most famous of these was the tragic case of the pro wrestler Chris Benoit. 

Whether or not roid rage exists as it is popularly portrayed i.e. an unstoppable, violent,  muscle-bound goon, remains up for debate. Studies have linked testosterone with increased aggression however studies looking directly at the use of anabolic steroids and random fits of rage are not conclusive and show conflicting results. Anecdotal evidence from heavy users does show that a number of them suffer from increased aggression – some report becoming angry at minor things that, before steroid use, they would have just shrugged off. If true, violent and dangerous roid rage exists it is very rare and probably restricted to heavy and long term steroid users. However, even mild users might develop ‘shorter fuses’ and be more easily wound up than prior to use – this is something you will see discussed a lot online. A common theory is that steroid use will amplify the disposition of the user. If a user was intolerant and easily riled before use, this will likely get worse with steroid use.

Ultimately, the jury is still out on this. Although roid rage isn’t a complete myth it is no where near as common as many believe and doesn’t always manifest as violent fits of anger.

Regarding the idea that steroid use shrinks your dick specifically. This is incorrect and probably came about for two reasons.

.

  • Professional body builders, in their tiny posing pants, do look like they have  minuscule nobs – this is because they are absolutely enormous human beings. Their legs are like that of a race horse so proportionally the penis looks like that of a pixie. In reality the size will not have changed with steroid use.

 

.


.

#5 Training legs ‘spikes’  testosterone and makes you bigger all over 

.

Similar to the concept of roid rage (above), studies have shown conflicting results regarding testosterone spiking during leg training and whether or not this makes you bigger and stronger overall. I hear trainers in my gym saying this a lot to their new clients – perhaps in an effort to get them in the habit of training their legs hard and well.

We know that testosterone is a major driver of muscle growth and that any natural way to increase testosterone production for weight lifters would offer a large advantage in the gym in both muscle mass and ultimately strength development.

.

.

So the question is really two smaller questions…

  1. If I train my legs will I have increased testosterone production?
  2. If so, does this lead to increased muscle mass in other body areas?

.

A number of factors influence your testosterone levels – your weight, age and also the time of day. In regards to question 1, it has been established that testosterone levels do increase following exercise but only briefly. Short, intense bouts of exercise and compound lifts such as the squat and dead lift appear to promote the greater release. What is harder to determine is if this actually leads to growth or gains elsewhere…

Two of the most relevant studies looking to answer this question directly show almost completely opposing results

One study performed by West et al in 2009 showed that if some male participants engaged in a high volume leg workout after a bicep workout and others just did the bicep workout without the leg exercises, there was NO DIFFERENCE in bicep size or strength between the groups by the end of the 12 week study…the theory was that the testosterone boost afforded by leg exercises would lead to a greater increase in bicep mass in the group that trained legs. This was shown to not be the case. 

Another study, with a similar design, undertaken by Ronnestad, B.R. et al in 2011, showed the exact opposite. They DID see an increase in bicep mass in the group that had trained legs. An important distinction between the studies is that in the West 2009 study, participants trained legs after their biceps, in this 2011 study, they trained legs before biceps.

So what to make of all this…

Both of these were well designed studies yet they demonstrate opposite outcomes. Perhaps the order of exercises is very important? However physiology is hugely complicated and increasing testosterone in the blood doesn’t necessarily lead to a direct increase in muscle mass.

.

  • Large compound lifts such as the squat and dead lift do lead to increased circulating testosterone but this is short lived and does not lead to increased overall muscle mass

 

  • There is no doubt that big lower body lifts leads to the development of greater lower body mass – as we expect, train a muscle well and that muscle gets bigger and stronger – simple.

Whether or not training legs ultimately makes you get bigger all over should be less important than the fact that training your lower body is very important regardless. You are only as strong as your weakest part and having a balanced and developed physique all over will translate into much greater functional strength and better lifting numbers. You also wont get laughed at for your baby legs.

.

Check out this big ass-lifting guide for mass monster in you!

.

Thanks for reading! Hit me up in the comments

.

-ScienceGuy

Homeopathy – The Placebo Effect

 

I’ve wanted to write about homeopathy for a long time. As you have probably already guessed if you frequent this website, I am somewhat of a sceptic. Questioning the truth and validity of things is in my nature. My training as a neuroscientist has only increased my disdain for pseudoscience and alternative medicine who’s growing popularity in this age of true science and discovery is nothing but woeful.

.

‘Homeopathy is a pseudoscience – a belief that is incorrectly presented as scientific’

.

