The 4-Hour Dentist(bygonebureau.com)
bygonebureau.com
The 4-Hour Dentist
http://bygonebureau.com/2011/02/02/4-hour-dentist/
105 comments
You know, it's possible to admire Tim and his work and still feel that the general style, this entire genre of books has jumped the shark.
Taken like that, it's not an attack, just some gentle ribbing. And it's not even directed at Tim per really -- it's the rest of us who eagerly buy into such over the top nonsense that's really being made fun of.
(I haven't read the book or know from Tim. But I'm very familiar with this style of writing. In my 20s I bought all sorts of these books and tapes, so this style has been around for a long time)
Taken like that, it's not an attack, just some gentle ribbing. And it's not even directed at Tim per really -- it's the rest of us who eagerly buy into such over the top nonsense that's really being made fun of.
(I haven't read the book or know from Tim. But I'm very familiar with this style of writing. In my 20s I bought all sorts of these books and tapes, so this style has been around for a long time)
What I found interesting was that he tested a ton of titles for the book and the "4-Hour" thing was the winner - it's not him that chose it, it's the market.
Why not let the market write the rest of the book, too? No problem with a little bit of A-Z-Testing.
In a sense, that's what an active blogger does before going blog-to-book. True, the author is the one putting the sentences together, but the market has a lot of say in the direction future articles go, and what of the blog content goes into the book version.
This was actually a Family Guy episode. Brian wrote a million selling self help book that was 1/3 blank where you were supposed to list your hopes and dreams.
Here's my fave commentary on the Ferriss snake-oil schtick: http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/2009/01/08/5-time-management-t...
I already responded to that post on her blog:
"To be honest lady, Tim Ferriss is the ONLY REASON I FOUND YOU."
Posted by Sasha on June 3, 2010 at 3:17 pm | permalink"
pretty much sums it up.
"To be honest lady, Tim Ferriss is the ONLY REASON I FOUND YOU."
Posted by Sasha on June 3, 2010 at 3:17 pm | permalink"
pretty much sums it up.
I've always thought people have their own special style of writing. Now that I've read your comment I realize how naive an idea that is. Would you happen to know the various categories of writing? I'm going to search google, but I am intrigued about what you know. :-D
I think this is just poking some lighthearted fun at Tim. I've lost about 35 lbs on the slow carb diet, so yes, that part of the book works for me. Other parts seem more dubious, but it does give you plenty to think about/research.
Actually, the post didn't bother me as much as the comments here on HN. The knee-jerk reactions that many HN'ers have towards Tim and his books are as bad as the naive gullibility they think they're rejecting. Neither require any kind of critical thinking or logical analysis.
If I could upvote you more than once, I would.
I got a LOT out of 4HWW, I haven't quit my job and gone freelancing yet - but now that you mention it, it sounds like a good idea.
4HB I can say that I don't feel like I've gotten anything of value from it. I felt really disappointed and let down by it. I also felt like some of the advice in there was so wrong it bordered on being dangerous.
Tim Ferris is highly controversial on HN. He's got a lot of supporters and a lot of detractors on here. I've been both.
As for the 4-Hour dentist, I think that it was really funny. Actually laughed.
4HB I can say that I don't feel like I've gotten anything of value from it. I felt really disappointed and let down by it. I also felt like some of the advice in there was so wrong it bordered on being dangerous.
Tim Ferris is highly controversial on HN. He's got a lot of supporters and a lot of detractors on here. I've been both.
As for the 4-Hour dentist, I think that it was really funny. Actually laughed.
How is this a straw man attack?
It would be a straw man attack if the author had proceeded to logically refute his own satire and claim it was a refutation of Tim's methods.
Note: the above would have to be done without breaking a smile.
Note: the above would have to be done without breaking a smile.
Or it would be that the satire is meant to reflect Tim's methods and the ridiculousness is meant as a refutation (in much the same way that "A Modest Proposal" was meant as a criticism of Britain's callousness — satire is generally a form of criticism).
Looking at your blog http://ryanwaggoner.com/ , I can see why you would come to his defence. You're obviously very much into self-help books. That stuff doesn't work for everyone.
That didn't take long. I'm actually NOT very much into self-help books. I can count on both hands the number I've read, and on one hand the number I've enjoyed. But I do think that there are a few that are valuable. And I'm quite skeptical that there's a mythical class of people out there who are either so brilliant or so far gone that useful information (whatever the source) can't help them.
Actually, I guess it depends what you mean by self-help: I enjoyed "Getting Things Done" and "Crush It!"...do those count?
Actually, I guess it depends what you mean by self-help: I enjoyed "Getting Things Done" and "Crush It!"...do those count?
Yes, they do. See e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Self-help_books for somebody agreeing with that.
Haters Gonna Hate, I love both books and have gotten plenty of great info and inspiration from them. And if nothing else I've enjoyed picking up on some great marketing tactics that he uses that obviously are working :-P
No I found it very useful, i've lost a significant amount of weight and feel a lot better.
I do wonder why HN readers seem to dislike Tim's books so much.
I do wonder why HN readers seem to dislike Tim's books so much.
It's not so much his books, it's him. On the surface he's the ideal HN idol; A/B tests and measures everything, scientific approach to life. But on the flipside he is wildly successful and has intimate relations with members of the opposite sex. Who wouldn't hate him? ;)
It's unfortunate that he has to use techniques like gain 28lbs of muscle in four weeks (or similar hype) to sell books. Clearly that's manipulation because even if he gained that many pounds in a month, he definitely didn't gain that much muscle. He's stretching words more so with 4HB than with 4HWW.
HOWEVER, he has data to back up a lot of his claims and a lot of the tips he gives are great. So if it takes some of these techniques to sell, maybe it's worth it. His books are a lot more substantial than other self-help books.
HOWEVER, he has data to back up a lot of his claims and a lot of the tips he gives are great. So if it takes some of these techniques to sell, maybe it's worth it. His books are a lot more substantial than other self-help books.
I think it might be the vague sense of uneasiness generated not by the fact that his books don't work, but by the fact that his books don't work as well as he does promoting them.
Salesman first, maker second. That's backwards in these here parts.
Salesman first, maker second. That's backwards in these here parts.
Straw man? No. Satire, and freaking hilarious at that. Tim F. doesn't need HNers to help him get across. He knows his game. It's about attention, not reaction or judgement. This is attention at its most attentive.
Health is a much more long-term thing than 6-8 weeks. I'd wait at least a year to pass judgement on any health proposal, unless it's clearly not working, and if you can't keep it up for a year, well...
The top of the article says "humor." This is satire. Satire can use whatever kind of attack it wants to get it's point across.
It reminds me of the criticisms of Guy Kawasaki (of Rich Dad, Poor Dad fame). He gives mostly excellent advice, but markets it to the lowest common denominator so a lot of smart people turn away.
It actually shows something about the HN crowd. We're actually susceptible to marketing; the stuff we value is stuff that doesn't look like 4 hour workweek, even if it might work better.
EDIT: It's actually Robert Kiyosaki, how embarassing.
It actually shows something about the HN crowd. We're actually susceptible to marketing; the stuff we value is stuff that doesn't look like 4 hour workweek, even if it might work better.
EDIT: It's actually Robert Kiyosaki, how embarassing.
Guy Kawasaki is an early Apple employee who wrote the book "The Macintosh Way" among others.
