2. Are we mixing up absence and presence? Example: if the claim is that a no-meat diet extends average lifespan 515%, is it possible that it is the presence of more vegetables, not the absence of meat, that extends lifespan? It most certainly is.

3. Is it possible that you tested a specific demographic and that other variables are responsible for the difference? Example: if the claim is that yoga improves cardiac health, and the experimental group comprises upper-cla.s.s folk, is it possible that they are therefore more likely than a control group to eat better food? You bet your downward-dog-posing a.s.s.

The point isn't to speculate about hundreds of possible explanations.

The point is to be skeptical, especially of sensationalist headlines. Most "new studies" in the media are observational studies that can, at best, establish correlation (A happens while B happens), but not causality (A causes B to happen).

If I pick my nose when the Super Bowl cuts to a commercial, did I cause that? This isn't a haiku. It's a summary: correlation doesn't prove causation. Be skeptical when people tell you that A causes B.

They're wrong much more than 50% of the time.

USE THE YO-YO: EMBRACE CYCLING.

Yo-yo dieting gets a bad rap.

Instead of beating yourself up, going to the shrink, or eating an entire cheesecake because you ruined your diet with one cookie, allow me to deliver a message: it's normal.

Eating more, then less, then more, and so on in a continuous sine wave is an impulse we can leverage to reach goals faster. Trying to prevent it-attempting to sustain a reduced-calorie diet, for example-is when yo-yoing becomes pathological and uncontrollable. Scheduling overeating at specific times, on the other hand, fixes problems instead of creating them.

The top bodybuilders in the world understand this and, even when in a pre-contest dieting phase, will cycle calories to prevent hormonal downregulation.5 The daily average might be 4,000 calories per day, but it would be cycled as follows: Monday, 4,000; Tuesday, 4,500; Wednesday, 3,500, etc. The daily average might be 4,000 calories per day, but it would be cycled as follows: Monday, 4,000; Tuesday, 4,500; Wednesday, 3,500, etc.

Ed Coan, described as the Michael Jordan of powerlifting, set more than 70 world records in his sport. Among other things, he deadlifted an unbelievable 901 pounds at 220 pounds bodyweight, beating even super-heavyweights. His trainer at the time, Marty Gallagher, has stated matter-of-factly that "maintaining peak condition year-round is a ticket to the mental ward."

You can have your cheesecake and eat it too, as long as you get the timing right. The best part is that these planned ups and downs accelerate, rather than reverse, progress.

Forget balance and embrace cycling. It's a key ingredient in rapid body redesign.

PREDISPOSITION VS. PREDESTINATION: DON'T BLAME YOUR GENES The marathoners of Kenya are legendary.

Kenyan men have won all but one of the last 12 Boston Marathons. In the 1988 Olympics, Kenyan men won gold in the 800-meter, 1,500-meter, and 5,000-meter races, as well as the 3,000-meter steeplechase. Factoring in their population of approximately 30 million, the statistical likelihood of this happening at an international compet.i.tion with the scope of the Olympics is about one in 1.6 billion.

If you've been in the world of exercise science for any period of time, you can guess their muscle fiber composition, which is an inherited trait: slow-twitch. Slow-twitch muscle fibers are suited to endurance work. Lucky b.a.s.t.a.r.ds!

But here's the problem: it doesn't appear to be totally true. To the surprise of researchers who conducted muscle biopsies on Kenyan runners, there was a high proportion of fast-twitch muscle fibers, the type you'd expect to find in shot-putters and sprinters. Why? Because, as it turns out, they often train using low mileage and high intensity.

If you are overweight and your parents are overweight, the inclination is to blame genetics, but this is only one possible explanation.

Did fatness genes get pa.s.sed on, or was it overeating behavior? After all, fat people tend to have fat pets.

Even if you are predisposed predisposed to being overweight, you're not to being overweight, you're not predestined predestined to be fat. to be fat.

Eric Lander, leader of the Human Genome Project, has emphasized repeatedly the folly of learned helplessness through genetic determinism: People will think that because genes play a role in something, they determine everything. We see, again and again, people saying, "It's all genetic. I can't do anything about it." That's nonsense. To say that something has a genetic component does not make it unchangeable.

Don't accept predisposition. You don't have to, and we can feed and train you toward a different physical future.6 Nearly all of my personal experiments involve improving something that should be genetically fixed. Nearly all of my personal experiments involve improving something that should be genetically fixed.

It is possible to redirect your natural-born genetic profile. From now on, "bad genetics" can't be your go-to excuse.

ELIMINATE PROPAGANDA AND NEBULOUS TERMS.

