Hate to burst anyone's bubble but Tim Ferriss is selling snake oil.
The 4 Hour Body is roundly and deservedly mocked on bodybuilding forums. Its claims are completely delusional. Among them:
# How Tim gained 34 pounds of muscle in 28 days, without steroids, and in four hours of total gym time
# How to sleep 2 hours per day and feel fully rested
# How to triple testosterone and double sperm count
# How to go from running 5 kilometers to 50 kilometers in 12 weeks
# How to reverse "permanent" injuries
This kind of stuff only fools people who don't have prior information to compare it to. For example, the "incredibly high" level of testosterone he is talking about is in the 600 ng/dL range, which is a normal level. It is an expected number, and the variation he observes is completely within the range of natural fluctuations. Testosterone peaks and falls.
It is also impossible to gain 34 pounds of muscle in 28 days with that level of testosterone. In fact, it would be impossible for anyone other than a professional bodybuilder coming back from a layoff (it's quicker to regain if you've already achieved it before) WITH high doses of anabolic agents including testosterone, pushing massive weights.
(Injectable testosterone esters have long carbon tails which means the molecules take much longer to be broken down. This jacks up testosterone levels 24 hours a day, without the peak/fall of the normal cycle. This vastly increases the window for protein synthesis.)
Just look at the claim: 34 pounds of muscle in 28 days, which is over a pound a day, in less than 4 hours in the gym. This is almost 9 POUNDS OF MUSCLE per one hour of exercise. Completely ludicrous.
Being able to run 30 miles after 3 months of training? Are we onto this BS yet?
Those injuries you've got, they aren't "permanent"! Note the scare quotes. It's just in your head, and if you don't get these fantabulous results, it's your own fault. Lazy bum.
There are similar problems with the 4-hour Workweek. Just look at all the publicity for it -- it was a CONSTANT media blitz where Ferriss was working around-the-clock to promote himself. And he's been doing that for a long time; his self-promotion is a full-time job in itself.
It's the same old story with all the so-called financial gurus. They ALL get rich by selling you a book about how you can get rich quickly and with barely any work.
Anyone who's ever done any programming or writing knows how little 4 hours is. As a weekly investment, that is NOT the path to mastery or startup success.
You can't even be a successful snake-oil salesman with 4 hours per week, as evidenced by Ferriss himself. It takes lots of work and dedication.
Hey, thanks for bringing my attention the 50K in 12 weeks suggestion.
I found some nice tips from that passage in a PDF version of the book and I think I can finish an ultra-marathon by the end of October with less than one month of training. I did -0- workouts and ate cake and pizza during the prior 30 days.
50K is too easy. I'll do 50 miles in a real race.
Want to make a bet—or a challenge—out of this?
Unlike yourself, I'm not particularly athletic. The longest timed race I have entered was a 12K (finish time of 1:07:11 for the May 2011 Bay to Breakers). I have done some nature hikes longer than that, though. Haven't gone to the gym, lifted weights, sprinted, or cross-trained in over a year.
Message me if you're interested. Contact info on my HN profile.
I've done a couple ultras.... don't kill yourself over HN-cred.
Edit: let me elaborate. In my experience and many others' it takes much longer than 3 months to train for a 50k, let alone a 50mi race if you hope to finish, even if you are able to handle a 12k and nature hikes. I ran 125mi through the Sahara a few years ago as part of a stage race and even after 9 months of training I still felt like I needed more training. Don't buy into the snake oil.
I second that. Don't buy the snake oil. People get killed running half-marathons that didn't train properly for.
I know people who seem to be able to run full marathons without any training. It varies from person to person. If I was stupid enough to do the same, I'd have a coronary.
Tim is very much a promoter and a sensationalist but you really should read the book before you knock the claims. He was pretty careful to document how he did the muscle growth thing, including weigh ins with a professor at SJ State.
I can tell from your profile that you were a high-level gymnast, so you have to know from first-hand experience that the difference between the before and after pictures isn't what 34 pounds of lean muscle mass looks like. Once you factor out the obvious attempts at manipulating the viewer (tanning, shaving, posing with muscles in an engorged post-workout state, etc), you are looking at maybe 5-10 pounds of muscle on the high end.
I read it a couple years ago, which is why I remember things like testosterone in the 600 range, but I have to look it up to see... 653.3.
Did you look at the pictures on that page?
Note how many tricks there are:
* Tanning
* Shaving
* Different lighting
* Flexing vs. not flexing
...and the #1 trick: STANDING CLOSER TO THE CAMERA
It's just flat obvious in the back double-biceps pose. He's not flexing on the left; he IS flexing on the right, and he's about 8 feet tall in comparison. He's also closer to the camera in the first pic, making his biceps appear larger.
Then in the next two, his "after" photo is further away, making a direct comparison more difficult. Possibly as a misdirection, after firmly establishing the larger "after" pictures in the first two examples. But in the arms down pic, he's clearly standing with his arms and shoulders flexed in the after pic. Also note the pulled-up shorts which is worthless for comparing quads because it's only done in the after pic.
You'd think "careful documentation" would at least get the only photographic evidence done right. I checked the book and the sizing discrepancy wasn't nearly as bad but was still present, and always in favor of the after shots, including the side chest pose.