Homeopathy, as we know it, was created by a man named Samuel Hahnemann in 1796 with the release of his book ‘Organon of Medicine’. Anything about homeopathy that you can find today is based on teachings from this book. This is where it all begin. The 6th edition of the book opens with this quote…

.

‘The Organon may in time be widely recognized as one of the most important books in the entire history of medicine, because it introduces in the long story of man’s struggle against disease a successful system of medicinal therapy that contrasts radically with everything previously taught and practised.’

.

Grammatical errors aside, I can assure you, that this will NOT be the case. One day homeopathy, as well as all unproven alternative medicine will fade into myth and memory as long as people continue to question it!

Homeopathy is aimed at a niche market split into two halves. One represents the naive buyers of homeopathic remedies which commonly have no active ingredient and are usually inert substances or water. These are normal people with no scientific training who have fallen for a scam or are trying something new based on a recommendation. The second half are the ignorant, ill-informed and vocal supporters of homeopathy many of whom are distrustful of empirically proven effective medicines and will stop at nothing to label anyone who speaks out against homeopathy as a brainwashed shill of the big pharmaceutical companies (we will meet some of those later).

We must do our best to question dubious pseudoscientific practices. Luckily the government is in agreement…

The United Kingdom’s House of Commons Science and Technology Committee has concluded that homeopathy is ineffective, and recommended against the practice receiving any further funding.

Read on to find out about the core beliefs of homeopathy, what the science says about the practise, and what happens when you question the hard-core believers.

.

.


.

The core beliefs of homeopathy: pure magic

.

The concept of homeopathy raises a number of issues before we even look at the science. The fact that homeopathic solutions are SO diluted that no active agent still persists is just one major issue that faces the homeopathic community. Others include notions of things like ‘water memory’ which state that water takes on the molecular form of any substance it comes into contact with. This is so preposterous that I just don’t know where to begin. Proponents of homeopathy are often very anti-pharmaceutical industry. If water really mimicked drugs do you think big pharmaceutical companies would spent literally billions of dollars developing drugs? No. I don’t think so.

.

So what are the core principles of homeopathy? I’ve taken this mainly from www.hpathy.com as they have a good amount of detail about the different principles…

.

The Law of Similia – ‘Like cures like’ :  the choice of the medicine is fundamentally based on the principle that the medicine must have the capability of producing similar symptoms of the disease to be cured in healthy persons. So backwards I don’t know where to begin. Based on this idea, in order to cure cancer a medicine must cause cancer -related symptoms in an healthy individual…makes…sense…

Law of Simplex – Only give one ‘homeopathic medicine’ at a time. This makes sense if we are testing the efficacy of a compound but many diseases require complex treatments requiring multiple drugs at once. 

Law of Minimum – Give the lowest possible dose of the medicine so that it doesn’t interfere with the vital source. This is based on the idea that small doses stimulate, medium doses paralyze and large doses kill. Dosing is VERY important in real medicine however homeopathic ‘treatments’ are often so dilute that they have no active ingredient left. Dosing is therefore entirely irrelevant. The less said about the ‘vital source’ the better. A large enough dose of pretty much anything can kill a person but that isn’t the issue. The issue is the idea that ‘infinitesimal’ doses are the most curative. Medicines usually work by targeting some sort of cellular receptor and changing a variety of signalling systems. If there is no drug (due to massive dilutions) these systems aren’t affected! 

Doctrine of Drug Proving – Recordings of drug proving give the only reliable knowledge of medicines which is very essential to cure disease homeopathicaly – drugs must be proved on animals as the symptoms of the drug and the disease are indistinguishable. We then must test on humans as mental symptoms are not seen with animals. At first glance this seems like actual planned drug testing first on animals and then scaled up to humans. Although some homeopaths do this their reasons are entirely backwards. According to Point 1 above that ‘like cures like’, effective medicines produce the same symptoms in healthy people as the diseased people experience – this is almost never the case. Taking Irritable Bowel Syndrome as an example; anti-motility medicines are often prescribed as they slow gut motility and  help relieve diarrhoea. Based on homeopathic teachings if I (a healthy person) were to take anti-motility medications, I would then suffer from diarrhoea. It just doesn’t hold up on any front.

