[quote]pushharder wrote:
I got about 2/3 of the way through the questionnaire and quit when the only available answers to a whole page of questions were:
“Somewhat likely”
or
“Very likely”
(or something to that effect)
when my only honest answer was “not likely.”
[/quote]
That stinks, regardless of the researcher’s credentials.
But were you able to put an honest answer for your age and then see those questions?
***** Looks like I made a bad assumption. I put 52 and it is letting me go to the next page.
***** EDIT #2:
Maybe it doesn’t stink. The only questions I with “very likely” and “somewhat likely” as the only choices had opposites where both sides had somewhat likely and very likely:
I am inclined to do X – very likely
I am inclined to do X – somewhat likely
I am not inclined to do X – somewhat likely
I am not inclined to do X – very likely
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
You know, I know that muscle dysmorphia is real. But every time one of these things comes up I find my hackles raised–it always just…STINKS. Obviously I am not calling into question the motives of the OP’s significant other in particular, nor the desire for better understanding of the topic and better treatment in general…but I can’t really help it. I smell a rat with most of this stuff in general.
[/quote]
I hate to throw false data anywhere, and my age is not within the requested range: so I could not get to see any of the questions beyond the first page.
Is there at least one question on the survey that actually pertains to somebody having a false perception of reality? Or is it all just questions about behaviors, goals, and preferences?
[/quote]
Looks like I made a bad assumption. I put 52 and it is letting me go to the next page.
[quote]Gmoore17 wrote:
Doing the survey, one of the things that I do not care for, one of the questions is:
*I use legal or illegal supplements (creatine or anabolic steroids) to help develop my muscles
Now anyone who takes any supplement, even creatine, has to answer yes to that question… Why would those two things be considered in the same category?
Food for thought, anyway
[/quote]
This type of false equivalency is routine when a study is being used to advance somebody’s agenda (not necessarily the student’s agenda).
[/quote]
Having discovered that I was able to see all the questions even though I put my real age of 52, now I am not so sure the question really implies any false equivalency.
This question is not being used as an indicator of a bad thing in and of itself. This question is asking whether or not you go to extra trouble to put a substance most people don’t use into your body to try to improve it in some way. Other questions and answers are being used as an indicator of the supposedly bad thing; and then this question is just to see whether or not there is a correlation with that supposedly bad thing.
The thing I found dubious about the questionnaire was that it seemed there was nothing in it that would provide a really solid indicator of a false perception of one’s body. Dissatisfaction does not equal false perception.
I will say that lifting has kept me sane. There have been a few points in my life that were very unsteady.
Being able to go into the gym and bust my ass was all that kept me from myself during those times. I could warm up, and then think about whatever was eating at me.
I would dwell on it until I was in a rage and practically ready to smash/destroy something (that feeling where you are so pissed you are half a second from crying), and then squat/deadlift until I collapsed. (I trained squat, bench, and DL to failure for almost an entire year. Drop sets work well if you are especially worked up that day.)
I would just let it all go like that 4 to 6 times a week. Maybe I will do a small write up on it some day. I relied on it to keep me level headed and calm for a long time.
Now I have made some peace with myself, it is more like this…
[quote]Gmoore17 wrote:
Doing the survey, one of the things that I do not care for, one of the questions is:
*I use legal or illegal supplements (creatine or anabolic steroids) to help develop my muscles
Now anyone who takes any supplement, even creatine, has to answer yes to that question… Why would those two things be considered in the same category?
Food for thought, anyway
[/quote]
This type of false equivalency is routine when a study is being used to advance somebody’s agenda (not necessarily the student’s agenda).
[/quote]
Having discovered that I was able to see all the questions even though I put my real age of 52, now I am not so sure the question really implies any false equivalency.
This question is not being used as an indicator of a bad thing in and of itself. This question is asking whether or not you go to extra trouble to put a substance most people don’t use into your body to try to improve it in some way. Other questions and answers are being used as an indicator of the supposedly bad thing; and then this question is just to see whether or not there is a correlation with that supposedly bad thing.
