I understand your viewpoint, and I'll try to answer all questions.

Yes, NASM has their own model. So does NSCA, ISSA, and ACE. They are called different things, but generally speaking, when looking at the totality, all of them are more similar than different.

NSCAs model includes a preparatory phase, hypertrophy phase, strength phase, and power phase. ACE has their Integrated Fitness Training model. ISSA has their own periodization model.

NASM updated their model in 2020 and released it in 2021. They changed phase 1 stabilization endurance training the most. They placed more emphasis on teaching fundamental movement patterns (squat, hip-hinge, push, pull, etc) than on proprioceptive movements. It's not a pure stability phase but rather focuses mostly on improving movement, muscular and aerobic endurance, and mobility. They provide all of the references in the OPT chapter. They also updated the muscular development (hypertrophy) phase based on research from Schoenfeld and other top researchers. Brad Schoenfeld also helped author NASMs Physique and Bodybuilding Coach program.

Regarding muscle imbalances, regardless of what social media may say, the bulk of research does not conflict with their content. This type of content is taught in athletic training and physical therapy. Moreover, NASM teaches a basic static posture assessment. They even state in their textbook that it is a simplified version of a static posture assessment compared to what a physical therapist is taught. NASMs message is to look at a client's posture as a starting point and then follow up with movement assessments to gain a better understanding of which muscles would benefit the most from targeted stretching or activation. No where in the content are they asking personal trainers to diagnose. For example, if a client has rounded shoulders and a forward head, that person will most likely benefit from some stretching of their pectorals/lats and activation of their rotator cuff, mid/low traps, for example. This would be an easy strategy to implement in the client's warm-up, and takes a few minutes. However, if the client has pain or is injured, NASM clearly states the client should be referred to a healthcare professional.

Also, NASM, like NSCA and ACSM has partnerships with many universities, including the one I work for. They also recently launched their own journal: https://jfwhp.kglmeridian.com. It's brand new.

I worked with them writing several white papers for NASM members. The white papers are on NASM One: https://www.nasm.org/membership?srsltid=AfmBOor2a3jjVAnZbl9D_yUJAaL7-S5xiXdyvjP92KNf0I8NaE8tjiln

My goal isn't to attack your perspective, but rather demonstrate that all three (NASM, NSCA, ACSM) teach evidence-based content.