Roert Kiyosaki wrote Rich Dad, Poor Dad : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Kiyosaki
Roert Kiyosaki wrote Rich Dad, Poor Dad : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Kiyosaki
Woah. Guy Kawasaki was chief evangelist at Apple.
Robert Kiyosaki is the hack who wrote Rich Dad, Poor Dad, a book that advocates highly risky real estate maneuvers and multi-level marketing. His books are endorsed by the newest incarnation of Amway.
Robert Kiyosaki is the hack who wrote Rich Dad, Poor Dad, a book that advocates highly risky real estate maneuvers and multi-level marketing. His books are endorsed by the newest incarnation of Amway.
http://www.johntreed.com/Kiyosaki.html
"A number of people asked me about Robert T. Kiyosaki and his book Rich Dad, Poor Dad. When I said I didn’t think he was a real-estate guru, they insisted he was. Several told me I would like him, that he preaches a message like mine. Eager to find such a guru, I bought his book, Rich Dad, Poor Dad, in a bookstore.
Summary Rich Dad, Poor Dad is one of the dumbest financial advice books I have ever read. It contains many factual errors and numerous extremely unlikely accounts of events that supposedly occurred.
Kiyosaki is a salesman and a motivational speaker. He has no financial expertise and won’t disclose his supposed real estate or other investment success.
Rich Dad, Poor Dad contains much wrong advice, much bad advice, some dangerous advice, and virtually no good advice."
"A number of people asked me about Robert T. Kiyosaki and his book Rich Dad, Poor Dad. When I said I didn’t think he was a real-estate guru, they insisted he was. Several told me I would like him, that he preaches a message like mine. Eager to find such a guru, I bought his book, Rich Dad, Poor Dad, in a bookstore.
Summary Rich Dad, Poor Dad is one of the dumbest financial advice books I have ever read. It contains many factual errors and numerous extremely unlikely accounts of events that supposedly occurred.
Kiyosaki is a salesman and a motivational speaker. He has no financial expertise and won’t disclose his supposed real estate or other investment success.
Rich Dad, Poor Dad contains much wrong advice, much bad advice, some dangerous advice, and virtually no good advice."
He doesn't advocate the real estate maneuvers particularly, he just uses it as an example of an asset that can be built using leverage. He gives MLM literally two sentences, as an example of something that can bring recurring income (however misguided he may be).
You have to admit the description of assets and liabilities (85% of the book) is spot on and excellent advice for many people. Look at any Indian immigrant with taxi medallions or franchises.
You have to admit the description of assets and liabilities (85% of the book) is spot on and excellent advice for many people. Look at any Indian immigrant with taxi medallions or franchises.
I tell you what, despite the lack of any actionable information whatsoever, Rich Dad, Poor Dad was what inspired me to go into business for myself.
Four Hour Work Week (despite not having THAT much actionable information for me) was the book that inspired me to stay in business for myself when times got tough.
Maybe Four Hour Body will be the book that inspires me to not be fat, who knows.
Four Hour Work Week (despite not having THAT much actionable information for me) was the book that inspired me to stay in business for myself when times got tough.
Maybe Four Hour Body will be the book that inspires me to not be fat, who knows.
Didn't you mean Robert Kiyosaki? I'm not sure how Kawasaki is attached to Rich Dad, Poor Dad.
+1 for making my brow bend and then laugh out loud when you corrected yourself and ended with "how embarrassing". I really needed that today, hope you don't mind it was at your expense--so I gave some karma your way.
I was just in a miserable mood and relief came in an unexpected place. Cheers!
(sorry this is off topic to the rest)
I was just in a miserable mood and relief came in an unexpected place. Cheers!
(sorry this is off topic to the rest)
I also really liked Rich Dad, Poor Dad. :)
[deleted]
Much of what Tim Ferriss writes is genuinely useful, particularly when it comes to experimentation, testing, and questioning assumptions.
Unfortunately, these messages are (1) packaged in the form of breathlessly-sold, instant-results snake oil; (2) explicitly modeled on the past 20 years of Men's Health and Cosmopolitan magazine covers; (3) contain obnoxious levels of social signaling and influence-via-association.
The reality is the above three factors are what have contributed the most to his renown. People want to instantly become wealthy, famous, and desirable with zero effort. They want to believe that someone (anyone) can provide these things, and they're willing to pay money on the off-chance they're able to deliver. They want to be associated with someone who travels around the world, hangs out with famous people all day, and seemingly succeeds in everything.
Ferriss promises people exactly what they want, so they buy. Simple as that.
The operative question for all of us on HN: what Ferriss does clearly works. Do you choose to emulate him? Why or why not?
Unfortunately, these messages are (1) packaged in the form of breathlessly-sold, instant-results snake oil; (2) explicitly modeled on the past 20 years of Men's Health and Cosmopolitan magazine covers; (3) contain obnoxious levels of social signaling and influence-via-association.
The reality is the above three factors are what have contributed the most to his renown. People want to instantly become wealthy, famous, and desirable with zero effort. They want to believe that someone (anyone) can provide these things, and they're willing to pay money on the off-chance they're able to deliver. They want to be associated with someone who travels around the world, hangs out with famous people all day, and seemingly succeeds in everything.
Ferriss promises people exactly what they want, so they buy. Simple as that.
The operative question for all of us on HN: what Ferriss does clearly works. Do you choose to emulate him? Why or why not?
I have a particular aversion to the 'social signaling and influence-via-association' you mention. However, I very much enjoy the substance of Tim Ferriss's content.
Why? 1) TF accomplishes things first, and then publishes these accomplishments - martial arts, ballroom dancing, swimming, building muscle mass - he really did these things.. better than others. 2) Regarding the substance of his book, nearly all important info is either grounded in his direct experience, or referenced by thoroughly researched science. He picks his words very carefully when making claims. 3) TF is goal oriented and rational in his approach to learn skills.
Yea, I wish his writing style was a bit different.. I'm just more cerebral than his average reader. However, when TF releases the '4-hour Promoter', I will be buying this. His promotion skills are just another area he has mastered. This guy is not a natural promoter, rather he is a golden example of how to learn skills and apply them with measurably improvable results.. his ability to promote is just another example.
Why? 1) TF accomplishes things first, and then publishes these accomplishments - martial arts, ballroom dancing, swimming, building muscle mass - he really did these things.. better than others. 2) Regarding the substance of his book, nearly all important info is either grounded in his direct experience, or referenced by thoroughly researched science. He picks his words very carefully when making claims. 3) TF is goal oriented and rational in his approach to learn skills.
Yea, I wish his writing style was a bit different.. I'm just more cerebral than his average reader. However, when TF releases the '4-hour Promoter', I will be buying this. His promotion skills are just another area he has mastered. This guy is not a natural promoter, rather he is a golden example of how to learn skills and apply them with measurably improvable results.. his ability to promote is just another example.
The probability of a "4-Hour Fame" book is pretty high. After wealth, physique, and sex, fame/status is the next big, universal desire.
The formula works: promise people they too can become a NYT bestseller, speak at TED, and get invited to Davos in less than four hours of effort.
The formula works: promise people they too can become a NYT bestseller, speak at TED, and get invited to Davos in less than four hours of effort.
This is a (relatively) good summary of the situation. I think you exaggerate on point #1, but it doesn't really matter, so let's not quibble.
