And again,you come across the issue of very different lighting and posing.
Its kind of irritating because he clearly made a massive transformation, but the obvious lies that come with it completely undermine that. The posing has clearly been changed, the lighting has clearly been added to make him look better and obvious bullshit claims like 3% body fat, all of which completely undermine the very successful training.
Different poses and lighting and you can still see the growth or regrowth, 
In that way, the guys who did the new one were very true to the original study! Lol
== Scott ==
Wow you speak very highly of yourselves! Iāve met / visited with several posters , bumped into others etc etc and suddenly itās virtually everybody! What a tight nit organization! And I hear HIT is called a cult, ha ha!
hmm probably not far offā¦ like state 3% is bullshit. Even with poor picture quality his face doesnt have the trade mark drawn look off someone in the actual 5% range, Its actually more filled out compared to the before. If anything I would say the amount of actual body fat didnt change significantly. But with the increase in muscle mass it would have lowered the actually %
Iāve been on this site for years and havenāt seen much, if any, attitude against people who employ HIT. Itās definitely not a prevalent theme and to the contrary, in the past couple of months, Iāve seen several instances of the encouragement of those who only frequent Dr. Dardenās section to venture out into the other areas. I canāt speak for the intent behind @T3hPwnisherās comment, but I read it as tongue in cheek, not malevolent.
I have a couple of Dr. Dardenās books, was part of his forum in the mid 00ās, followed his programs in the past, read Joneās biography, etc. While itās not how I choose to train now, Iām not going to disparage others who feel itās best for them.
What I have seen, unfortunately, is an unwillingness to have an open discussion on methods, the reasons for utilizing those methods, and any results seen. Any counter opinion is automatically shut down as unwarranted and taken as a personal attack.
I believe the criticism of this experiment and the reported results would have been the same whether it had been done using HIT, high volume, high frequency, bodyweight training, powerbuilding, powerlifting, etc.
He never trained abs under Jones, just throwing that n there
I do actually agree, I think any method of training wouldāve netted the results with the conditions being what they were. I train HIT but Iām not disillusioned by it and I donāt think itās a magic formula for success. Intensity, volume, and frequency all kind of work on a sliding scale. I personally prefer low volume, high Intensity, and higher frequency. I think everyone has to find the method that they see results from and keeps them training. I will say, everyone has been nice to me and very supportive. I donāt think Iāve seen anyone try to disrespect me or the way I train, and I actually did laugh at what @T3hPwnisher said! I think the criticisms have been valid and the jokes have been funny.
If you feel that confirming that these people and their video, pics and meet results kept by a 3rd party are real, as are the people they have met and known and seen with their own eyes is not good enough, then nothing more can be said.
== Scott ==
Ive been reading up and down the training logs and other topics and maybe Iām blind but I havenāt seen any real discussions going on to be a part of . Most of the training logs seem to be a lot of back and forth chatter like I see on Facebook. I just had a great cheese sandwich , did 10 sets of squats workout and now Iām having a toco salad or whatever. Who cares! I donāt see much discussion or arguments of why this exercise is better or whatever or why this works and that doesnāt ? I wish I did .
@aldebaran has posted some pretty detailed explanations of his methods
Regardless, most of the posters donāt comment on what exercises āworkā or ādoesnātā because we assume that the person doing the programme/exercise knows what works for them or has a rationale- unless the log creator asks for advice.
Also, most loggers here tend to more or less the same exercises, all of which have been demonstrated to be effective- no squats on a bosu ball, weird db shadowboxing routinesā¦ Also, most of the posters follow systems that have been shown to be effective over time (ie 5/3/1, tactical barbell, dark horse, deep waterā¦)
Occasionally, there are those who do weird/ seemingly crazy things, but most of them have ample evidence that it works, at least for them
Does your training log set the example of what you wish there was more of?
