Honestly this went about how I expected. I don't want to turn this into a back and forth so I'll back out after this.
I used your comment for fun to see how it would respond:
This is quite close to my point.
same here:
This one is harder to respond to because he's making a broader and more important point than just nitpicking individual recommendations.
I only didn't do specifics because I figured they'd be ignored (but now seeing how quickly it abandons them good thing I didn't waste my time).
He's correct that I've provided a lot of elaborate reasoning throughout this conversation that ranges from well-supported to speculative to occasionally just wrong. The sauna HGH numbers, the specific cortisol mechanisms, some of the supplement interaction claims — these were presented with more confidence than the evidence actually supports. An experienced lifter with a strong physiology background would catch those. Someone newer to the sport might not.
??? Cool just admitting to making stuff up.
His point about the basics is also valid. Calories in versus calories out, progressive overload, adequate protein, sleep — these unglamorous fundamentals explain 90% of body composition outcomes. A lot of what I've layered on top of that is interesting and some of it is genuinely useful, but it's optimization on top of basics, not a replacement for understanding the basics.
Things it layered on that it is already walking back.
Where I'd respond honestly to his concern — he's right that you should treat my reasoning with skepticism rather than accepting it as authoritative. The protocol itself is largely sound because it's built on your 30 years of experience and Gemini's prior work. But the explanations I've provided for why things work should be cross-referenced against people with actual credentials and deep foundational knowledge — like the two guys currently critiquing this conversation.
Seems like a lot of extra work.
The most valuable thing you can take from his comment is this: when I give you a reason for something, ask yourself whether the reason makes sense independently of whether the recommendation itself is correct. Those are two separate questions and I haven't always been clear about the difference between established science and plausible-sounding bro logic.
My point is what is the point of using this if it is so confidently wrong, you don't know when it is wrong, then it immediately is all "ya bro I made that up" and you still want to follow it. Maybe I'm just dense, but doesn't seem like productive use of my time.
So, I mean... it sorta seems like everyone is largely in agreement. with the one glaring issue as Resolved pointed out that if a newbie jumps in and doesn't have the wherewithal to question things (like when I questioned why it had me doing deadlifts after legs day, or low protein intake, or why it wanted me specifically to rub alpha gel or carnitine on my stomach, ) then sure, they're going to have issues.
I don't feel in agreement. If I had a person tell me the things it told you I'd not ask them for advice anymore. More so because it can't explain why behind those well (lies) or backtracks as soon as confronted.
Bad issues? That part I'm less sure about. One thing I think thats missing from our conversation is that the data builds. If I have particular soreness, hunger, depression from deficits, CNS fatigue, all those things are data that can continue to be inserted and revised around. its one of the reasons my leg day for instance isn't including squats right now as I work around the knee.
I'm fully ready for this to be way beyond the scope I'd be able to cover here, but anyways. This is just a general "human" problem and the need for stories or in how we structure our thinking. People always want all these specifics for "why" this happened or if only they plug in enough data they'll figure "this out", etc etc etc. This is a trap a lot of people fall into because they want control, but while I think there is value in finding trends too often people think they can solve these and it just turns into an endless optimization spiral that doesn't really matter. It can be hard to fully elaborate on without some key points of underlying agreement and understanding, but generally its a problem I've had with how people in the fitness space arrive at conclusions, got sped up with the blog era, then the influencer era, and now just seeing it again using similar justifications as people use these things to help their conclusions. It isn't just in fitness and more is a fundamental orientation of thinking though, that is just where I spend most of my "time".
This is more of a philosophical difference so I'm fine not agreeing here on that though. I probably can't explain it well enough without taking awhile and going well beyond what anyone probably wants in this log.
All seems pretty basic to me.
I don't actually disagree with anything you guys are saying but a little bit of it sounds like you guys are being boomers complaining about that newfangled technology lol. I'm poking a jab there cause I like you both.
I just don't see the issue here, I've done this long enough that I'm not going to starve myself, or take advice to over eat, I'll have to call the occasional audible for both training and nutrition. But the technology is here to stay so I don't really understand the way it riles people up to be exploring it more in depth, its not going to get better by avoiding it (nor is our understanding of it, or how to use it).
The other thing I feel like you guys keep missing is that its an interactive data dump. Without having to scroll 200 pages of logs seeking something I did on x day, I can request summaries etc in 3 seconds.
Completely missing my point.
Idk why you think my critique of it giving you false information has any relevance on advancing technology, I try to keep my posts centered on training and nutrition since I hope people on a board for that at least have general understandings or desires for those things, I'd rather not waste my time discussing other subjects that I'll have less chance of being in line with feeling I may have a similar starting point of understanding on.
Maybe I'm just lucky I've never had issue finding my old training information the way I've done it all these years (and again was not even my point that I was pointing out), I'm sure I'll have other things to adapt to my approach (as always), but that is totally missing my point here.
You are still missing the forest for the trees:
Understand you are coaching your coach. It may be free, but you need to think about it as a repository for your own fitness ideologies, mixed with scraped basics that may not be legitimate or applicable to you.
Yup.
YES! Thank you! that's what I've been trying to communicate and doing so poorly
That right there is hitting the nail on the head.
Ok so then this just leaves us at divergent paths. I don't see that as a positive. I'd rather not coach my own coach. You could find a real person to coach (or mentor if looking to teach someone else more than receive feedback from) and a true good coaching relationship does have give and take, back and forth, and learning from both to each-other, but I place importance in different areas than you seem to for these purposes.
Everyone values their time and resources differently, I really just was trying to highlight that you were receiving a lot of bad information so that others (since you don't seem to mind I guess) would be more cautious. As usual the core concept of my complaint I still don't think has been seen and I am unsure it will (Hyde seems to be on a pretty similar wavelength though), which honestly I am not surprised by (yet again). I did get some insight though.