The word aerobics aerobics came about when the gym instructors got together and said, "If we're going to charge $10 an hour, we can't call it jumping up and down." came about when the gym instructors got together and said, "If we're going to charge $10 an hour, we can't call it jumping up and down."-Rita Rudner One question you must learn to ask when faced with advice or sales pitches is: "If this [method/product/diet/etc.] didn't work as advertised, what might their other incentives be for selling it?"

Aerobics cla.s.ses? The reason you're sold: aerobics is more effective than alternative X. The real reason it's promoted: there's no equipment investment and the gym can maximize students per square foot per cla.s.s. Many "new and improved" recommendations are based on calculating profit first and then working backward to justify the method.

Marketer-speak and ambiguous words have no place in 4HB or your efforts. Both will surface in conversations with friends who, in their best effort to help, will do more harm than good. If unprepared, one such conversation can single-handedly derail an entire program.

These are two categories of words that you should neither use nor listen to. The first, marketer-speak, marketer-speak, includes all terms used to scare or sell that have no physiological basis: includes all terms used to scare or sell that have no physiological basis: ToningCelluliteFirmingShapingAerobics The word cellulite cellulite, for example, first appeared in the April 15, 1968, issue of Vogue Vogue magazine, and this invented disease soon had a believer base worldwide: magazine, and this invented disease soon had a believer base worldwide: Vogue began to focus on the body as much as on the clothes, in part because there was little they could dictate with the anarchic styles.... In a stunning move, an entire replacement culture was developed by naming a "problem" where it had scarcely existed before, centering it on the women's natural state, and elevating it to the existential female dilemma... began to focus on the body as much as on the clothes, in part because there was little they could dictate with the anarchic styles.... In a stunning move, an entire replacement culture was developed by naming a "problem" where it had scarcely existed before, centering it on the women's natural state, and elevating it to the existential female dilemma... . The number of diet- related articles rose 70 percent from 1968 to 1972. . The number of diet- related articles rose 70 percent from 1968 to 1972.

Cellulite is fat. Nothing special, neither a disease nor a unique female problem without solutions. It can be removed.

Less obvious, but often more damaging than marketer-speak, are scientific- scientific-sounding words words that are so overused as to have no agreed-upon meaning: that are so overused as to have no agreed-upon meaning: HealthFitnessOptimal To eliminate words you shouldn't use in body redesign, the question to ask is: can I measure it? can I measure it?

"I just want to be healthy" is not actionable. "I want to increase my HDL cholesterol and improve my time for a one-mile jog (or walk)" is actionable. "Healthy" is subject to the fads and regime du jour. Useless.

The word optimal optimal is also bandied about with much fanfare. "Your progesterone might fall within the normal range, but it's not optimal." The question here, seldom asked, should be: optimal for what? Triathlon training? Extending lifespan 40%? Increasing bone density 20%? Having s.e.x three times a day? is also bandied about with much fanfare. "Your progesterone might fall within the normal range, but it's not optimal." The question here, seldom asked, should be: optimal for what? Triathlon training? Extending lifespan 40%? Increasing bone density 20%? Having s.e.x three times a day?

"Optimal" depends entirely on what your goal is, and that goal should be numerically precise. "Optimal" is usable, but only when the "for what" is clear.

If it isn't, treat optimal optimal as Wikipedia would: a weasel word. as Wikipedia would: a weasel word.

[image]

[image]

Calories are all alike, whether they come from beef or bourbon, from sugar or starch, or from cheese and crackers. Too many calories are just too many calories.-Fred Stare, founder and former chair of the Harvard University Nutrition Department The above statement is so ridiculous as to defy belief, but let's take a look at the issue through a more rational lens: hypothetical scenarios.

Scenario #1: Two male identical twins eat the exact same meals for 30 days. The only difference: one of the subjects just finished a strong course of antibiotics and now lacks sufficient good bacteria for full digestion.

Will the body composition outcomes be the same?

Of course not. Rule #1: Rule #1: It's not what you put in your mouth that matters, it's what makes it to your bloodstream. If it pa.s.ses through, it doesn't count. It's not what you put in your mouth that matters, it's what makes it to your bloodstream. If it pa.s.ses through, it doesn't count.

The creator of the "calorie" as we know it, 19th-century chemist Wilbur Olin At.w.a.ter, did not have the technology that we have today. He incinerated foods. Incineration does not equal human digestion; eating a fireplace log will not store the same number of calories as burning one will produce. Tummies have trouble with bark, as they do with many things.