Your question is interesting though: if you have genuinely good content (or functionality), do you market it as aggressively as possible, knowing that if you don't, less useful stuff by superior marketers is going to win out? Doesn't game theory indicate that you should, if you want to positively impact as many as possible?
Your question is interesting though: if you have genuinely good content (or functionality), do you market it as aggressively as possible, knowing that if you don't, less useful stuff by superior marketers is going to win out? Doesn't game theory indicate that you should, if you want to positively impact as many as possible?
I think it goes deeper than that - it deeply influences the market you choose to serve in the first place.
If you can semi-credibly promise to give people instant results in wealth, physique, sex, etc - your offer will sell.
The real question isn't whether or not you choose to market your offer aggressively. It's whether or not you choose to enter those specific (proven) markets, using that specific (proven) approach, knowing full well that you're intentionally exaggerating for the sake of attention and results.
Personally, I've intentionally made the decision not to go that route. It makes my job more difficult, but it's a tradeoff I'm willing to make.
If you can semi-credibly promise to give people instant results in wealth, physique, sex, etc - your offer will sell.
The real question isn't whether or not you choose to market your offer aggressively. It's whether or not you choose to enter those specific (proven) markets, using that specific (proven) approach, knowing full well that you're intentionally exaggerating for the sake of attention and results.
Personally, I've intentionally made the decision not to go that route. It makes my job more difficult, but it's a tradeoff I'm willing to make.
As someone who once dabbled in coaching, allow me to say that I always noticed you as an example of a person doing it in a way that I found honorable and admirable. The integrity you mention here is certainly a large part of why.
Thanks - that means a lot to me!
[deleted]
[deleted]
That's precisely what I've been thinking about Tim Ferriss. His books look like get-rich-quick nonsense pawned off on the gullible. No notion of the hard work (and natural talent) required to build a great business or become a successful athlete. His next book will surely claim that we can all make Carnegie Hall with minimal practice.
we can all make Carnegie Hall with minimal practice
Well... sure. We can, right?
Step one: Phone Carnegie Hall. Ask them how much it costs to rent the place for a while. They do that, as attested by this rentals page:
http://www.carnegiehall.org/article/the_basics/art_hall_rent...
It is probably quite a lot, but it may be less than you think.
Step two: Find some musicians with actual talent to fill out your program at the Hall. Hint: Classical music students are not rich. And they love to perform. And they're astonishingly talented.
Better idea: There are a bunch of college a-capella groups. There are a bunch of high school music groups. All those folks might love to perform at Carnegie Hall. Especially if it's an event with a bunch of other groups. And their parents might love to come. And their friends.
Step three: Schedule your concert. Charge enough admission to cover the cost of the hall and whatever you have to pay your musicians. Donate any leftover money to a charity. Preferably one with lots of supporters who want to come and fill out your audience at Carnegie Hall.
Step four: Come up with something you can play during your more-than-slightly-comedic opening act. I'm a banjo player, so naturally I suggest the banjo. It sounds cheerful and three chords will get you through a lot of folk repertoire. Fallback position: The kazoo. (But don't overstay your welcome. The joke will get old very fast.)
And you're on!
What have we all learned from this Ferris-esque exercise?
A) Being a concert promoter is not, in fact, rocket science. (Being a consistently profitable concert promoter is a different matter. But that isn't our necessarily our goal, is it?)
B) Oops, by "make Carnegie Hall" we didn't actually mean "stand on stage at Carnegie Hall and play an instrument in a way which entertains hundreds of people". Not just that. No, we meant something much more intangible and ineffable and... well, unobtainable. We want to Arrive, whatever that means. What does that mean? Perhaps we should think about that. And what of all the people who have made it to Carnegie Hall, many times, to public acclaim, but still have found themselves unsatisfied or even terrified? (Did you know that Vladimir Horowitz retired from live performance at the height of his career because of debilitating stage fright?)
Well... sure. We can, right?
Step one: Phone Carnegie Hall. Ask them how much it costs to rent the place for a while. They do that, as attested by this rentals page:
http://www.carnegiehall.org/article/the_basics/art_hall_rent...
It is probably quite a lot, but it may be less than you think.
Step two: Find some musicians with actual talent to fill out your program at the Hall. Hint: Classical music students are not rich. And they love to perform. And they're astonishingly talented.
Better idea: There are a bunch of college a-capella groups. There are a bunch of high school music groups. All those folks might love to perform at Carnegie Hall. Especially if it's an event with a bunch of other groups. And their parents might love to come. And their friends.
Step three: Schedule your concert. Charge enough admission to cover the cost of the hall and whatever you have to pay your musicians. Donate any leftover money to a charity. Preferably one with lots of supporters who want to come and fill out your audience at Carnegie Hall.
Step four: Come up with something you can play during your more-than-slightly-comedic opening act. I'm a banjo player, so naturally I suggest the banjo. It sounds cheerful and three chords will get you through a lot of folk repertoire. Fallback position: The kazoo. (But don't overstay your welcome. The joke will get old very fast.)
And you're on!
What have we all learned from this Ferris-esque exercise?
A) Being a concert promoter is not, in fact, rocket science. (Being a consistently profitable concert promoter is a different matter. But that isn't our necessarily our goal, is it?)
B) Oops, by "make Carnegie Hall" we didn't actually mean "stand on stage at Carnegie Hall and play an instrument in a way which entertains hundreds of people". Not just that. No, we meant something much more intangible and ineffable and... well, unobtainable. We want to Arrive, whatever that means. What does that mean? Perhaps we should think about that. And what of all the people who have made it to Carnegie Hall, many times, to public acclaim, but still have found themselves unsatisfied or even terrified? (Did you know that Vladimir Horowitz retired from live performance at the height of his career because of debilitating stage fright?)
They look like get-rich-quick but there are some real nuggets of truth in there; but the hard work is well disguised.
Take for example the 4-Hour body's section on ultrarunning. I'm training for a marathon so I know how hard it is, yet the way it's written about in the book is (to my recollection - don't have my copy here) "20 minutes 3 times a week and you can run 50K". Then you read closer, and closer, and there are detailed training schedules with some long runs, and it's actually sensible - but the initial wow is definitely along the lines of snake oil.
I think Tim just knows what will get people to bite, but underneath it all he also knows how to achieve (most of) the things he writes about.
Take for example the 4-Hour body's section on ultrarunning. I'm training for a marathon so I know how hard it is, yet the way it's written about in the book is (to my recollection - don't have my copy here) "20 minutes 3 times a week and you can run 50K". Then you read closer, and closer, and there are detailed training schedules with some long runs, and it's actually sensible - but the initial wow is definitely along the lines of snake oil.
I think Tim just knows what will get people to bite, but underneath it all he also knows how to achieve (most of) the things he writes about.
OK, but as someone who as run a 50k, "20 minutes 3 times a week and you can run 50K" is bald faced lie.
Tim's books are effectively about finding the 20% of your efforts that give you 80% (or 90%) of your results, and then just doing those things. They've both been very effective for me (as in, they've introduced life-changing ideas and strategies to me), but you sound like you've made up your mind. Have you read them?
You've basically described all self-help books in the history of mankind.
You're not making sense. So if a book purports to help someone, it's automatically bullshit? Even if many people have found it to be useful and to have a positive impact in their lives?
