The dogmatic evidence based group doesn’t really have a grasp on what the “broscience” is or where it came from. It’s stuff that has been learned over time and passed down and passed on that someone did and it worked, it was repeated and so were the results. Now, some of it is useless and we’ve found out isn’t necessary or can even be detrimental to our goals, but a lot of it, these exercise science guys haven’t figure out yet or even worse they misrepresent what is actually proven. It’s like the whole “volume is the primary driver of growth” nonsense. That’s not even what any of the studies say. Guys like Mike Mentzer and Dorian Yates and guys before them figured out and it’s what’s built into all these studies that’s looked over by certain people is that mechanical tension (progressive overload) is the primary driver of growth.Honestly... to add to your point, i would go as far as to say these "studies" actually become a detriment bc there are so few people who recognize how limited they, will base their training/diet/gear usage off it and lose.
As it pertains to this specific discussion, i 100% notice i put on a lot more muscle on cycle when i kick protein up to 1.5g+ per lb as opposed to 1g. Thats just me and i can only speak for myself.
Bro Science is a lot more valuable than specific studies that dont exist.