Scenario #2: Three females of the same race, age, and body composition each consume 2,000 calories daily for 30 days. Subject 1 consumes nothing but table sugar, subject 2 consumes nothing but lean chicken breast, and subject 3 consumes nothing but mayonnaise (2,000 calories is just 19.4 tablespoons, if you'd care to indulge).

Will the body composition outcomes be the same?

Of course not. Rule #2: Rule #2: The hormonal responses to carbohydrates (CHO), protein, and fat are different. The hormonal responses to carbohydrates (CHO), protein, and fat are different.

There is no shortage of clinical studies to prove that beef calories7 do not equal bourbon calories. do not equal bourbon calories.

One such study, conducted by Kekwick and Pawan, compared three groups put on calorically equal (isocaloric) semistarvation diets of 90% fat, 90% protein, or 90% carbohydrate. Though ensuring compliance was a challenge, the outcomes were clearly not at all the same:

1,000 cals. at 90% fat = weight loss of 0.9 lbs. per day 1,000 cals. at 90% protein = weight loss of 0.6 lbs. per day 1,000 cals. at 90% carbohydrate = weight gain gain of 0.24 lbs. per day of 0.24 lbs. per day

Different sources of calories = different results.

Things that affect calorie allocation-and that can be modified for fat-loss and muscle gain-include digestion, the ratio of protein-to-carbohydrates-to-fat, and timing.

We'll address all three.

[image]

Marilyn Monroe building her world-famous s.e.x appeal.

More than 50% of the examples in this book are of women.

Marketers have conditioned women to believe that they need specific programs and diets "for women." This is an example of capitalism at its worst: creating false need and confusion.

Does this mean I'm going to recommend that a woman do exactly the same thing as a 250-pound meathead who wants 20-inch arms? Of course not. The two have different goals. But 99% of the time both genders want exactly the same thing: less fat and a bit more muscle in the right places. Guess what? In these 99 cases out of 100, men and women should therefore do exactly exactly the same thing. the same thing.

On average, women have less than one-tenth (often less than one-fortieth) the testosterone of men. This biochemical recipe just doesn't support rapid muscular growth unless you're an outlier, so, for the duration of this book, please suspend any fear of "getting bulky."

Even if you are a fast-responder, as you observe changes, you can omit pieces or reduce frequency. Don't worry about waking up looking like the Hulk the morning after a single workout. It won't happen, as much as men wish it did. There will be plenty of time to tweak and fine-tune, to cut back or shift gears, as you go.

One potential objection from the scientists in the group: But don't women have more slow-twitch muscle fibers? Doesn't that mean women should train differently? But don't women have more slow-twitch muscle fibers? Doesn't that mean women should train differently? I propose not, and I'm not the first. Based on the data in this book and in the literature, you'll see that (1) muscle fiber composition can be changed, and (2) you should eat and train for your desired outcome, not to accommodate your current condition. I propose not, and I'm not the first. Based on the data in this book and in the literature, you'll see that (1) muscle fiber composition can be changed, and (2) you should eat and train for your desired outcome, not to accommodate your current condition.

Don't fall victim to s.e.xism in exercise. It's almost always a fraud or a sales pitch.

[image]

TOOLS AND TRICKS.

Seeking Wisdom: From Darwin to Munger From Darwin to Munger ( (www.fourhourbody.com/wisdom) This is one of the best books on mental models, how to use them, and how not to make a fool of yourself. I was introduced to this manual for critical thinking by Derek Sivers, who sold his company CD Baby for $22 million. This is one of the best books on mental models, how to use them, and how not to make a fool of yourself. I was introduced to this manual for critical thinking by Derek Sivers, who sold his company CD Baby for $22 million.

Poor Charlie's Almanack: The Wit and Wisdom of Charles T. Munger The Wit and Wisdom of Charles T. Munger ( (www.fourhourbody.com/almanac) This book contains most of the talks and lectures of Charlie Munger, the vice chairman of Berkshire Hathaway. It has sold nearly 50,000 copies without any advertising or bookstore placement. This book contains most of the talks and lectures of Charlie Munger, the vice chairman of Berkshire Hathaway. It has sold nearly 50,000 copies without any advertising or bookstore placement.

Munger's Worldly Wisdom (www.fourhourbody.com/munger) This transcribed speech, given by Charlie Munger at USC Business School, discusses the 8090 important mental models that cover 90% of the decisions he makes. This transcribed speech, given by Charlie Munger at USC Business School, discusses the 8090 important mental models that cover 90% of the decisions he makes.

[image]

End of Chapter Notes 3. In this case, the "4-Hour Body" is quite literal. In this case, the "4-Hour Body" is quite literal.

4. These "mental models" are often referred to as These "mental models" are often referred to as heuristics heuristics or or a.n.a.lytical frameworks a.n.a.lytical frameworks.

