Now, in the original article, I mentioned something like �we would need some sort of double-blind squat study� in order to show if there are any real (special) benefits to having the ability to squat like a baby as adult, beyond those people like Olympic lifters who obviously need it in order to participate in their sport. Or, something to that effect. That part has been removed (from the original article) for the the following reason:
At the time of writing that part into the article, I was well aware that you couldn�t �blind� an exercise (in a study) because it�s impossible to do an exercise without knowing it. Where I went wrong was that I assumed that a study like this could be done without informing the participants �why� they were squatting, or informing the observers who were analyzing each person what the specific criteria was they were looking for, as not to cognitively prime them to seek out and only take note of the things that fit the specific criteria.
After posting this, my good friend Dr. Jose Antonio, who is well-versed on how exercise (and nutrition) oriented research studies are run, informed me that you would not get approval for an exercise-based research study that attempted to create a blind in this manner because the participants would have to be informed why they were doing the squats.
The point is, not only was I wrong for simply assuming something and not checking my facts before I wrote it into an article that contained many things that I did take great time and energy in fact-checking. But I was also wrong because the criteria I proposed just did not line up with reality; the reality of how a study involving the squat could be done.