14 comments

[ 4.3 ms ] story [ 38.0 ms ] thread
28 points (and counting) for a bullshit fluff piece absolutely filled to the brim with Amazon product links.

Tell people they can be fit with no effort on their part, add the word hack, bump up the upvotes with friend's accounts to get started, profit.

Agreed, there's very little actual content in this post.

If anyone is serious about either cutting or bulking, I'd recommend the /fit/ sticky [0]

[0] http://liamrosen.com/fitness.html

I felt the same. The article is full of broscience. There were multiple points where it was clear he was unfamiliar with exercise & nutrition research yet he still spouted the broscience as "scientific" research.

Though, I do have mixed feelings on this. If this convinces some readers to take up fitness as a hobby that's great, but there are much better fitness resources online than some broscience blog post.

This is terrible. Why isn't the article flag killed yet?
> Tell people they can be fit with no effort on their part

That is not at all a fair characterization of the article. Unfair characterizations do more damage to HN than "bullshit fluff" articles do.

(comment deleted)
Advertizing using creatine, which used to be banned everywhere until recently, and mentionning injuries all the time makes me think people should stay pretty far from any kind of advices this person gives.
source for creatine banned anywhere?

I'm using creatine for 10 years...

also - this article is bullshit :)

Huh? AFAIK creatine hasn't ever been banned. It is the safest workout supplement out there.
But... What if it is true?
Excuse me but since when is it more weight and less repetitions that lead to strength? It is the other way around. Less weight, more repititions -> strength. A lot of weight, less repetitions -> size gains.
True. Also i could change the 2-6 8-12 repetitions to 10-12 or 15! :)