Mike Israetel of @RenaissancePeriodization constantly reminds us that he has a PhD. But what does that title actually represent?
28 COMMENTS
IMPORTANT UPDATE 6 OCTOBER 2025: lol
Chapters: 0:00 Prologue 1:32 Chapter 1. Introduction 3:14 Chapter 2. An overview of Mike Israetel’s PhD thesis 5:33 Chapter 3. An overview of standard assessment criteria for PhD theses 8:07 Chapter 4. Why Mike Israetel’s PhD thesis would likely fail—or at least be sent back for major revisions—at any high-ranking university 8:25 4.1. Lack of original knowledge and significant contribution to the field 11:57 4.1.1. Lack of independence of thought and approach 13:56 4.2. Ineffective communication of research findings 14:44 4.2.1. Incompetent data entry 21:06 4.2.2. Unnecessarily complicated and pretentious writing 25:49 4.2.3. Persistent grammatical, typographical and formatting errors 26:494.2.3.1. Copy-pasting and editorial negligence 29:374.2.3.2. Systematic APA formatting and citation failures 31:394.2.3.3. Spelling and typographical errors 34:024.2.3.4. Grammar, punctuation and awkward phrasing 35:304.2.3.5. On and on it goes 36:58 4.3. Poorly justified methods 40:56 4.4. Lack of command and critical assessment of a substantial and complex body of knowledge 41:20 4.4.1. Superficial literature review 42:49 4.4.2. The phantom research gap and distortions of cited works 48:47 4.5. Lack of carefulness, cohesion, rigour and originality 52:39 4.6. Why the thesis fails in total 55:37 Chapter 5. Why this matters 56:02 5.1. Providing a window into a failing discipline 56:51 5.2. Challenging the argument from authority 58:42 5.3. Rethinking expertise in fitness 1:00:39 5.4. Providing a cautionary tale 1:02:07 5.5. Explaining the gap between title and conduct 1:03:41 5.6. Deflating a delusion 1:07:35 Chapter 6. Conclusion
Clarification at [18:33]: my commentary at this point refers to figures 5.1 and 5.2. However, tables 5.1 and 5.2 are mistakenly displayed on screen. Apologies for the visual error! (Note added 3 October, 2025.)
I've watched a lot of Israetel's videos and I never adopted any of his training recommendations re: sets and reps per week. I discovered the RP channel before it really blew up and honestly he looked happier when the content was more focused on diet and nutrition and the uploads weren't happening every single day. Also there were other people on the RP channel besides him back then. Seems going viral just swelled his ego and fed his narcissistic tendencies. I just hope he doesn't mistreat his wife and RP employees.
While I agree regarding 4.2.1 that the tables (particularly, the std deviations) you present in the video look erroneous, you're math is wrong, too. You claim that about a third of the data must lie further than one standard deviation from the mean. However, you wrongly assume that we have a normal distribution; here, we have discrete data. For example, let's have the following 100 data points: {-1, 1, 0, …, 0}, then only 1/50 of the data lies further than one stddev from the mean. Thus, the argument you make to show that the data is "impossible" is not correct.
@Solomon_nelson thank you for the video 🙏 I have heard Mike's reaction to your critique was that you were reviewing a draft, and not the real PhD. Any comments? 🤷♂️🧐
The rhetoric people have been taking on this is absolutely ridiculous. So Mike, over TEN YEARS AGO, defended a thesis that didn't have some revolutionary, completely new takes on fitness. This "takedown" is by someone who speaks eloquently but otherwise has few (if ANY) credentials of their own by comparison. I don't disagree that his PhD is disappointing, but its not uncommon for PhDs to not take crazy out there takes because they're challenging to defend and might end up leading to nothing, both of which lead to not getting your doctorate. Solomon is literally saying things like not having a space after a period or forgetting a space is suddenly calling this piece of work "Fundamentally compromised" and grounds for us to completely disregard Israetel and the literal hundreds of quality videos he's come out with regarding exercise science.
The fact that ANYONE is giving Solomon the time of day when all he does is (poorly) armchair critique other peoples' work is both hilarious and disappointing on the part of anyone viewing this.
This is so embarassing… Not just for Mike, but for his supervisor and everyone who reviewed his thesis. Heck I'm even getting second hand embarrassment.
