This video matches your companies training, Next Level Precision 👌. Your videos should be public service announcements as the value to society would be limitless. Please keep them coming!!!!!👏👏👏
4 minutes into this video, and I can already say, I feel it is necessary to explain all of this to as much people as possible. I'll write down another comment after watching it completely, but this is already gold to me
From beginning to end, key information spoken non-stop. I believe everyone should watch this and I can't wait for part 2. Thanks Mike and Functional Patterns
Someone told me that FP can make people faster than traditional strength and conditioning speed training. Put up or shut up guys. Here's a simple way, if you have the huevos to do it: Take 90 track athletes, off season, measure their 30m sprint. 30 do conventional S&C with speed training 3x weekly, 6 weeks 30 do F&P protocols that are identified ahead of time and trained into the exercise scientists conducting the study 30 do sham F&P, that is "movement flows" that are not FP designated. All groups receive training from University trained exercise physiologists. The second two groups are trained by Naudi himself. That is, Naudi selects the FP protocls he wants to test against S&C and trains a group of 5 kinesiologists, then he trains another group of 5 kinesiologists in fake FP protocols. Neither of those two groups know what the athlete is getting, nor does the athlete. That's a double blind. Then we test their 30m sprint at the end of the 6 weeks and take the average of each groups performance to see who tests best. That's a very basic scientific study. Naudi could afford to finance the whole thing at any University. I'm sure they will be happy to receive the funding. You people can't keep bashing science when you don't understand it. Then you take snippets out of other SCIENTIFIC journals to "prove" that your ideas are better? That's not proof. That's just an out of context claim.
Well done Mike. So many holes in the way science is conducted and perceived today. This video helps to shine the light on that, looking forward to more.
This is an awesome video. Mike is such a great speaker. The things you talked about always made sense in my head but had difficulties expressing precisely what I mean, this video is exactly that. Clear and easy to understand for everyone. Looking forward to the second part.
Hey Mike, I applaud this video 👏 I'm a Team, Immersion and Certification Instructor for an evolutionary physical education organization called MovNat. In this video I see a lot of common themes in your work and our work. Coming to similar conclusions from different directions. One of our values in MovNat is cooperation. That's a part of our method, but we aim to make it a part of our lives. Therefore, I see folks in an adjacent field doing a good thing, I shout it out 🤝 Thank you for creating and sharing, keep fighting the good fight 🙌 Johnathon Lang MovNat Team Instructor (I don't use this RU-vid much professionally 😊)
I’m sure this is not a critique of the scientific method (I think?). Based on your sound understanding of the current limitations of evidence based biomechanical studies, it would be logical to design your own FP research studies to provide statistical power to your results. The argument that if there aren’t studies about FP and FP anecdotally works (for many, including me) then why disregard it l, works… up to a point. The next step is to build a library of your own scientific proof based on the outcome measures that FP strives to improve. BTW, I am an FP client and believe in it. But to limit the power of your evidence to observation when you clearly have reproducible results is what will ultimately limit FPs mainstream adoption. Unfortunately (and yes, fortunately as an MD) that’s the way the world works.
If FP did a study proving it was better than conventional strength and conditioning for ANY measure they tested, it would be readily adopted. I had this debate with an FP Acolyte and Adherent in another thread. Like many of them with the conspiracy theory that conventional strength and conditioning is only there to make people injured to keep feeding the "industry" their thinking has become too narrow. What about where the money is? In professional sports? They didn't think that far. If you could prove to keep professional athletes on the field better than conventional methods, you would have a SWARM of professional teams implementing your strategies over conventional methods overnight. Your conspiracy theory that the "industry" exists to keep people injured does not compute in the professional sporting world. They do everything they can to get their athletes back on the field, even ignoring the scientists who say it's too early, because THAT is where the money is...having their PRO'S PLAY! So your conspiracy theory is easily debunked with that one example. Next....
You’re not incorrect in analyzing their motivations & the ends they’ll go to in order to perpetuate the entertainment money machine. I will say that most sports over the last century have genetically self selected for body types that are in most cases outliers. In this sense, it doesn’t make sense for a linebacker to train FP if he will most likely lose weight. I only say that because FP hasn’t solved for excessive mass in a way that compares to what’s required for these sports. Combat sports & Olympic sports may be an exception, things like javelin throwing or sprinting, but if x athlete is using traditional method & has x success, it’s hard to argue that there is another training method that could make x athlete better. Simply because of the fear of the unknown. That being said, the most likely course is that FP will have to build athletes from mostly ground up to prove the point.