 Theory of Chronic Disease – Chronic diseases are caused by chronic miasms. The miasms are Psora, Syphilis and Sycosis. Psora is the mother of all diseases and at least 7/8th of all the chronic maladies. You won’t see the words Psora or Miasm in the medical literature as they are only recognised by homeopaths. Lots of real research in the last few decades has shown that low-grade and often sub-clinical inflammation is a driver behind many different diseases ranging from diabetes to obesity and many chronic diseases inbetween. This was assessed through hundreds of well-designed studies. So it is true that lots of chronic diseases can have the same or similar underlying causes. However, The concepts of the miasms were invented by one man based on the observation that people had recurrence of symptoms when diseased. 

Theory of Vital Force – The human organism is a triune entity consisting of body, mind, and spirit. This spirit which is responsible for different manifestations of life was termed by Dr. Hahnemann as ‘Vital Force’. In the healthy condition, it is the vital force which maintains normal functions and sensations of the organism. The idea behind this is kind of on the right track. The body is a finely tuned machine constantly aiming to maintain balance and homoeostasis in multiple physiological symptoms. The theory of vital source believes that a misalignment of the triune entity leads to damage to the vital force which manifests as disease. You can sort of see where this idea sprang from – someone contracts a bacterial infection, the immune system kicks in to action, individual shows signs of disease as a result. To a homeopath the major points are Vital Source is compromised (somehow), disease manifests. 

Doctrine of Drug Dynamisation – Homeopathic dynamisation is a process by which the medicinal properties which are latent in natural substances while in their crude state, become awakened and developed into activity to an incredible degree. According to Dr. Stuart Close, “Homeopathic potentisation is a mathematico-mechanical process for the reduction, according to scale, of crude, inert or poisonous medicinal substances to a state of physical solubility, physiological assimilability and therapeutic activity and harmless, for use  as homeopathic healing remedies.” The quote is essentially a load of drivel, using big words to carry authority without really saying much. Dynamisation is achieved either using trituration (dilution of a potent drug powder with an inert diluent powder) or Succussion the action or process of shaking). According to homeopaths using these processes turns poisonous substances into ones of healing, increases the ‘dynamism’ of the medcine which is more important than quantity, medically inert crude subtances are transformed int powerful healing substances. Its this major point here that the medical community has so many issues with as it goes against the basics of chemistry and known biology and has never been shown to happen in any controlled study. Turning a poison into a powerful and true healing factor by shaking it or diluting it isn’t real!

 

.

Well there you have it. That’s the major run down of the key principles of homeopathy. They tend to vary a little bit depending on the source. If you are interested in the original work that popularised homeopathy  in 1796 by Samuel Hahnemann, then you can find a PDF version of the 6th edition of this questionable book right here.

.


.

What is the placebo effect?

.

The placebo effect sometimes also called the placebo response is a truly remarkable medical phenomenon in which a fake treatment such as a ‘sugar pill’ can sometimes improve a patients condition simply because they expect it to. The whole core of this effect is that the patient BELIEVES what they are receiving is actual medicine, not just a fake pill or solution.

In the pharmaceutical industry, placebo treatments are commonly given alongside newly developed drugs. This is to determine whether new drugs have a therapeutic effect to a greater degree than we would see with a fake placebo drug – this helps determine the true medical benefits of a particular drug. Well-designed studies are described as ‘double-blind’. This means that neither the researcher giving the drugs or the participant taking the drugs known who is receiving the real medicine and who is receiving the placebo.  The information of who gets what drug (real or placebo) is usually held by another researcher who is not involved in the study or data analysis in any other way.

.

If patients taking the real drug show significant improvement in comparison to the placebo group then this helps support the conclusion that the medicine is effective.

.

The concept of positive thinking has been around for countless years – the idea that a positive outlook on situations can ultimately help said situations. The specific idea of the placebo response however is more recent and was popularised by a paper called ‘The Powerful Placebo‘ written by prominent anaesthesiologist Henry K Beecher back in 1955. This can be considered a type of meta-study in that he took a number of studies from the time which explored the placebo effect and then came to an overall conclusion based on the individual findings of these papers. In total he analysed 26 studies and found that, on average, 32% of patients respond to a placebo treatment. This has since been criticised for perhaps over-inflating the true numbers as he didn’t distinguish other factors from the placebo effect. He would later go on to write additional papers expanding on the idea of placebo-responders and non-responders. The general idea being that most people will simply not respond to a placebo treatment. Those who do however, show modest improvements in their conditions.

.

It has been shown in the literature that placebos have real and measurable physiological effects…

.

Athsma

Pain

Reduced anxiety

Reduction in depression symptoms

Irritable bowl syndrome

Parkinson’s disease

.