I think the common objection to self-help books is not "Hey, books shouldn't help people!" It's that the content of self-help books tends to fall into one of three categories:
1) Common-sensical faffery ("Don't waste time!")
2) Meaningless, feel-good faffery ("You have all the power you need, right inside you!")
3) Snake oil ("Hold a magnet to your head for four hours a week and become a Nietzschian Ubermensch!")
None of these categories are really valuable content, so self-help books get a reputation as blatant time-wasters at best (due to the copious faffery) and harmful scams at worst (due to the snake oil). When somebody says something sounds like a "typical self-help book," most of the time they're really saying it sounds like one or more of those things.
1) Common-sensical faffery ("Don't waste time!")
2) Meaningless, feel-good faffery ("You have all the power you need, right inside you!")
3) Snake oil ("Hold a magnet to your head for four hours a week and become a Nietzschian Ubermensch!")
None of these categories are really valuable content, so self-help books get a reputation as blatant time-wasters at best (due to the copious faffery) and harmful scams at worst (due to the snake oil). When somebody says something sounds like a "typical self-help book," most of the time they're really saying it sounds like one or more of those things.
I'm just saying that you are doing a poor job of dispelling people's reservations.
What I'm saying makes perfect sense to people who can't stand the industry and Tim Ferris. I don't know what it looks like to you.
There will always be people who love something, regardless of what it is, and whether it works or not.
What I'm saying makes perfect sense to people who can't stand the industry and Tim Ferris. I don't know what it looks like to you.
There will always be people who love something, regardless of what it is, and whether it works or not.
And crosshairs in moon landing photos make perfect sense to people who belive it was faked.
Tim's books have some worthwhile advice backed by solid data and also some very anecdote-based conclusions. If you're not flat out calling him a liar, his methods have worked for at least himself. That's all that he claims. If you want to know if they'll work for you, try some of them or do the research yourself.
Tim's books have some worthwhile advice backed by solid data and also some very anecdote-based conclusions. If you're not flat out calling him a liar, his methods have worked for at least himself. That's all that he claims. If you want to know if they'll work for you, try some of them or do the research yourself.
I haven't read the Avesta, but I don't believe in Zoroastrianism.
Yes, that's the same.
>> No notion of the hard work (and natural talent) required
No, no, that's not true. What he suggest to his readers, like low carb diet, or no-news diet is quite a hard work.
No, no, that's not true. What he suggest to his readers, like low carb diet, or no-news diet is quite a hard work.
I haven't read any of his books, but as an Australian, Mr Ferris's tone fills me with dread, suspicion and an instinctual need to take the piss.
I've seen various endorsements here on HN of the diet and the training regimen. In both cases I have a point to make: almost all of you are seeing novice gains.
Strength coaches recognise this phenomenon. The novice can see amazing gains in hypertrophy and strength in a short time with very little stimulus because they have never had to adapt before. Their capacity for adaptation is barely tapped by infrequent training and they're coming off a low base. It is not uncommon to see total newbs put on a decent weights program add substantial weight to both bar and body in 8 weeks.
In fact, novices are so underadapted that almost any training at all will see improvements in strength. Riding a bicycle will improve squat maxes, for the novice.
Likewise with diets. Often folk swear by diet X because it works for them. One of three things is usually happening:
1. It's their first diet, and they're simply having a caloric deficit for the first time in their lives.
2. They're still enthusiastic and regimented when they make the endorsement. Boredom has yet to set in and sabotage the gains.
3. They're an experienced dieter, having tried quite a few; but this particular diet just so happens to fit their particular combination of taste, hormonal cycles, insulin resistance, adipose senstivity juuuust right.
It's not linear. Did you gain/lose 10kg this month? Don't count on it next month. Maybe 9. Don't count on it for a year, either. In my first month serious weight training I added 60kg to my squat max. If progress was linear I should be squatting several tons by now.
But it isn't. Eventually you require more and more stimulus to disrupt homeostasis, to force new adaptation of the muscle, bone, tendon, nervous, cardiovascular and endocrine systems.
Take my sport: Olympic weightlifting. When I first started I went from naked bar to snatching 60kg in about 6 weeks. On a linear basis I would be snatching 750kg or so at this point, which would make the world-record holder by a factor of 3. Of course that doesn't happen, currently I am just shy of snatching 120kg.
With a goal of snatching 130kg in March, I am now training twice a day, four days a week.
Elite-level international competitors in my sport will train 3-6 times per day, 6 days per week. At the elite level it takes enormous stimulus to cause adaptation. 4 hours per month, let alone per week, just isn't going to work.
One more thing. Apparently Feriss mentions hCG in his book as an aid to sexual performance. Does he mention that its major use as post-cycle therapy for steroid users? Because, to be quite honest, I would be surprised to find any iron sport enthusiast using hCG who wasn't also performing the twist-and-jab exercise first.
I've seen various endorsements here on HN of the diet and the training regimen. In both cases I have a point to make: almost all of you are seeing novice gains.
Strength coaches recognise this phenomenon. The novice can see amazing gains in hypertrophy and strength in a short time with very little stimulus because they have never had to adapt before. Their capacity for adaptation is barely tapped by infrequent training and they're coming off a low base. It is not uncommon to see total newbs put on a decent weights program add substantial weight to both bar and body in 8 weeks.
In fact, novices are so underadapted that almost any training at all will see improvements in strength. Riding a bicycle will improve squat maxes, for the novice.
Likewise with diets. Often folk swear by diet X because it works for them. One of three things is usually happening:
1. It's their first diet, and they're simply having a caloric deficit for the first time in their lives.
2. They're still enthusiastic and regimented when they make the endorsement. Boredom has yet to set in and sabotage the gains.
3. They're an experienced dieter, having tried quite a few; but this particular diet just so happens to fit their particular combination of taste, hormonal cycles, insulin resistance, adipose senstivity juuuust right.
It's not linear. Did you gain/lose 10kg this month? Don't count on it next month. Maybe 9. Don't count on it for a year, either. In my first month serious weight training I added 60kg to my squat max. If progress was linear I should be squatting several tons by now.
But it isn't. Eventually you require more and more stimulus to disrupt homeostasis, to force new adaptation of the muscle, bone, tendon, nervous, cardiovascular and endocrine systems.
Take my sport: Olympic weightlifting. When I first started I went from naked bar to snatching 60kg in about 6 weeks. On a linear basis I would be snatching 750kg or so at this point, which would make the world-record holder by a factor of 3. Of course that doesn't happen, currently I am just shy of snatching 120kg.
With a goal of snatching 130kg in March, I am now training twice a day, four days a week.
Elite-level international competitors in my sport will train 3-6 times per day, 6 days per week. At the elite level it takes enormous stimulus to cause adaptation. 4 hours per month, let alone per week, just isn't going to work.
One more thing. Apparently Feriss mentions hCG in his book as an aid to sexual performance. Does he mention that its major use as post-cycle therapy for steroid users? Because, to be quite honest, I would be surprised to find any iron sport enthusiast using hCG who wasn't also performing the twist-and-jab exercise first.
Ferris tends to sell what zefrank classes as "brain crack". It gives you a high, fills your head with possibilities and a week after you finish the book you never think of it again.