5. For example, proper conversion of T4 thyroid hormone to the more thermogenically active T3. For example, proper conversion of T4 thyroid hormone to the more thermogenically active T3.

6. Genes alone cannot account for the diversity of characteristics we see around us. Messenger RNA (mRNA) is now thought to be responsible for much of the diversity, and there is good news: just as you can turn genes on and off, you can influence mRNA dramatically with environment-even shut down certain processes entirely through interference. Genes alone cannot account for the diversity of characteristics we see around us. Messenger RNA (mRNA) is now thought to be responsible for much of the diversity, and there is good news: just as you can turn genes on and off, you can influence mRNA dramatically with environment-even shut down certain processes entirely through interference.

7. Protein, for one, provokes a greater thermic effect of food (TEF) than either carbohydrate or fat-in simple terms, in digestion a higher percentage of protein calories are "lost" as heat vs. carbohydrates or fat. This has led some scientists to suggest that the 4 calories per gram a.s.sumed for protein should be downgraded 20% to 3.2 calories per gram. Protein, for one, provokes a greater thermic effect of food (TEF) than either carbohydrate or fat-in simple terms, in digestion a higher percentage of protein calories are "lost" as heat vs. carbohydrates or fat. This has led some scientists to suggest that the 4 calories per gram a.s.sumed for protein should be downgraded 20% to 3.2 calories per gram.

GROUND ZERO- Getting Started and Swaraj At the individual level Swaraj is vitally connected with the capacity for dispa.s.sionate self-a.s.sessment, ceaseless self-purification and growing self-reliance.... It is Swaraj when we learn to rule ourselves.-Mahatma Gandhi, Young India, Young India, June 28, 1928, p. 772 June 28, 1928, p. 772

THE HARAJUKU MOMENT.

The Decision to Become a Complete Human I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pa.s.s over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.-Bene Gesserit "Litany Against Fear," from Frank Herbert's Dune Dune For most of us, the how-to books on our shelves represent a growing to-do list, not advice we've followed.

Several of the better-known tech CEOs in San Francisco have asked me at different times for an identical favor: an index card with bullet-point instructions for losing abdominal fat. Each of them made it clear: "Just tell me exactly what to do and I'll do it."

I gave them all of the necessary tactical advice on one 35 card, knowing in advance what the outcome would be. The success rate was impressive...0%.

People suck at following advice. Even the most effective people in the world are terrible at it. There are two reasons:

1. Most people have an insufficient reason for action. The pain isn't painful enough. It's a nice-to-have nice-to-have, not a must-have must-have. There has been no "Harajuku Moment."

2. There are no reminders. No consistent tracking = no awareness = no behavioral change. Consistent tracking, even if you have no knowledge of fat-loss or exercise, will often beat advice from world-cla.s.s trainers.

But what is this all-important "Harajuku Moment"?

It's an epiphany that turns a nice-to-have into a must-have. There is no point in getting started until it happens. It applies to fat-loss as much as strength gain, to endurance as much as s.e.x. No matter how many bullet points and recipes I provide, you will need a Harajuku Moment to fuel the change itself.

Chad Fowler knows this.

Chad, CTO of InfoEther, Inc., spends much of his time solving hard problems for customers in the Ruby computer language. He is also co-organizer of the annual RubyConf and RailsConf conferences, where I first met him. Our second meeting was in Boulder, Colorado, where he used his natural language experience with Hindi to teach a knuckle-dragger (me) the primitive basics of Ruby.

Chad is an incredible teacher, gifted with a.n.a.logies, but I was distracted in our session by something he mentioned in pa.s.sing. He'd recently lost 70+ pounds in less than 12 months.

It wasn't the amount of weight that I found fascinating. It was the timing. He'd been obese for more than a decade, and the change seemed to come out of nowhere. Upon landing back in San Francisco, I sent him one question via e-mail:

What were the tipping points, the moments and insights that led you to lose the 70 lbs.?

I wanted to know what the defining moment was, the conversation or realization that made him pull the trigger after 10 years of business as usual.

His answer is contained in this chapter.

Even if you have no interest in fat-loss, the key insights (partial completeness, data, and oversimplification among them) will help you lift 500 pounds, run 50 kilometers, gain 50 pounds, or do anything else in this book.

But let's talk about one oddity upfront: calorie counting. I just got done thrashing calorie counting, and I'm including Chad's calorie-based approach to prove a point.

This book didn't exist when Chad lost his weight, and there are far better things to track than calories. But...would I recommend tracking calories as an alternative to tracking nothing? You bet. Tracking anything is better than tracking nothing.