Interestingly, the opposite can also occur. Placebos can actually cause negative or side effects. This is described as a nocebo effect.

These effects don’t have to be produced by a physical intervention such as a placebo drug but can also occur if someone is given a negative medical prognosis.

Although the placebo effect may seem like a good thing (especially for homeopaths as this is the only route by which homeopathy may be beneficial) it means much greater care is required when trialling new drugs. We have to control for the placebo effect. 

.

The placebo effects is real but how or why does this happen?

.

.

Proposed mechanisms

 .

Although the placebo effect produces real physiological responses- exactly why or how this happens is not full understood. There appear to be a number of process occurring simultaneously which may produce the observed effects.

.

‘The placebo effect is part of the human potential to react positively to a healer. A patient’s distress may be relieved by something for which there is no medical basis. A familiar example is Band-Aid put on a child. It can make the child feel better by its soothing effect, though there is no medical reason it should make the child feel better’

-Medicine Net

.

Expectancy and conditioning: 

The placebo effect is related to the expectations and perceptions of the patient. If they view the placebo as helpful then generally we see some kind of healing effect. Conversely, if the placebo is seen as harmful we will observe a detrimental effect – the nocebo effect. Expectation plays an additional role when we consider what the placebo looks like – bigger more colourful placebo pills often equate to a bigger health effect. Interestingly, it was thought the placebo was based on the notion that patients believe they are receiving medicine when in fact it is a ‘dud’ pill. Essentially a form of deception. However, it has been shown that even when people with Irritable Bowl Syndrome are told that they are receiving a placebo, we see a modest improvement in symptoms. Placebos can act similarly through classical conditioning, wherein a placebo and an actual stimulus are used simultaneously until the placebo is associated with the effect from the actual stimulus. This concept was famously explored by Pavlov with his dogs and bells.  So we know that the placebo effect is based on what people expect to happen…but what about the true phyiological effects produced when taking a placebo?

.

Effects on physiology:

A number of studies have shown measurable changes in physiology as a result of placebo treatment. These changes likely underlie any reduction in symptoms in health benefits observed. The effects of placebo analgesia (pain relief) on higher brain circuits have been studies in depth primarily using MRI scanning to highlight areas of activation in the brain.

Placebo responses are linked with enhanced dopamine and opiod signalling in reward and motivated behaviour pathways. Additionally, nocebo responses were associated with deactivation of these same circuits and reduced dopamine and opiod release.

Moving away from pain-related treatment, placebos have other   measurable physiological effects. I mentioned earlier that placebo can have a positive effect on Parkinson’s disease – this is down to increased dopamine secretion (Parkinson’s is typically caused by a destruction of dopaminergic neurons). When looking at depression, placebo treatment appears to affect many of the same areas activated by common anti-depressants with most emphasis being on the prefrontal cortex. In another interesting study, coffee which contained ‘placebo-caffeine’ caused an increase in dopamine secretion. The concept of placebo ergogenic aids (performance enhancers) has been debated on and off by the sporting industry as to whether they should be allowed.

We know that the placebo effect is real and that is stems from our perception of drugs and what we expect them to achieve – we also know that symptom improvement can be due measurable physiological changes such as changes in hormone secretions. However, the broader question of exactly why our bodies show physiological alterations just because we think they should is still quite baffling.

Hopefully I’ve explained fairly clearly what the placebo effect is and how it can produce modest physiological effects in placebo-responders. The placebo effect also explains why wacky interventions like homeopathy can in fact alleviate symptoms in those who believe it will.

.

Nothing about the concept of homeopathy is special – it is simply the placebo effect.

.

What does the science say about homeopathy? The papers I will be consulting will be non-biased, peer-reviewed papers. Not poorly conducted ‘studies’ by practitioners of homeopathy. When performing your own research, if you can, aim for well respected journals, that publish peer-reviewed papers  with no-conflict of interest from the authors. If you want to be extra careful you can also search for the authors and check the quality of the papers they have published in the past.

.

 .


.

Homeopathy: what does the science say?

.

Below, I’ve summarised the most prominent studies into the effects of homeopathic treatment on a variety of disorders and diseases.

 

 

http://www.whillyard.com/pseudo-science/homeopathy.html

.

