Tim Ferriss' New Book: Become a Superhuman
singularityhub.com
singularityhub.com
Ferriss claims to have gained 34 pounds of muscle in 4 weeks:
http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/2007/04/29/from-geek-to...
Here is a discussion by steroids users that confirms what my friend told me:
http://www.elitefitness.com/forum/anabolic-steroids/10-pound...
I couldn't find the relevant research that says ten pounds a year is the max, but here is a Google Books search result that confirms it:
http://books.google.com/books?id=VnpCA-Z1qcsC&pg=PT166...
"Unfortunately, the average bodybuilder finds it nearly impossible to gain even ten pounds of solid muscle tissue in a year's time..."
I haven't read Tim's books but this seems like a reason to not like his work. This isn't science. Now, if he said body weight from water etc. Which he could have for all I know.
When I first started training Olympic weight lifting seriously I gained nearly fifteen pounds of muscle in six months (along with five pounds of fat; even vain bodybuilders who are obsessed with body fat have to alternate bulking and cutting cycles because it's very hard to gain a lot of muscle while keeping off the fat) and my coach has replicated that routinely starting with relatively weak beginners. About six months into a program like that, your efforts start to yield diminishing returns. This is true for total performance as well: when you're starting out, for the first six to eight months, it's easy to work out 3-4 times a week, do heavy squats every time, adding 5 kg to your old record with every single session, but once you get to about 2x body weight (around 150 kg squats in my case) on the bar you not only can't add things as fast anymore, but you have to totally change the nature of the program, and this is despite the fact that 5 kg represents an increasingly smaller percentage of your maximum capacity, so you might naively think it would get easier, not harder, over time to keep up a constant rate.
I myself have gained more than ten pounds of muscle at many points over a twenty year history of bodybuilding. It’s even more possible when you’re a <i>green hand</i>, as you will gain a lot easier from day zero than you will five years down the line. I think you’ve missed that the first four responding posters in the second link you’ve provided all agree with this in different manners. And from what I can see, (I may be wrong here) but Tim Ferriss also claims to have started his training regime—specifically targeted at maximum muscle gain—from day zero.
Regarding your third link, well, just looking at the quote you’ve supplied beneath it is enough. There are two variables in that statement which need to be highlighted, “…the average bodybuilder…” and “…nearly impossible…”
If you consider the reverse of what the author seems to be saying it would be along the following lines: “…in order to gain more than ten pound of muscle in a year, you need to be an above average bodybuilder.” So, all we need to do now is figure out if Tim Ferriss is an ‘above average bodybuilder’ or not. If everything he is telling us is true, then there is the possibility that he is indeed above average, either in genetics, or in his understanding of exactly how to build quality lean mass. Or even better, both.
However, you’ve unfortunately taken the third link out of context. If you read on, John Little actually goes ahead and supports ‘mavericks’ like Tim Ferriss. Immediately following the point where you’ve cut off his sentence, he continues:
“…due largely to the person’s falling prey to the hype and outright B.S. that is propagated by most bodybuilding publications and that line the pockets of more than a few gym owners and personal trainers.”
By this comment it seems to me that John Little’s definition of an average bodybuilder is someone who chooses to follow popular techniques…as opposed to those who use a more scientific route.
Now I’d never heard of Tim Ferriss until today when I typed the word ‘superhuman’ in the Google Blog search for other reasons, but his thinking and techniques are very similar to the ones that I used when I was in training. People also found it hard to accept the accomplishments that I made relative to my time and frequency in the gym (whole body, once a month, average of 30 minutes per workout.) I never made gains to the tune of 34 lbs in 28 days though, but then I never had the luxury of constant optimum conditions within which to grow. Real life kind of gets in the way.
My routine was based on the theories and practices of Mike Mentzer, a strong science-based proponent of the Heavy Duty method of training, which Tim Ferriss’s method seems very similar to.
It’s a real difficult call to make—not being able to examine the Tim Ferriss’s results first hand—but I’m gonna stick my neck out and say that 34lbs in 28 days could be done by a beginner, under strict and optimum conditions…conditions which include choosing parents with the best genetics possible!
And then there's my general beef with all self-help gurus: if you really have it all figured out, why are you still trying to sell me shit?
http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/2009/01/08/5-time-management-t...
Basically, I found few original ideas in his book–it read like a get-rich-quick-scheme aimed at tech-savvy middle managers who are stuck in a cube farm.
I don't want to work 4 hours a week ... because I actually _enjoy_ the things I choose to work on.
what's wrong with that?
I'm the same as you in that I love what I do for a living, but to be honest with you, we're rare. Most people are stuck living boring lives, doing jobs that make them miserable.
I gave the book to two friends of mine in 9-to-5 jobs. One of them read the book and told me that she was legitimately blown away by what she read. Fast forward a few years and now she's got a side project going that makes her happy. It's not a "muse" per se because it takes quite a bit of work, but the point is, this book inspired her to start a startup so that she can one day quit her job.
The other friend I gave it to was cynical and echoed a lot of the sentiments I hear around here. It's not original, it'll never work, Tim Ferriss is dishonest. Well, it's been a few years and he's still stuck, stagnating in the same shitty job.
-shrug-
That's why Ferriss defines work as the stuff you do primarily for money and would prefer to do less of. Even if you love your job, there is going to be some of that in there.
As far as I can see Tim Ferriss is all about short-cuts, not optimizations. There is a big difference.
Social entrepreneurialism, making a dent in the universe, helping those less fortunate, those are all awesome things. But capitalism, which is the issue at hand when talking about 4HWW, is about the accumulation of capital. Ferriss just talks about some cool ways to make money efficiently and spend money in ways that get you good bang for the buck.
And, with that, I'm going to stop procrastinating and go pack for my trip to Tunisia, paid for by creating an iPhone application, the development of which was made feasible by the savings achieved by moving to a country with low cost of living (Hungary). Cheers :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9pWKB2D23k#t=3m38s
I've been more dazzled by amateur hot dog eating contests.
In my book, it was a "victory" in name only; it was clearly unsportsmanlike behavior, contrary to the essence of the game, and devoid of any of the skills the sport is based on, and yet he seems pretty damned proud of himself.
He's all about claiming the glory while avoiding the work.
Stop paying attention to things you aren't interested in.
I'm interested in the place where health, science, and startups combine.