Yes, generalizing - yes, a select few people will read this kind of press then go out and change their life, start a series of successful endeavors and make love like a wild badger / hamster / emu / whatever the popular animal is for the moment, but from my general experience of the kind of people that love these books, it's a form of fantasy or escapism.
I'm surprised your reply didn't get downvoted to hell simply because it injects spades of uncomfortable, sweaty reality to this specific kind of goal. Tim Ferris' achievements seem to be the intersection of several other significant bodies of work / effort that contributed to easing the pathway to achieving other things, but they are sold as if he woke up a few weeks ago and made it all happen.
Most people will need to at least invest significant material or psychological effort to get to the point where they can enable similar actions, but it's not going to bother the majority because they'll never get to that point of action - testing the validity of a fantasy tends to destroy the associated pleasure.
Edit: The similar scenario I always think of with 4HWW is the Banksy / Exit through the gift shop / Mr Brainwash thing - the guy basically outsourced everything to do with an art show (including the creation of art), crammed it all into the shortest window possible, and only _just_ scraped through the process (while destroying his health and having what looked like a complete breakdown). Additionally he created no lasting value or developed any meaningful skills (in either art or event co-ordination). Made some money, sure, but I'm not entirely sold in the tradeoff there.
Yes, generalizing - yes, a select few people will read this kind of press then go out and change their life, start a series of successful endeavors and make love like a wild badger / hamster / emu / whatever the popular animal is for the moment, but from my general experience of the kind of people that love these books, it's a form of fantasy or escapism.
I'm surprised your reply didn't get downvoted to hell simply because it injects spades of uncomfortable, sweaty reality to this specific kind of goal. Tim Ferris' achievements seem to be the intersection of several other significant bodies of work / effort that contributed to easing the pathway to achieving other things, but they are sold as if he woke up a few weeks ago and made it all happen.
Most people will need to at least invest significant material or psychological effort to get to the point where they can enable similar actions, but it's not going to bother the majority because they'll never get to that point of action - testing the validity of a fantasy tends to destroy the associated pleasure.
Edit: The similar scenario I always think of with 4HWW is the Banksy / Exit through the gift shop / Mr Brainwash thing - the guy basically outsourced everything to do with an art show (including the creation of art), crammed it all into the shortest window possible, and only _just_ scraped through the process (while destroying his health and having what looked like a complete breakdown). Additionally he created no lasting value or developed any meaningful skills (in either art or event co-ordination). Made some money, sure, but I'm not entirely sold in the tradeoff there.
I haven't read any of his books, but as an Australian, Mr Ferris's tone fills me with dread, suspicion and an instinctual need to take the piss.
...but from my general experience of the kind of people that love these books, it's a form of fantasy or escapism.
I'm also not familiar with these books (except for discussions of them on HN, where they get a lot of negative comments). I'm American -- born and raised -- but come from a multicultural background and can't relate to a lot of popular American stuff. The above comments make me think/wonder if this is an American phenomenon, kind of like how everyone talks about wanting to win the lottery. I get all kinds of flack for rolling up my sleeves and working to resolve my problems. Americans seem to have the hardest time with that. Maybe it is selection bias, but foreign friends seem to have a much easier time wrapping their head around the choices I have made to genuinely resolve problems that are supposed to be "unresolvable".
My anecdotal observation is that people who have a huge love of Christmas and theme parks are typically people with their head in the sand, who only want escapism and god forbid that you offer them a real solution. That might involve work. That might involve being uncomfortable. That might lead to divorce or changing jobs or something.
Sigh.
...but from my general experience of the kind of people that love these books, it's a form of fantasy or escapism.
I'm also not familiar with these books (except for discussions of them on HN, where they get a lot of negative comments). I'm American -- born and raised -- but come from a multicultural background and can't relate to a lot of popular American stuff. The above comments make me think/wonder if this is an American phenomenon, kind of like how everyone talks about wanting to win the lottery. I get all kinds of flack for rolling up my sleeves and working to resolve my problems. Americans seem to have the hardest time with that. Maybe it is selection bias, but foreign friends seem to have a much easier time wrapping their head around the choices I have made to genuinely resolve problems that are supposed to be "unresolvable".
My anecdotal observation is that people who have a huge love of Christmas and theme parks are typically people with their head in the sand, who only want escapism and god forbid that you offer them a real solution. That might involve work. That might involve being uncomfortable. That might lead to divorce or changing jobs or something.
Sigh.
Yeah. To contrast, one of the books that changed my life (well, fitness wise) was Rock, Iron, Steel - Justa's book of strength.
It was about 15 pages long, and can be summarized as "go and find some heavy things, then lift and drag them around for the rest of your life. Don't skip any days in between. Expect results in 3-6 years". The book itself is pretty useless, but it was a reflection of "there's no science here, just start".
I'm putting some hyperbole in that, but it was a distinct change for me at the time. Not saying I've got everything solved, but as a general rule if something causes me to spend more time imagining doing things than actually doing things, I try to avoid it.
One of the aspects in all this that incites the want to attack the style of book is that some of this is basic beyond books, beyond anything else - eg, if you want to lose weight, eat less and get off your ass. You don't need a book, or a hack, or even clever thought about it. Go the hell outside and move around a lot.
Full disclosure: I'm an Australian as well.
It was about 15 pages long, and can be summarized as "go and find some heavy things, then lift and drag them around for the rest of your life. Don't skip any days in between. Expect results in 3-6 years". The book itself is pretty useless, but it was a reflection of "there's no science here, just start".
I'm putting some hyperbole in that, but it was a distinct change for me at the time. Not saying I've got everything solved, but as a general rule if something causes me to spend more time imagining doing things than actually doing things, I try to avoid it.
One of the aspects in all this that incites the want to attack the style of book is that some of this is basic beyond books, beyond anything else - eg, if you want to lose weight, eat less and get off your ass. You don't need a book, or a hack, or even clever thought about it. Go the hell outside and move around a lot.
Full disclosure: I'm an Australian as well.
My mother grew up in Germany during WWII and it's aftermath, struggling to survive and witnessing atrocities I can't imagine. She escaped East Germany as an underage teen with forged papers, claiming her infant niece was her own baby so she could return the child to its rightful mother who was not allowed to take her own baby home to West Germany after going to their mother's funeral in East Germany. My dad grew up in The Great Depression and fought in the front lines of two wars. He is also basically old enough to be my grandfather.
Superficially, I am white, I am American and I am middle class. This causes many people to view me as culturally "white middle class American", which is not really accurate. It gets me into hot water because it causes my behavior to be wildly misinterpreted at times. I don't really do Christmas and other American holidays anymore. I don't see any real value in it. It's like a cultural meme of "salvation" -- knight in shining armor, Santa Claus, lottery tickets. I stopped speaking to one woman who was constantly whining to me about her utterly prosaic problems (as if they were the worst problems ever in the history of human kind and no one else had any) but turned a deaf ear to all attempts to gently suggest she do something about it. Her answer to absolutely everything was: It's someone else's fault and I'm going to win the lottery.
Superficially, I am white, I am American and I am middle class. This causes many people to view me as culturally "white middle class American", which is not really accurate. It gets me into hot water because it causes my behavior to be wildly misinterpreted at times. I don't really do Christmas and other American holidays anymore. I don't see any real value in it. It's like a cultural meme of "salvation" -- knight in shining armor, Santa Claus, lottery tickets. I stopped speaking to one woman who was constantly whining to me about her utterly prosaic problems (as if they were the worst problems ever in the history of human kind and no one else had any) but turned a deaf ear to all attempts to gently suggest she do something about it. Her answer to absolutely everything was: It's someone else's fault and I'm going to win the lottery.