@@AlexanderDominisac-sg4xi FP is grossly exaggerated rotatory training. They pretend it is related to the gait cycle because they do "derivatives' of opposite arm, leg coupled movements. Naudi has no idea about gait mechanics. They also missed the point on novel movements. The Brain likes it. Just as many athletes can injure themselves doing too high a load and too high a complex movement pattern without adequate base training, so too can those doing FP if they grab too heavy a kettlebell, or do too complex a movement. Rotation training is good. Naudi learned from Gary Gray. Gary Gray explains the process better. Gary Gray has a chain reaction training that explains coupled movements, fascial connectivity, better than Naudi can dream of. Kayezen and Vertimax provide better training systems that achieve far superior results. Naudi admits he uses conventional training methods in many of his ramblings, that FP is in addition to this. Someone who says that a round house kick is a derivative of throwing and gait, has absolutely NO clue about either. Naudi and Mike said this in a podcast. They simply do not understand biomechanics at all. Our body was designed to move in oppositional (rotatory) patterns. FP has no more impact on gait mechanics than throwing a javelin does. They're different patterns. FP patters are imaginary complex movement patterns that Naudi made up. Lucky for him and his crew, the body likes complex and novel movements, so practicing this can add novelty. Your body will integrate it. If you want to improve running, you need to train running. If you want to improve speed, you train speed. Running in circles with a kettle bell won't improve this. It may improve load through range, whilst having to manage the load and activating more core stability musculature, etc. Sure. Cool. None of their claims are grounded in reality or validity. They will never do a study, because as soon as one confirms their methods aren't better than conventional, and certainly not better than sport specific, then they will lose appeal. Why do that to a business that attracts a lot of cult like followers? The rest is nonsense. Just like their pseudo intellectual arguments about the economy, politics and spirituality mostly derived from Neo Marxist Jack Fresco. Jack Fresco was a shill for UN Agenda 2030. Neophytes of FP repeat what Naudi, who has a mental illness, tells them. They want to be everything except what they are; just personal trainers that don't understand the neurology of movement well.
As much as I love your content, you're really cherry picking here. One example is you ignoring the portion of the study by John Hopkins after the word "But". But ;) I do appreciate you posting the links in the description.
There may be irrelevant info that was discarded to keep it concise. Anyway can you point me to a ground breaking study that is worth looking into in the field of training, should be easy to cherry pick something like that.
@am p go read the study yourself, its in his description. The next piece goes against what he's saying. I get what hes talking about because i also have issues with a lot of studies (mainly because they study one specific thing and apply to general ideas), but in this specific study, hes misdirecting what the study is saying.
@@TrainandMassage your interpretation is incorrect. I addressed what you’re saying at the beginning of quoting the study. You mis heard. I say “although John Hopkins response says that 50% of research being false must as of now be considered unproven…” and then I say that they concede the areas that I highlighted. The “but” statement is right after those concessions. When they say but…they just say what I had just said, that as of now it must be considered “unproven” but they concede to many of Ioannidis claims. So I addressed that in the video and the way you interpreted it was incorrect. I made it clear and you just assumed I was cherry picking. Should be pretty obvious if you supposedly read the study.
I think there is pretty convincing evidence these days that saturated fat is unhealthier than PUFA and MUFA, and it doesn't seem like Ancel Keys' work was bad
“Witchcraft “ with clear visible results all over of the world. I wonder which of the holes revealed in the process of how science is conducted today you disagree with. You probably didn’t even watch the video.
@@ampjs1 every method has its flaws. The issue with this video is that it indirectly to directly states that because science has flaws, his approach is valid. That’s trash can logic
@RV maybe it’s be easier if the author actually listed the citations to his video. I don’t think anyone needs to take anything said seriously, especially from someone who actually believes sees oils are harmful while saturated fats are not. We’re good taking our leave.
@RV maybe look a bit more into John Ioannidis. He’s had better days till he came upon covid 19. And why is it hard for anyone at FP to realize that posture doesn’t equal pain or the absence of pain? This entire video was cherry picked to entertain the notion that because research has its faults, we should never listen to it. Go on and smoke your cigarettes.
Guy talks like he's advertising on late night TV. Selling food blenders or maybe a multi purpose knife. No way he talks like this to his friends or family. Feels very performed.
The problem with evidence based fitness is that it goes against what you’re selling. There’s a reason that every professional sports organization follows evidence based training by legit strength and conditioning coaches. Because it works. The real issue is the snake oil salesman out there pushing their “better than science” or the “we are right and everyone else doing something different is wrong” narratives.
Legit strength & conditioning coaches in pro sports organizations…….but non-contact injuries are getting more frequent, Anthony Davis is like Mr Glass, and Zion hasn’t played in a really long time. No results to show that their stuff works. FP has them though, with a people who have a wide range of health conditions.
The true technological and scientific revolution didn't happen during the mythicised Age of Enlightenment, but rather before during the Spanish Renaissance. The Spanish were the ones that led the Western world from Middle to Modern Ages. Btw, Harari's work is awful. He's quite mediocre as a historian, and worse as a philosopher.