Before we go into studies a little bit about how homeopathy is currently regarded in the scientific community…

The fact that homeopathic preparations often lack even a single molecule of the original diluted substance has been the basis about the effects of preparations for decades.  The concept of ‘water memory‘ is now thrown about by modern proponents of homeopathy. The idea being that water has the innate ability to mimic the effects of whatever it is diluted with. This goes against our current understanding of matter has never been demonstrated to be true in any way. Quite obviously, basic pharmacological research has shown that stronger biological effects come from higher doses of active ingredient, not lower.

In true medical and scientific circles (i.e. not alternative medicine), homeopathy has never been taken seriously as a treatment for anything and is often considered a sham or pseudoscience. Those who support and promote homeopathy, rightly or wrongly, are often labelled quacks. Now the reasons for this are very straight forward –

.

”There is no sound statistical evidence of therapeutic effect, which is consistent with the lack of any biologically plausible pharmacological agent or mechanism”

-From: Ernst E  ‘A systematic review of systematic reviews of homeopathy‘ Clin Pharmacol. 2002;54(6):577-82.

.

.

Some practitioners of homeopathy put forward very advanced and abstract theoretical physics concepts in order to explain why homeopathy works. These concepts include quantum entanglement, quantum non-locality as well as chaos theory. The people putting these theories forward are not even close to being experts in these fields and often explain them incorrectly. They are also not supported by any actual experiments – its all just speculation and nonsensical explanations.

Aside from a lack of any solid evidence to support the efficacy of homeopathic treatments – the key ideas of homeopathy conflict with fundamental concepts of physics and chemistry.

.

Looking at systematic reviews of the literature…

.

‘No individual preparation has been unambiguously shown by research to be different from placebo’

Ernst 2002

‘Studies that were explicitly randomised and were double-blind as well as studies scoring above the cut-points yielded significantly less positive results than studies not meeting the criteria’

Linde K et al 1999 – explaining that as study design has become more fair, homeopathy shows even LESS efficacy than it has in the past

“The most reliable evidence  fails to demonstrate that homeopathic medicines have effects beyond placebo.”

Cochrane Systematic Reviews 2010

.

Almost all modern meta-studies  show no effect of homeopathic treatment beyond what we would expect with a placebo effect. Those meta-studies which DO show a small effect also state that this outcome is likely due to weak trial design which leads to biased results. As study sign has improved – these positive outcomes are no longer observed.

A quick look at the dilutions involved just so you have an idea of what a ‘minute or infinitesimal amount really is. In homeopathy the most commonly used dilution is called 60X or 30C. This is a 10-60 dilution of the original agent. That might not sound crazy but let this put it into perspective…

At a concentration of 60X/30C…

‘Dilution advocated by Hahnemann for most purposes: on average, this would require giving two billion doses per second to six billion people for 4 billion years to deliver a single molecule of the original material to any patient.’

-Wikipedia: Homeopathic Dilutions

For all intents and purposes, this dilution isn’t even close to containing a fraction of a single therapeutic molecule of medicine. 

The science concerning the efficacy of homeopathy is conclusive and has been or a long time. Read on for what happened when I disagreed with the NHS funding homeopathic treatments…it’s mental.

 


.

The ‘Facebook Fight’

.

I usually try to avoid openly arguing with certain people. In this case I simply couldn’t help myself. I was scrawling through Sky News and noticed a small story at the bottom about NHS homeopathy funding.

I thought ‘surely that can’t be right’.

But it was right. Turns out, tax payers money does fund a small homeopathic budget. I found this pretty ridiculous. I think people should be able to spend their own money on pretty much anything, but taxpayers money? On something that has been repeatedly disproved? I decided to dig a little deeper.

.

.

I came across the British Homeopathic Association Facebook page. I had a look around the page and saw that the (very few) members were up in arms about a story detailing that health chiefs were planning to cut homeopathic funding. At this point I couldn’t help but chime in. Oh dear. What a mistake that was. Delve into the madness below…

Admittedly my opening gambit was a bit full on, perhaps poorly worded in hind sight. However, the argument/conversation that followed was very interesting.

.

Zoom in on this. It’s worth a read!

.

Linda Holmes was very vocal throughout the exchange and a quick peak at her Facebook page reveals someone completely absorbed in conspiracy theories and pseudoscience.

.

Lovethispic.com sounds like a legitimate research source…

.

I’m not sure why but in my research it seems that pseudoscience believers are so often always conspiracy theory crackpots, yelling in various Facebook groups and forums that ‘Big Pharma’ is trying to keep us sick to make money and that cancer has been cured but there’s ‘no money in cures’.

.

Take off the tin foil hat Linda! Aliens aren’t reading your thoughts

.