Salvation via consumption also seems to be the go. It baffles me that people think you need to buy something to fix a problem like emotional wellbeing / fitness / etc. Self help is one of the more insidious forms of consumerism, from my perspective.
I think it is selection bias. The American mythology, as evidenced by the lack of social programs in comparison to other similar countries, is that hard work is everything. Americans work more hours, take less vacation, and receive fewer benefits from their government than their European counterparts. Germans, for example, are near the bottom of the list here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_time#Differences_among_...
The foreign friends you have are in the US because they are hard workers, they are not hard workers because they are foreign.
The foreign friends you have are in the US because they are hard workers, they are not hard workers because they are foreign.
The foreign friends you have are in the US because they are hard workers, they are not hard workers because they are foreign.
A lot of the foreign friends I have had I have only known online. They were not in the US but usually in some other country. I used to have really bad insomnia and when it was 3am in California, most of America was asleep. But it was midday elsewhere and there were people awake in such places and willing to talk to me. Nor did I mean to indicate they were specifically "hard workers". But they were people who understood doing things that are uncomfortable on many levels, making really big sacrifices for something one values and so on in a way that seems alien to many Americans.
I have a form of cystic fibrosis and I have given up all my furniture and I sleep on the floor. I can't tell you how many people I have met online who are desperately ill and would clearly rather die a slow torturous death than contemplate giving up their couch. I can't relate to the idea of desperately clinging to your material possessions when they are helping to kill you and they cannot relate to my choice to have almost no possessions in order to be drug free and breathe without pain. Foreigners are typically much more understanding of that choice and are much more likely to be civil to me on a CF list where many Americans openly attack me and moderators frequently side with my attackers.
Europeans often have more holidays and do more traveling than Americans but don't usually have as many material possessions -- like a TV in every room of the house -- and aren't generally as steeped in North American "affluenza". It is a different set of values.
A lot of the foreign friends I have had I have only known online. They were not in the US but usually in some other country. I used to have really bad insomnia and when it was 3am in California, most of America was asleep. But it was midday elsewhere and there were people awake in such places and willing to talk to me. Nor did I mean to indicate they were specifically "hard workers". But they were people who understood doing things that are uncomfortable on many levels, making really big sacrifices for something one values and so on in a way that seems alien to many Americans.
I have a form of cystic fibrosis and I have given up all my furniture and I sleep on the floor. I can't tell you how many people I have met online who are desperately ill and would clearly rather die a slow torturous death than contemplate giving up their couch. I can't relate to the idea of desperately clinging to your material possessions when they are helping to kill you and they cannot relate to my choice to have almost no possessions in order to be drug free and breathe without pain. Foreigners are typically much more understanding of that choice and are much more likely to be civil to me on a CF list where many Americans openly attack me and moderators frequently side with my attackers.
Europeans often have more holidays and do more traveling than Americans but don't usually have as many material possessions -- like a TV in every room of the house -- and aren't generally as steeped in North American "affluenza". It is a different set of values.
I think you are missing the point of the book (not surprising since you did not read it).
The thesis of the 4-hour body is to understand as much of the science as meaningful, and then to do the absolute minimum in terms of diet and exercise in order to improve your body. As you know, the book is written for a general audience.
As an elite athlete, it may be easy for you to look at the situation and say 'you are seeing novice gains'. But thats not the point. The point is that the book is a knowledge repository for me to accomplish the goals the author has set forth.
Instead of just criticizing, perhaps you can offer a suggestion for a better alternative of a knowledge repository aimed at the goals and the audience Tim Ferriss is trying to impact?
The thesis of the 4-hour body is to understand as much of the science as meaningful, and then to do the absolute minimum in terms of diet and exercise in order to improve your body. As you know, the book is written for a general audience.
As an elite athlete, it may be easy for you to look at the situation and say 'you are seeing novice gains'. But thats not the point. The point is that the book is a knowledge repository for me to accomplish the goals the author has set forth.
Instead of just criticizing, perhaps you can offer a suggestion for a better alternative of a knowledge repository aimed at the goals and the audience Tim Ferriss is trying to impact?
> The thesis of the 4-hour body is to understand as much of the science as meaningful, and then to do the absolute minimum in terms of diet and exercise in order to improve your body
And my point is that the absolute minimum is all you need to get novice gains, in any system. High reps, low reps. High frequency, low frequency. High intensity, low intensity. High density, low density. High volume, low volume. High tempo, low tempo. They will all work for the novice, just not very long. Nothing I have heard about this book changes this fact.
> Instead of just criticizing, perhaps you can offer a suggestion for a better alternative of a knowledge repository aimed at the goals and the audience Tim Ferriss is trying to impact?
For novices, the go-to golden standard is Starting Strength by Rippetoe. He's a strength coach with decades of both practical and research experience. I'd back him in a controlled twin study against Feriss for AU$1000 right now.
And my point is that the absolute minimum is all you need to get novice gains, in any system. High reps, low reps. High frequency, low frequency. High intensity, low intensity. High density, low density. High volume, low volume. High tempo, low tempo. They will all work for the novice, just not very long. Nothing I have heard about this book changes this fact.
> Instead of just criticizing, perhaps you can offer a suggestion for a better alternative of a knowledge repository aimed at the goals and the audience Tim Ferriss is trying to impact?
For novices, the go-to golden standard is Starting Strength by Rippetoe. He's a strength coach with decades of both practical and research experience. I'd back him in a controlled twin study against Feriss for AU$1000 right now.
Again, you seem to think the book is about this claim that TF has invented some new kind of workout routine. Its not.
At a novice level there is a minimum amount of work that can be done to get the desired outcome. Further, an intermediate or professional athlete also has a minimum amount of work that can be done to get their desired outcome. In every goal, no matter what your experience or skill level, there is a minimum amount of work for the desired outcome.
How do you quantify this minimum amount of work is? The 4 hour body prescribes a methodology of continual trial and measurement. That is what the book is about.. applying this principle to your goals for your own body. And, he has sections in the book for both beginners and more experienced athletes.
Occams Protocol, as the book refers to it, is really a brilliant principle if you can just remove yourself from your expertise in this subject for one minute.
Starting Strength looks great. I started lifting about 15 years ago - my first read was Arnold's 'Encyclopedia of Body Building'. Either of those books would take me a few weeks to really absorb. The Four hour body took me about 6 hours to read, it encouraged me to cut back my workouts from 6 hours per week to 3 hours per week - so far with solid results. That is significant, that is important to me - that is something that I would like to share with other people.
btw, I would not take your bet, however, if that challenge was to happen, I would not bet against Tim Ferriss.
At a novice level there is a minimum amount of work that can be done to get the desired outcome. Further, an intermediate or professional athlete also has a minimum amount of work that can be done to get their desired outcome. In every goal, no matter what your experience or skill level, there is a minimum amount of work for the desired outcome.
How do you quantify this minimum amount of work is? The 4 hour body prescribes a methodology of continual trial and measurement. That is what the book is about.. applying this principle to your goals for your own body. And, he has sections in the book for both beginners and more experienced athletes.