The thing I found dubious about the questionnaire was that it seemed there was nothing in it that would provide a really solid indicator of a false perception of one’s body. Dissatisfaction does not equal false perception.
[/quote]
Yeah you will be able to see all the questions regardless of age,she just can’t use the data if you’re under 18/over 40.
As far as I understand that was the point of the question exactly,just to see if someone is using outside supplements to help with muscle growth etc,by no means is it to equate steroids with creatine,just examples of supplements legal or illegal
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
You know, I know that muscle dysmorphia is real. But every time one of these things comes up I find my hackles raised–it always just…STINKS. Obviously I am not calling into question the motives of the OP’s significant other in particular, nor the desire for better understanding of the topic and better treatment in general…but I can’t really help it. I smell a rat with most of this stuff in general.
How many days a week do high school football athletes train? How many days a week do top high school baseball players or hockey or wrestling or soccer players train on the field AND in the gym? How many supplements do many of them take? And why can’t we say that a guy who has serious goals and is very strict and driven in his way there is just being competitive and critical of himself? It is a well established fact that the majority of the all-time greats, not to mention most of the regular top level pros or even collegiate athletes are their own worst critics, relentlessly hard on themselves. Why is it that a guy who couldn’t play that level of sports but wants to excel at SOMETHING is always ready bait for the “must be abnormal, he’s not doing what the herd does and he won’t compromise” line of reasoning?
The minute you stop trying to beat your limits you accept mediocrity and become obsolete. The minute you stop learning the same thing happens.
[quote]Waylon wrote:
This is how it started for me - First I was going to the gym a couple times a week, then I started eating more protein, eventually using highly concentrated protein powders and experimenting with creatine. Now I walk around weighing 165 at only 5’7" with some 12% bf, train four days a week and lift HUNDREDS of pounds! I am still not satisfied and have added fish oil and even started taking the hormone known as vitamin D. Someday I may even get to 175 or 180 and keep lifting. I know this isn’t normal for human males, but in my eyes, I’m still not that big.[/quote]
[/quote]
I definitely understand your point of view,as I am generally wary of any study like this where it seems it is just an outsider looking in on a subculture like bodybuilding for example and completely missing the point.
I am an amateur bodybuilder who has competed and own and run a local supplement store,so she definitely knows about the lifestyle and lives it herself also. I believe (and I can’t fully speak for her) that the question on are you or have you competed is pretty much in there to rule a lot of people out from having muscle dysmorphia as they are training and eating to that obsessive level for a purpose and a goal.
The people who she is trying to find out about with muscle dysmorphia are the ones who won’t leave the house or attend social occasions because of it and it impacts on their life negatively,not just someone who is avoiding social occasions or work because they are going through a comp prep.
I’m not trying to be argumentative just shed a little light on it!
Always important to know whom one is dealing with.
[/quote]
Isn’t it the opposite in a study? I thought the people answering the questions–the test subjects–shouldn’t know anything about why the questions are being asked and the people asking the questions–i.e. collecting the data–shouldn’t even know the purpose of the study. Telling the subject the purpose of the study usually skews the data. I only scanned the thread and I didn’t take the quiz but as soon as the person collecting data disclosed the purpose that lead me to conclude the whole thing was bullshit, unless the disclosure was actually a smokescreen and there is some other purpose for the data collection.
[quote]roybot wrote:
I thought that true muscle dysmorphia was the result of someone seeing themselves as smaller than they actually were.
[/quote]
That’s what I thought, too. But it wouldn’t surprise me too much to see somebody expand the meaning to fit an agenda.
[quote]roybot wrote:
I thought that true muscle dysmorphia was the result of someone seeing themselves as smaller than they actually were.
[/quote]
That’s what I thought, too. But it wouldn’t surprise me too much to see somebody expand the meaning to fit an agenda.
[/quote]
Yeah. The meaning has been expanded to include everyone from curl monkeys to pros. How does this guy fit in to the study?