It’s all mad and it’s terrifically difficult if not impossible to convince these people that maybe, just maybe, the world isn’t trying to murder them and coffee doesn’t cure Alzheimer’s.

.

‘Drugs will always drugs’

-Linda

.

Our friend Katie (final comment from the large exchange above) cherry picks one particular example of a (probably), self-resolving infection (no details of the use of actual medicine but if she was a real nurse then presumably this infant would also be on some kind of antibiotics) in a new born. She has then attributed this positive outcome to the use of homeopathic medicine i.e. water. As such, no amount of real scientific evidence or research AGAINST her belief will convince her that she is wrong.

.

What homeopaths and almost all other practitioners of allopathic/alternative medicine rely upon is anecdotal evidence and personal testimony both of which spit in the face of the scientific method. Quackwatch points this out rather well:

.

‘Imagine if the FDA or pharmaceutical companies, like GSK, decided that large scale drug trials where too expensive and ‘pointless’ and relied on the experiences of a few patients when interviewed about a particular new drug.’

.

Katie has used an ‘n’ of 1 in her observation. An ‘n’ number in a study, put simply, is an experimental unit. If you are testing the efficacy of a compound on 20 mice then that experiment has an n number of 20. We conduct a power analysis before an experiment to determine how many n number we need in order to detect a difference between experimental groups when a real difference actually exists. This is important as it limits the ‘over-use’ of precious animals and also means you don’t under-power your experiment and potentially waste your time and the lives of your animals. Katie has an n of 1 which is useless in all situations I can think of. Again, it’s anecdotal and personal experience.

.

I could provide these people with multiple large scale studies (lots of n) showing the fallacy of homeopathic medicine but they wouldn’t read them and even if they did, it would still be denied. No one likes being proven wrong, including me, but sometimes you have to take a step back and really look at the evidence, or lack thereof, that support your claims.

.

This sort of thinking spills over into all aspects of these peoples lives. One commentator on this post has a Facebook page almost entirely dedicated to quackery. Highlights in included:

.

‘Big pharma has a cure for cancer but won’t release it’

‘The FBI created HIV’

‘Peanut butter cures Alzheimer’s’

‘Green tea cures cancer and pharma doesn’t want you to know’

.

I’ve written extensively about the myths surrounding green tea before.

Looking at Alzheimer’s, even just a small amount of research on the topic of peanut butter and Alzheimer’s would show this is not true. Do these people not realise that if their claims were true then what they preach would be common place? We are seeing an increase in Alzheimer’s in this country due to an ageing population. I work alongside an Alzheimer’s research group in fact. If peanut butter really did cure the disease do you think members of that research lab would be working long hours on in vitro release study’s and in vivo models desperately trying to combat it?  No.

.

Harsh but fair.

.

.


How.

But what about when homeopathy appears to work?

.

We know that modern, well-controlled and designed studies show that overall, homeopathy is no better than a placebo. Then how do we explain all these anecdotes or personal testimonies from homeopaths about them witnessing healing miracles?

Quite simply. Science offers a number of explanations as to how homeopathy may cure diseases or alleviate symptoms despite having no true medical efficacy…

.

  • The placebo effect –  expectations for the homeopathic preparations may cause the effect.
  • Therapeutic effect of the consultation – this falls under the umbrella of the placebo effect. The care and reassurance a patient experiences when talking to a caregiver can have a positive effect on the patient’s health.  Studies have shown this effect to be real.
  • Unassisted natural healing – many diseases are disorders are self resolving. ‘Homeopathic’ healing is wrongly attributed to the natural healing process over time.
  • Unrecognised treatments – changes in diet, exercise habits and lifestyle choices can have massive positive impacts on health but may not be recognised as the cause of healing at the time.
  • Regression towards the mean – lots of diseases are described as ‘cyclical’ with patients going through good and bad periods. As people are more likely to seek treatment when feeling the worst, the odds are that from that point they will start to feel better due to this cycle even without medical intervention. Mistakenly attributing healing to a homeopathic remedy during the ‘bad’ phase of the cycle is probably fairly common.
  • Medical intervention – patients may also receive standard medical care at the same time as homeopathic treatment with real medicine being responsible for health improvements.

In reality, healing effects are probably due to a combination of these occurring at once. All the anecdotes and stories you hear from homeopaths will be down to one or more of these reasons. These are actually very straight forward ideas but few people stop to consider them – especially those with no interest or knowledge in real biology or health sciences

 .


.

What to make of all this?

.