Occams Protocol, as the book refers to it, is really a brilliant principle if you can just remove yourself from your expertise in this subject for one minute.
Starting Strength looks great. I started lifting about 15 years ago - my first read was Arnold's 'Encyclopedia of Body Building'. Either of those books would take me a few weeks to really absorb. The Four hour body took me about 6 hours to read, it encouraged me to cut back my workouts from 6 hours per week to 3 hours per week - so far with solid results. That is significant, that is important to me - that is something that I would like to share with other people.
btw, I would not take your bet, however, if that challenge was to happen, I would not bet against Tim Ferriss.
> Again, you seem to think the book is about this claim that TF has invented some new kind of workout routine. Its not.
OK. Admittedly I am attacking my own impression of a book I don't own (and don't plan to). Technically I am beating up a strawman, which is always an uneven fight.
> How do you quantify this minimum amount of work is? The 4 hour body prescribes a methodology of continual trial and measurement. That is what the book is about.. applying this principle to your goals for your own body.
Thank you for the best point made yet. I think it's great to experiment on yourself. I keep a log for more or less this purpose. However, it is problematic to generalise from "this worked awesomely for me" to "this will work awesomely for everyone forever", because novice gains dry up fast.
> Starting Strength looks great. I started lifting about 15 years ago - my first read was Arnold's 'Encyclopedia of Body Building'. Either of those books would take me a few weeks to really absorb
Yeah, I had Arnold's book in high school. Spent hooooours in the gym doing every variation of shoulder exercise known to man. My only really fond memory of the book is that it insisted on squatting and by god I did lots of them. Squats have never let me down.
> The Four hour body took me about 6 hours to read, it encouraged me to cut back my workouts from 6 hours per week to 3 hours per week - so far with solid results.
I am very pleased it is working for you. I note in passing that Starting Strength aims for 3 workouts of 45 minutes duration -- less time than you are spending now.
Edit: a good book to follow Starting Strength is Practical Programming for Strength Training, by Rippetoe et al.
OK. Admittedly I am attacking my own impression of a book I don't own (and don't plan to). Technically I am beating up a strawman, which is always an uneven fight.
> How do you quantify this minimum amount of work is? The 4 hour body prescribes a methodology of continual trial and measurement. That is what the book is about.. applying this principle to your goals for your own body.
Thank you for the best point made yet. I think it's great to experiment on yourself. I keep a log for more or less this purpose. However, it is problematic to generalise from "this worked awesomely for me" to "this will work awesomely for everyone forever", because novice gains dry up fast.
> Starting Strength looks great. I started lifting about 15 years ago - my first read was Arnold's 'Encyclopedia of Body Building'. Either of those books would take me a few weeks to really absorb
Yeah, I had Arnold's book in high school. Spent hooooours in the gym doing every variation of shoulder exercise known to man. My only really fond memory of the book is that it insisted on squatting and by god I did lots of them. Squats have never let me down.
> The Four hour body took me about 6 hours to read, it encouraged me to cut back my workouts from 6 hours per week to 3 hours per week - so far with solid results.
I am very pleased it is working for you. I note in passing that Starting Strength aims for 3 workouts of 45 minutes duration -- less time than you are spending now.
Edit: a good book to follow Starting Strength is Practical Programming for Strength Training, by Rippetoe et al.
The interesting point here is that "Novice" does not mean "Does in spare time", but means "Does for a short, unique time period".
Outside of those 8 weeks, the benefits are going to rapidly decrease, and then you're going to need a bit more science to continue with.
Outside of those 8 weeks, the benefits are going to rapidly decrease, and then you're going to need a bit more science to continue with.
Yes, I could have been clearer. In strength training jargon, novice basically means "unadapted". It's a person who hasn't strength trained before -- elite cyclists, swimmers, sprinters and even bodybuilders can all be called novices in the right circumstances.
The point of books like this is always the same: Where your focus is will become more.
When you focus on problems becoming an entrepreneur you won't become an entrepreneur. When you focus on health you will get healthier. Nothing new here. So I don't think parent missed the point. But maybe for some Tim Ferriss books are reminders to focus.
When you focus on problems becoming an entrepreneur you won't become an entrepreneur. When you focus on health you will get healthier. Nothing new here. So I don't think parent missed the point. But maybe for some Tim Ferriss books are reminders to focus.
> haven't ready any… all you are seeing novice gains…
Interestingly I've also seen the complaint that "all strength coaches know that if you've already had training experience, it's very easy to regain muscle pounds". So you gain if you're a novice, you gain if you're experienced… you gain…
> Likewise with diet. Often folk swear by diet X because it works for them.
(added emphasis). So it works…
> It's not linear… Elite-level international competitors… just isn't going to work.
I doubt I would bother writing and marketing a book for such a minuscule audience, especially if they have little or nothing to gain from it.
> Apparently Feriss mentions hCG…
He does point out risks, and caveats and even writes that surely he'll be wrong on some things. I know that likely people will completely overlook that, but what can you do more than explicitly point out things this way.
There are parts of his work with which I disagree, or at least believe the advice could be different, better, more specific, or in cases more general, but I also get "filled with dread, suspicion and an instinctual need to take a piss" when some just decide to offer such negative appraisals even when they "haven't read any of his books".
As they say, to each their own.
Interestingly I've also seen the complaint that "all strength coaches know that if you've already had training experience, it's very easy to regain muscle pounds". So you gain if you're a novice, you gain if you're experienced… you gain…
> Likewise with diet. Often folk swear by diet X because it works for them.
(added emphasis). So it works…
> It's not linear… Elite-level international competitors… just isn't going to work.
I doubt I would bother writing and marketing a book for such a minuscule audience, especially if they have little or nothing to gain from it.
> Apparently Feriss mentions hCG…
He does point out risks, and caveats and even writes that surely he'll be wrong on some things. I know that likely people will completely overlook that, but what can you do more than explicitly point out things this way.
There are parts of his work with which I disagree, or at least believe the advice could be different, better, more specific, or in cases more general, but I also get "filled with dread, suspicion and an instinctual need to take a piss" when some just decide to offer such negative appraisals even when they "haven't read any of his books".
As they say, to each their own.
> Interestingly I've also seen the complaint that "all strength coaches know that if you've already had training experience, it's very easy to regain muscle pounds". So you gain if you're a novice, you gain if you're experienced… you gain…
Regaining lost strength happens fast for two reasons.
1. Neural adaptations last longer than muscular adaptation.
2. A detrained, previously elite athlete has the same untapped recovery capacity as the novice.
> (added emphasis). So it works…
For a while. Added emphasis. And you cannot draw universal conclusions from anecdotes, no matter how compelling. What works for you may not work for me, except insofar as both diets will require caloric deficit to do anything.
You're right that I may be attacking a strawman, but honestly, miraculous workout/diet regimes are not new to the iron sports universe. The critiques of one apply almost universally and without exception to the others. Aside from anabolic steroids, there are no silver bullets.
Regaining lost strength happens fast for two reasons.
1. Neural adaptations last longer than muscular adaptation.
2. A detrained, previously elite athlete has the same untapped recovery capacity as the novice.
> (added emphasis). So it works…
For a while. Added emphasis. And you cannot draw universal conclusions from anecdotes, no matter how compelling. What works for you may not work for me, except insofar as both diets will require caloric deficit to do anything.
