Aside from the well earned reputation programmers have for believing they can solve any problem, this is good old bro science. Popular on the Internet. And worth ignoring, or at least being very skeptical about. Bad advice can be pretty dangerous.
- practice methods of bailing out from the start
- after wall-walk, rather than taking both legs off the wall with your body facing the wall, kick up so you're facing away from the wall and try to achieve balance
I have seen a lot of gym going adults attempt to learn handstands. Vast majority will give up. Teaching even the gym population to hand balance is not easy.
This is really something I think of as “fitness fluff”. It’s not really science, it’s a simple training plan that’ll probably work for >50% of the reasonably fit population. It’s also a training plan to accomplish a specific thing, do a handstand. It doesn’t really feel like a discussion on whether handstands are good and what regressions to apply where; why judge it so.
The bs and “real” science on nutrition and exercise both face a replicability crisis. The salt you take with all this bs (or studies, advice) will also help you achieve bigger pumps during hypertrophy training.
p.s. Don’t take the “bro” in bs too literally. It comes from all genders and identities equally. Anecdotally the biggest purveyor of bs in my life was a woman who went to med school. I still hear and say plenty of bs in my circle of crunchy climbers. You apply it moderately and trust your gut on what’s reasonable in the face of _massive_ complexity.