Research into the placebo effect is still ongoing. As of now, the effect is known to be real but the exact mechanisms by which it works are still under investigation. In individual cases were homeopathy ‘works’, the benefit is due to the placebo effect. I have no problem with this. People genuinely recovering from mild illnesses can only be a positive thing. However I DO have a problem with the mentality of hard believers of homeopathy who will often claim their ‘water’ is more effective than modern medicine.

This is not only false but also potentially dangerous – you should NEV ER seek out alternative treatments instead of evidence based, proven medicines. 

Another area of contention are companies and individuals, who, knowing homeopathy is hocus pocus, market and sell expensive potions to willing and naive homeopathy practitioners. I just wish that in this day and age we were beyond this medieval mind set.

Modern medicine is EVIDENCE BASED. Homeopathy is not.

While homeopathy may provide beneficial effects for mild disorders (through the placebo effect) it will not in any way cure serious or life threatening diseases and it is unfair and untrue to claim that it will.

My advice?

By all means, take homeopathic remedies to combat things like anxiety if you must (try not to spend too much, it is water after all), but never EVER choose homeopathy over evidence based modern medicine for anything remotely serious.

.

Thanks for reading!

.

-ScienceGuy

Reach me in the comments below or at ed@scienceguysupplements.com

.


.

References

.

References can now be found linked directly in the text rather than listed in this section. Delving deeper into the research has never been easier!

If you are looking to do a bit of your own research, on any topic, PubMed and Google Scholar both have a huge literature collection.

Top 5 Body Weight Exercises

Improving your physique and strength isn’t all about smashing the heavy weights. It is a great idea to incorporate simple body weight exercises into your workout programme. These sort of exercises can help with explosive strength, core development as well as overall body development.

The great thing about body weight lifts is that they can be performed at home when you can’t make it to the gym and also function as a great introduction for people who have yet to take the leap to weight lifting.

I perform at least two body weight exercises every time I hit the gym. I use them primarily as a warm up for bigger lifts but increasing repetitions or adding additional weight to body weight lifts can make them  a major part of any workout.

Here are my top 5 body weight exercises:

.

#1 Pull-ups

.

In my opinion, the undisputed king of body weight exercises. Pull-ups are simple to perform. Pull-ups are a fantastic way to build upper back mass but are also effective in building larger biceps. I rarely train biceps by themselves (I know, shocking!) but my arms remain in proportion to my physique due to focused back training. Some people swear by pull-ups for arm growth and perform them with a narrow grip to put as much emphasis onto the biceps as possible.

.

Varying your hand grip can change the emphasis across your entire back. Feel like your lats are lagging? Wide grip pull-ups have you covered. Looking to beef up your rhomboids and lower trapezius? Narrower grip pull-ups are for you.

.

.

Not only are pull-ups versatile in muscle targeting but adding additional weight (either through a belt or dumbbell) turns them into a serious back exercise to rival well-liked machines such as the ‘rope pull down’.

.

Ever since hearing that Arnold (The King) use to start every training session with a 5 set pull-up warm up I have done the same. It has done true wonders for the width of my upper back.

.

If pull-ups aren’t part of your routine then consider fitting them in or even performing them instead of using fixed pull down machines. If you are an ace at the standard pull-up, consider making things harder for yourself by increasing your hand spacing, performing pause reps, or adding additional weight to the lift.

.

Major Muscles:

  • Middle and lower trapezius
  • Rhomboids
  • Latissimi dorsi
  • Deltoids
  • Biceps brachii/brachialis

.

Great For:

Upper back width

Building ‘lat’ mass

Building biceps

Grip strength

.

How To:

.

.

Key things to remember:

Full reps! Don’t cheat yourself with half repetitions

No ‘kipping’. This isn’t cross-fit. Avoid using leg momentum

If you are just starting out, most gyms have ‘assisted’ pull-up machines to give you a hand

.


.

#2 Press-ups

.

A classic body weight exercise favoured by teenage boys the world over. The press-up is so popular because it can be performed pretty much anywhere. Not only are press-ups a great chest builder but they also target the triceps. As with pull-ups varying things such as hand width and body angle can place greater emphasis on certain parts of the chest.

.

.

Although I only perform press-ups rarely they can be used as great warm up to any full chest routine, or with varied grips and added weights, can act as a great chest workout in or outside of the gym.

.

Major muscles:

  • Pectoralis major.
  • Deltoids.
  • Triceps brachii.
  • Serratus anterior.

.