You're right that I may be attacking a strawman, but honestly, miraculous workout/diet regimes are not new to the iron sports universe. The critiques of one apply almost universally and without exception to the others. Aside from anabolic steroids, there are no silver bullets.
There are not enough upvotes in the world for the knowledge you are dropping in this thread.
That's very flattering, but really, it's mostly on loan from a) Coach Rippetoe, b) The Mad Egyptian[1] (his nickname in Oly circles) and my own long meandering and mostly unimpressive journey until I read one and then the other.
Credit also to my first Oly coach, Jack Walls. He churns out record-breakers like a factory.
[1] aka Mohamed F. El-Hewie.
Credit also to my first Oly coach, Jack Walls. He churns out record-breakers like a factory.
[1] aka Mohamed F. El-Hewie.
One more thing:
> "filled with dread, suspicion and an instinctual need to take a piss"
To take the piss, not a piss: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taking_the_piss
> "filled with dread, suspicion and an instinctual need to take a piss"
To take the piss, not a piss: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taking_the_piss
The parent's point about it not being linear is that the initial gains novices see don't continue. Getting stronger and gaining endurance are adaptations.
If your fitness base is extremely low because you spend all day, every day sitting down, then any regular training program is going to force your body to adapt. But once you do adapt, you will need to either change programs, increase the intensity, or increase the frequency in order to continue seeing gains. This is simply because your body has adapted to those fitness requirements.
If your fitness base is extremely low because you spend all day, every day sitting down, then any regular training program is going to force your body to adapt. But once you do adapt, you will need to either change programs, increase the intensity, or increase the frequency in order to continue seeing gains. This is simply because your body has adapted to those fitness requirements.
There are a number of points I could address, but I'll just say that any diet that leads to weight loss while also keeping you feeling satisfied is going to be way more effective than something that requires you to control your appetite. I'm sure there are others that do this, but Tim's version of Slow Carb is one of them.
Of course, with a whole lot of knowledge and a whole lot of self-control, you could be more effective, but Ferriss's whole idea is being effective with minimal effort.
Of course, with a whole lot of knowledge and a whole lot of self-control, you could be more effective, but Ferriss's whole idea is being effective with minimal effort.
I lost over 20lbs in January by lazily following Tim's Slow Carb Diet, as described in the book. I'm currently working on a blog entry about my experiences and observations.
I anticipate losing another 15-20lbs this next month. I'll report back then, the next time a 4HB criticism is posted here.
I anticipate losing another 15-20lbs this next month. I'll report back then, the next time a 4HB criticism is posted here.
I'm doing it as well, and have seen similar results. Not as drastic, but very impressed. It's all about a lifestyle change for me, just needed a little kick in the pants. Excited to read your blog post.
In case you missed the word 'Humour' at the top (I originally did, but I recognised the parody), this link may help save you from wasting the next 3hrs 54mins planning to mutilate a patient - http://mixergy.com/timothy-ferriss-four-hour-body-interview/
I'm hoping somebody can provide a direct link that demonstrates just how wonderfully the OP nailed the style of Tim's book!
I'm hoping somebody can provide a direct link that demonstrates just how wonderfully the OP nailed the style of Tim's book!
This is a hilarious take on Tim Ferriss's style.
I thought this gem was particularly hilarious: "Objectivity is subjective, and the laws of science are for victims."
I enjoy Tim's books (and find them somewhere between entertaining and useful depending on chapter) but I found this darn near keyboard-kill amusing.
"Be careful of reading health books. You might die of amisprint." - Mark Twain
"Be careful of reading health books. You might die of amisprint." - Mark Twain
There is a nugget of value to be taken from TF and every single successfully sold diet.
People love a system. LOVE A SYSTEM.
Anything that promises to take the work of determining what will lead to success out of an equation will be wildly popular.
"Always Eat Before 9pm" "Don't Sell on a Monday" "Drink 43.2mL of water per dollar you earn"
will all, ALWAYS, be more popular then "Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants."
Why do we need to know this? Because your startup will be more likely to succeed if it presents a systematic solution to a problem (OMG OPINION).
People love a system. LOVE A SYSTEM.
Anything that promises to take the work of determining what will lead to success out of an equation will be wildly popular.
"Always Eat Before 9pm" "Don't Sell on a Monday" "Drink 43.2mL of water per dollar you earn"
will all, ALWAYS, be more popular then "Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants."
Why do we need to know this? Because your startup will be more likely to succeed if it presents a systematic solution to a problem (OMG OPINION).
After I watched the Mixergy interview a few weeks ago and read snippets of his books... this is so spot on.
It's like a written, Tim-Ferriss-ized version of those Old Spice commercials!
"Hello, ladies, look at your man, now back to me, now back at your man, now back to me. Sadly, he isn’t me, but if he stopped using ladies scented body wash and switched to Old Spice, he could smell like he’s me. Look down, back up, where are you? You’re on a boat with the man your man could smell like. What’s in your hand, back at me. I have it, it’s an oyster with two tickets to that thing you love. Look again, the tickets are now diamonds. Anything is possible when your man smells like Old Spice and not a lady. I’m on a horse."
"Hello, ladies, look at your man, now back to me, now back at your man, now back to me. Sadly, he isn’t me, but if he stopped using ladies scented body wash and switched to Old Spice, he could smell like he’s me. Look down, back up, where are you? You’re on a boat with the man your man could smell like. What’s in your hand, back at me. I have it, it’s an oyster with two tickets to that thing you love. Look again, the tickets are now diamonds. Anything is possible when your man smells like Old Spice and not a lady. I’m on a horse."
Sometimes, there is a fine line between parody and imitation.
I just choked on an almond. That was hilarious and dead on.
One of the two that you're eating for breakfeast after following this guide? ;)
More like one of the twenty four-hours-before, if he's following 4HB. ;)
This essay reminds me of the classic College Admissions Essay from Hugh Gallagher.
I woo women with my sensuous and godlike trombone
playing, I can pilot bicycles up severe inclines with
unflagging speed, and I cook Thirty-Minute Brownies in
twenty minutes. I...
Anyone else get the Steve Martin Dentist song from Little Shop of Horrors in their head while reading this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOtMizMQ6oM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOtMizMQ6oM
All this talk and not one person has discussed the fifteen-minute O?
Scientific Self Help:
http://lesswrong.com/lw/3nn/scientific_selfhelp_the_state_of...
http://lesswrong.com/lw/3nn/scientific_selfhelp_the_state_of...
Brb... Searching for cod liver oil Syringes on Amazon.
>Success comes to those who force reality to bend to their will.
Words of wisdom in any age. Utterly fantastic.
Words of wisdom in any age. Utterly fantastic.
I bet Tim Ferriss is somewhere laughing at all this ... all the way to the bank.
[deleted]
Am I seriously the only person on HN who has gotten useful, effective stuff from both of Tim's books? Does everyone just hate him because he's such an effective promoter that they assume he must be selling snake oil?
4HWW led me to quit my job and start freelancing, spend three months traveling through Asia, build some online passive income streams, and generally have a healthier respect towards my time and how I spend it. The 4 Hour Body has led me to completely change my diet over the last 6-8 weeks and I feel incredible, better than I have in a long time.
I know I'm not the only one, but am I the only one on HN?