As for the claims of having someone at SJU do the weighings, you only have his word for it, AND you have no way to coordinate these pictures with those numbers. Or any verification of his workouts or diet. Or any testing for steroids (you can always trust an athlete's word on that one!).
In addition, hydrostatic weighing can be gamed by not exhaling for the "before" weight, which increases buoyancy and will make the bodyfat estimate too high. In addition, the hydrostatic method is known to underestimate bodyfat in muscular individuals.
This whole thing is the equivalent of Cosmopolitan or teen magazines for girls. They use airbrushing and photoshopping to sell makeup to females at the equivalent of $5,000/gallon.
Muscle magazines do the same for teen boys. They use bodybuilders on huge stacks of anabolics pretending that protein powder did it! to sell to males.
(And 4 Hour Workweek is the same principle except for entrepreneurs.)
The general tenor of the discussion I recall was that his "after" pictures look a few pounds heavier, bodyfat is not noticeably different (note waist INCREASED 3.5 inches), and the rest is flexing, tanning, lighting, etc.
I don't think any of your arguments are very responsive to Ferris's reasoning. For example, that it's "ludicrous" for him to gain muscle with so little gym time is not responsive to the argument that not allowing muscles time to recover retards growth.
Moreover, I think it's a misinterpretation to say that Tim is promising people, say, 2 hours of sleep per day by reading his book. His book is a documentation of experimentation by himself and others, and especially for sleep is partly theoretical. But his analysis on how to cut sleep time is still helpful, especially given the scheduling constraints Ferris recognizes for a 2 hour sleep schedule.
Ferris sounds like someone claiming they can sell you a part you can bolt-on to your engine to double your gas mileage. I mean, I don't think anything he said violates the laws of physics; It's possible, but it's so unlikely that without extraordinarily good evidence, I'm simply going to ignore the claim.
“Timothy has packed more lives into his 29 years than Steve Jobs has in his 51.” —Tom Foremski, journalist and publisher of SiliconValleyWatcher.com ...More lives? Remove the "v" and I'd agree.
“Reading this book is like putting a few zeros on your income. Tim brings lifestyle to a new
level—listen to him!” —Michael D. Kerlin, McKinsey & Company consultant to Bush-Clinton Katrina Fund and a J. William Fulbright Scholar
“Tim has done what most people only dream of doing. I can’t believe he is going to let his
secrets out of the bag. This book is a must read!” —Stephen Key, top inventor and team designer of Teddy Ruxpin and Lazer Tag and a consultant to the television show American Inventor
And the subtitle:
"AN UNCOMMON GUIDE TO RAPID FAT-LOSS, INCREDIBLE SEX, AND BECOMING SUPERHUMAN"
How much Kool-Aid does someone have to drink before they aren't embarrassed to buy into these breathless sensationalist claims?
The 4 Hour Body is roundly and deservedly mocked on bodybuilding forums. Its claims are completely delusional. Among them:
# How Tim gained 34 pounds of muscle in 28 days, without steroids, and in four hours of total gym time
# How to sleep 2 hours per day and feel fully rested
# How to triple testosterone and double sperm count
# How to go from running 5 kilometers to 50 kilometers in 12 weeks
# How to reverse "permanent" injuries
This kind of stuff only fools people who don't have prior information to compare it to. For example, the "incredibly high" level of testosterone he is talking about is in the 600 ng/dL range, which is a normal level. It is an expected number, and the variation he observes is completely within the range of natural fluctuations. Testosterone peaks and falls.
It is also impossible to gain 34 pounds of muscle in 28 days with that level of testosterone. In fact, it would be impossible for anyone other than a professional bodybuilder coming back from a layoff (it's quicker to regain if you've already achieved it before) WITH high doses of anabolic agents including testosterone, pushing massive weights.
(Injectable testosterone esters have long carbon tails which means the molecules take much longer to be broken down. This jacks up testosterone levels 24 hours a day, without the peak/fall of the normal cycle. This vastly increases the window for protein synthesis.)
Just look at the claim: 34 pounds of muscle in 28 days, which is over a pound a day, in less than 4 hours in the gym. This is almost 9 POUNDS OF MUSCLE per one hour of exercise. Completely ludicrous.
Sleeping 2 hours a day? Sure. Forget 8-minute abs, we've got... 7 minute abs!
Being able to run 30 miles after 3 months of training? Are we onto this BS yet?
Those injuries you've got, they aren't "permanent"! Note the scare quotes. It's just in your head, and if you don't get these fantabulous results, it's your own fault. Lazy bum.
There are similar problems with the 4-hour Workweek. Just look at all the publicity for it -- it was a CONSTANT media blitz where Ferriss was working around-the-clock to promote himself. And he's been doing that for a long time; his self-promotion is a full-time job in itself.
It's the same old story with all the so-called financial gurus. They ALL get rich by selling you a book about how you can get rich quickly and with barely any work.
Anyone who's ever done any programming or writing knows how little 4 hours is. As a weekly investment, that is NOT the path to mastery or startup success.
You can't even be a successful snake-oil salesman with 4 hours per week, as evidenced by Ferriss himself. It takes lots of work and dedication.