Great for:

Chest work when away from the gym

As part of a chest routine/part of a super set

Building triceps

.

How to:

.

.

Key things to remember:

Avoid elbow flaring. Press-ups should be performed in a similar way as the bench press

Vary the grip to place greater emphasis on different parts of the chest/triceps

Keep the body straight, don’t dip the hips to the floor

Get nice and low to the floor, perhaps even a light touch

.


.

#3 Dips

.

When talking about ‘dips’ I am referring to full body weight dips which are usually performed on a rack with also has a bar for pull-ups. Another form of the ‘dip’ also exists, usually called ‘the tricep dip’ in which one balances off the end of an object with the feet on the ground – these sort of dips are almost exclusively for targeting the triceps.

Dips are a solid auxiliary exercise that target both the chest and triceps. As part of a workout with press-ups, dips increase the tension even further on similar muscles. Super setting these two exercises, especially with added weight, can provide a demanding but effective chest/triceps workout.

Dips are one of my favourite exercises. I use them, alongside pull-ups, as an overall upper body warm up, especially when going into a full chest routine. By practising dips frequently you can eventually add substantial weight to the lift either around your waist as a belt or via a dumbbell picked up with the feet.

.

Major muscles:

  • Triceps brachii
  • Pectoralis major
  • Anterior deltoids

.

Great for:

Adding volume to a chest workout

Building tricep mass

.

How to:

.

.I’ve highlighted the two major forms of dip. Each comes with their own advantages.  Note that the bar dip is the better of the two for chest development. The bench dip however is great for tricep work.

.

Bar Dip

.

.

Bench dip

.

.

Key things to remember:

Control your reps – these exercises are hard on the shoulder ligaments and joints

Angling your body on the ‘bar dip’ places emphasis on different parts of the chest

Avoid elbow flaring just as you would on the bench press

.


.

#4 Lunges

.

Ah good old lunges. Tough but effective. Lunges are a great way to add volume during leg training. I really like to perform them after a heavy squat session to push myself over the brink! Lunges can be used by themselves as part of a body weight leg workout and are great for quad and glute development. Lunges come in a variety of form but I will run through the basics of the standard lunge.

Don’t forget that as with all ”body weight’ exercises, additional weight can be added for greater benefit. When I first started training and went abroad for holidays with no gym access, I would lunge with a back pack full of rocks (sounds crazy but it works!). In the gym, additional weight can be applied across the back as a barbell or held at the side using dumbells.

.

Major muscles:

  • Quadriceps
  • Gluteus maximus

.

Great for:

Adding volume to leg workouts

Glute development

.

How to:

.

.

Key things to remember:

Take care with additional weight – especially across the back

Avoid touching the floor with the lower knee – keep everything under tension

Both legs should be roughly right angles – avoid a very narrow or very wide step.

.


.

#5 Plank

.

The plank is a fantastic core development exercise. It spreads tension from the shoulders, through the abominable and lower back muscles and finally through the quadriceps. Although correctly performed heavy lifts such as the deadlift and squat help build a strong core, it never hurts to supplement with core-specific exercises.

If you don’t squat or deadlift then exercises such as the plank should definitely be in your routine.

Coupled with more traditional ‘ab’ workouts like crunches and leg raises, planks can be an effective addition to any abdominal routine. It should be noted that a strong core is vital to big lifts. People who constantly focus on ab work like crunches aren’t really building a strong ‘core’. Instead they are simply developing their abdominals. A strong core relates to the strength of all the lower trunk muscles which includes the abdominals but also the obliques and much of the lower back anatomy as well. Planks target all of these components. 

.

Major muscles:

  • Erector spinae
  • Rectus abdominis
  • Transverse abdominus
  • Deltoids
  • Pectorals
  • Gluteus maximus
  • Quadricpes

.

Great for:

Building a strong core!

How to:

.

.

Key things to remember:

Make use of this exercise for building a strong core as well as a nice set of abs (body fat % permitting)

Additional weight can be added for a greater challenege but do this gradually

.


.

Well there you have it. My run down of the top 5 body weight exercises. All of which can function as great additions to an existing workout or form a workout at the gym or at home by themselves. It’s entirely up to you.

If you want to incorporate body weight lifts as part of a more advanced weight lifting programme then don’t forget to check out our ‘5 best mass-building exercises‘ article to make sure you aren’t missing out on some serious gains!

Any questions? Leave a comment below and I’ll get back to you or reach me at ed@scienceguysupplements.com

.

-ScienceGuy