Always Stay Critical – Review 4 - Complementary Training

Always Stay Critical – Review 4

This topic contains 2 replies, has 3 voices, and was last updated by  Daniel Kadlec 2 years, 8 months ago.

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • 20/07/2021 at 18:28 #33180

    Always Stay Critical with Daniel Kadlec Review 4 – What Can We Learn From the Brain? Today we gonna look at this meta-analysis determining the reliabi
    [See the full post at: Always Stay Critical – Review 4]

    02/09/2021 at 17:20 #33568

    This time you went emotional, Daniel :-D! I really enjoyed that one and I am on your side with the conclusion. On the other hand, I think it is quite a leap from saying the ICC low to calling every application of neuroscience BS.
    It is a bit like saying measuring CSA is unreliable so hypertrophy is BS. (I am exaggerating, but you get the point)
    Keep it up 🙂

    11/09/2021 at 13:23 #33646

    Hi Peter, thanks for your comment. The obligation to provide valid evidence is on the side of proponents of neuroscience. Yet, the lack of even ‘good enough’ reliability permits us from having data on any intervention experiments nor cross-sectional and observational data. Hence, all conclusions or rather convictions are IMO not yet good enough to be incorporated in training programs. Happy to be proven wrong tho 🙂 Have a great weekend. Thanks

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.