IMPORTANT UPDATE 6 OCTOBER 2025: lol
Chapters:
0:00 Prologue
1:32 Chapter 1. Introduction
3:14 Chapter 2. An overview of Mike Israetel’s PhD thesis
5:33 Chapter 3. An overview of standard assessment criteria for PhD theses
8:07 Chapter 4. Why Mike Israetel’s PhD thesis would likely fail—or at least be sent back for major revisions—at any high-ranking university
8:25 4.1. Lack of original knowledge and significant contribution to the field
11:57 4.1.1. Lack of independence of thought and approach
13:56 4.2. Ineffective communication of research findings
14:44 4.2.1. Incompetent data entry
21:06 4.2.2. Unnecessarily complicated and pretentious writing
25:49 4.2.3. Persistent grammatical, typographical and formatting errors
26:49 4.2.3.1. Copy-pasting and editorial negligence
29:37 4.2.3.2. Systematic APA formatting and citation failures
31:39 4.2.3.3. Spelling and typographical errors
34:02 4.2.3.4. Grammar, punctuation and awkward phrasing
35:30 4.2.3.5. On and on it goes
36:58 4.3. Poorly justified methods
40:56 4.4. Lack of command and critical assessment of a substantial and complex body of knowledge
41:20 4.4.1. Superficial literature review
42:49 4.4.2. The phantom research gap and distortions of cited works
48:47 4.5. Lack of carefulness, cohesion, rigour and originality
52:39 4.6. Why the thesis fails in total
55:37 Chapter 5. Why this matters
56:02 5.1. Providing a window into a failing discipline
56:51 5.2. Challenging the argument from authority
58:42 5.3. Rethinking expertise in fitness
1:00:39 5.4. Providing a cautionary tale
1:02:07 5.5. Explaining the gap between title and conduct
1:03:41 5.6. Deflating a delusion
1:07:35 Chapter 6. Conclusion
Clarification at [18:33]: my commentary at this point refers to figures 5.1 and 5.2. However, tables 5.1 and 5.2 are mistakenly displayed on screen. Apologies for the visual error! (Note added 3 October, 2025.)
Hes obviously a fool.
You can tell by all the talking…
Just like peterstein, that other clown who sells the green shit & now blue block glasses
Just clowns, surrounded by other clowns that make uo the peer review system
If he says raw intellect again im gonna puke
32:28 kek
Maybe for the negative height athleths, they were from australia? 😅
The PHD was promised to him 6 million years ago 👃
Schrödinger's phd😂
LOL blurring out the statue's junk!
I've watched a lot of Israetel's videos and I never adopted any of his training recommendations re: sets and reps per week. I discovered the RP channel before it really blew up and honestly he looked happier when the content was more focused on diet and nutrition and the uploads weren't happening every single day. Also there were other people on the RP channel besides him back then. Seems going viral just swelled his ego and fed his narcissistic tendencies. I just hope he doesn't mistreat his wife and RP employees.
Ahhhh you mad lol
While I agree regarding 4.2.1 that the tables (particularly, the std deviations) you present in the video look erroneous, you're math is wrong, too. You claim that about a third of the data must lie further than one standard deviation from the mean. However, you wrongly assume that we have a normal distribution; here, we have discrete data. For example, let's have the following 100 data points: {-1, 1, 0, …, 0}, then only 1/50 of the data lies further than one stddev from the mean. Thus, the argument you make to show that the data is "impossible" is not correct.
Mike is a scumbag
i failed my first masters thesis defense for 4 grammatical mistakes and a comma splice, i should’ve majored in exercise science…
@Solomon_nelson thank you for the video 🙏 I have heard Mike's reaction to your critique was that you were reviewing a draft, and not the real PhD. Any comments? 🤷♂️🧐
Remember guys: simply go to this channel's videos and sort by popular. Notice a pattern?
Dude destroyed Dr Mike’s PhD just so he could say the N word at 32:10 😂
This is a very good video and I am enjoying the watch but please for the love of god do something abt this 💀 32:08
So Mikes PhD could honestly be summed up as saying the same joke but louder.
People who ride their bike to work are more fit and healthy than those who drive their cars.
-Dr. Mike
The answer is jumbled into the guy's name
Anyone else sleep to this?
Cool vid, IMO this whole drama seems like a giant nothing burger though idk. So weird to me.
The rhetoric people have been taking on this is absolutely ridiculous. So Mike, over TEN YEARS AGO, defended a thesis that didn't have some revolutionary, completely new takes on fitness. This "takedown" is by someone who speaks eloquently but otherwise has few (if ANY) credentials of their own by comparison. I don't disagree that his PhD is disappointing, but its not uncommon for PhDs to not take crazy out there takes because they're challenging to defend and might end up leading to nothing, both of which lead to not getting your doctorate. Solomon is literally saying things like not having a space after a period or forgetting a space is suddenly calling this piece of work "Fundamentally compromised" and grounds for us to completely disregard Israetel and the literal hundreds of quality videos he's come out with regarding exercise science.
The fact that ANYONE is giving Solomon the time of day when all he does is (poorly) armchair critique other peoples' work is both hilarious and disappointing on the part of anyone viewing this.
I have no idea why my algorithm sent me here but I have enjoyed my time.
This is so embarassing… Not just for Mike, but for his supervisor and everyone who reviewed his thesis. Heck I'm even getting second hand embarrassment.
Now lets see Paul Allens draft
good, Dr Mike is a toxic scientific racist
This guy is a menace, I better get my tesis right