Sure, the training logs arenāt necessarily the place for these discussions, though. I, for example, donāt read through all the logs and only follow a couple, so if someone in one I donāt follow posts a thought or question, I wonāt see it. Iām sure a lot of others are the same.
That said, you started a conversation in your log and weāre getting responses, but then havenāt posted in 12 days, so you canāt really complain about the lack of discussion in the logs.
If thereās a topic someone wants to discuss more widely, the better place to post is in one of the other sub forums, like this one for general training or the bodybuilding/powerlifting/conditioning sub forums if the topic is specific to one of those. I do usually jump into those each day to see if any interesting topics or questions came up.
I have attempted to have these very conversations with you previously.
They absolutely happen. Most of the members here have been members for a while, and so they know the methods others are using and donāt need to open a dialogue. New readers to certain logs certainly ask questions though, and if youāre curious about someone elseās methods, just ask about them. Youāll probably find many people are more than happy to share information and engage in healthy discussion.
Iā¦ donāt even know where to begin with this. It really makes you seem like you donāt understand how an internet forum works at all.
Again, many of the members here have been internet friends for a while, so they check in to offer encouragement on otherās workouts and donāt need to debate and argue someoneās methods because they already understand why the logās writer is doing what theyāre doing. The very nature of having an open and visible training log is one that invites chatter.
Food is absolutely an important training component, and I personally welcome knowing what other successful lifters are consuming to fuel their training. Lifting weights without proper nutrition is just a recipe for getting nowhere and making zero progress.
Be the change you wish to see, my dude. Donāt just sit here and whine about, go into otherās training logs and ask questions. Start discussions.
But also, why does training have to fall into an argument? If someone is seeing success, why canāt you ask how they got there, encourage them, and move on?
Just because he gave the data to someone in academia, that doesnāt mean anything will be done with it. I think all he said was that he passed a bunch of data from the study on to an academic person in the UK. I have my suspicions as to who that might be. If Iām right, and the information is useless or suspect, it wonāt get published by that person in a peer reviewed setting.
Occasionally, in the medical field, you will find one-off medical situations written up as a case study. But that is pretty rare. Generally researchers like to have larger groups and controls. That is why case studies like Dr. Darden publishes never make it into the academic literature.
The idea that he had data to pass on to an academic person is interesting to me for another reason. A big deal is being made about the poor setup of the physique photos that went up on Facebook. Folks are acting as if those photos were the primary outcome of the experiment. But I have read a lot of academic papers on strength training, and I cannot recall a single case where physique photos were used to prove anything, especially muscle gain. Body composition, if reported, is by dexa, bio-impedance, hydrostatic weighing, maybe skin calipers. To an academic, physique photos are largely useless; it isnāt quantitative data. So maybe the physique photos were not, in the minds of the participants, the primary outcome. Maybe they just added them on as an after-thought?
I think weāre on the same page on thisā¦ by nature for better or worse is i am a numbers guy. Give me numbers and not pictures .
Yes you have tried to have a conversation with me about how you train everyday but through no fault of your own I have a hard time following what you are saying. Maybe itās my lack of understanding the terminology , I donāt know but donāt worry about it, Iām guessing itās not something I could ever do anyway .
Scott
OKā¦ pictures or it didnāt happen. Fair enough for individual contributors. I guess I was thinking more about the headline articles by well known coaches. A lot of that seems to involve taking something on faith, based on the reputation of the coach or guru.
I didnāt intend my Scott report to be in the log section . Before in the old forum it was like a news report . Iād talk about recent events relating to Nautilus and Arthur Jones and Darden stuff and Iād talk about my workouts . Iāve been lectured more than once that this isnāt a Darden forum and only for direct questions to Darden but in the old days everyone including Darden would see and sometimes respond to what was posted . It all went to the same place . Now Darden will never see it and most Nautilus guys wonāt see it either. Hey, thatās not my decision but what can I do? Itās the rules , good or bad. Iāve thought of deleting my log but havenāt done so yet for some reason Iām not sure of myself?
Scott