- ISBN13: 9780071597173
- Condition: NEW
- Notes: Brand New from Publisher. No Remainder Mark.
Product Description
Building muscle has never been faster or easier than with this revolutionary once-a-week training program In Body By Science, bodybuilding powerhouse John Little teams up with fitness medicine expert Dr. Doug McGuff to present a scientifically proven formula for maximizing muscle development in just 12 minutes a week. Backed by rigorous research, the authors prescribe a weekly high-intensity program for increasing strength, revving metabolism, an… More >>
Body by Science: A Research Based Program to Get the Results You Want in 12 Minutes a Week
I found this to be an utter embarassment to the field of exercise science. So full of contradictions I wouldn’t even know where to begin. Leads people to believe that minimal investment is needed to remain fit for life. So far away from reality!!! I wouldn’t recommend this to anyone interested in improving their fitness level. There isn’t an athletic population that I have ever worked with at any level from recreational to professional who would follow a program like this.
Rating: 1 / 5
This book claims to be dead on scientific. Unfortunately this is not the case. One example is at the beginning when the writers claim that walking a mile and running that same mile will burn the same number of calories. This could not be further from the truth.
The book itself is well written but some of the arguments have too many flaws. It was a good read in the sense of learning another point of view in the lifting world but there are much better HIT books out there that fundamentally make more sense. I suggest Ellington Darden’s The New HIT.
I also think it is ridiculous that John Little is using this book (Body by Science) to employ his entirely non scientific and non physiological based styles of training such as max contraction. Anything good in this book has been ruined by all the mythical garbage placed in it. Your much better off going and reading a physiology text book.
Rating: 2 / 5
Dr. McGuff and John Little do a great job on this new book which is a VG combo of many high intensity books that have come down the pike but done in a more thorough and scientific fashion.
I don’t agree that one strength training session a week is optimal (in my experience 2 weekly sessions work better than one) nor do I agree that a calorie is just a calorie (visit the Nutrition and Metabolism Society website[...] for more info on this subject), but for the most part, the information in Body by Science is rock solid and I highly recommend it!
Rating: 5 / 5
Body by Science has some great chapters on somatypes, insulin metabolism, aerobic and cardio myths,fat loss, genetics, epigenetics, romanticizing our ancestors, assuming causal relationships when looking at fit people, and training adaptation. As with any book, it’s important to keep checking on updates to the information presented.
This book states that omega-6 fats are harmful. Here is some new research from Webmd:
[...]
WebMD Health News
Reviewed by Louise Chang, MD
Jan. 26, 2009 — The American Heart Association (AHA) has come to the defense of omega-6 fatty acids, the fats found in many grains and most vegetable oils that some have linked to heart disease.
In a scientific advisory released today, an AHA panel noted that there is little credible evidence that omega-6 fatty acids promote inflammation and increase cardiovascular risk.
The experts concluded that reducing omega-6 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) from their current levels would be more likely to increase the typical American’s risk for heart disease than decrease it.
“Our goal was simply to let Americans know that foods containing omega-6 fatty acids can be part of a healthy diet, and can even help improve your cardiovascular risk profile,” researcher and panel chairman William S. Harris, PhD, notes in a news release.”
So now I question other claims in the book, since authors usually get their information from others who get their information from an original-but-not-so-credible source, and since it has been repeated so often we often don’t question the origin. We just believe it because we are bamboozled by chemical terms and processes that we accept on faith because we cannot “see” the microscopic biological processes ourselves.
From the Clarence Bass site:
“The Washington Post also reported a little-known aftermath of Wayne Westcott’s slow lift studies. “The bad news,” Westcott told The Post, “is that when I finished both studies (of slow lifting vs. standard lifting), only one of the 147 people involved… wanted to continue the training. We feel it’s a little too tedious, too tough for the average person.”
The written description of how to do correct squats is correct, yet the accompanying photo shows one of the authors doing a squat with rear to heels and heels up with weight on the balls of the feet and knees in front of the toes. I’ve been taught that this position (in the photo) is harmful to the knees.
The authors recommend going to positive failure once a week, preferably on the Nautilus-type machines (which they have at their facilities) since going to positive failure with free-weights could be dangerous. The exercises they recommend are done on the machines in a sitting position, which is not functional for everyday life, in case that is important to you. Their free-weight version of the seated row is a standing, bent-over row, which puts a lot of leverage on the low back.
Even with these problems the book is very good about reducing training anxiety, setting realistic goals, pointing out that sports aren’t necessarily healthy, and encourages healthy eating. I recommend reading the articles on Doug McGuff’s two websites and watching his online videos.
Rating: 4 / 5
Hi,
This is a great book! Highly recommended.
If you’re interested in strengthening to help make yourself as healthy as you can be, you must do so only in accordance with your joint and muscle function, and do so in a slow and safe manner directly targeting your muscles with minimum momentum to induce maximum stress to trigger changes, using the most safe and efficient tools for the job.
Anything else (cross-training, cardio, weight lifting/throwing, recreation, barbells, strongman competitions, etc.) is inefficient, however you may get fit in spite of such methods.
The message boils down to doing strength training in a slow manner, using strength training machines. This is where strength training is heading anyway, despite a few groups hanging on, mostly because of traditions. Historically, strength training went from lifting rocks, to shot-filled barbells, to plate loaded barbells, and then pulley and plate loaded machines. Then Science entered the picture, and we were blessed with machines with cams, and now the field is quickly moving towards computerized machines and all of their benefits.
This book has an absolutely great discussion of the difference between fitness and health. Fitness would be a powerlifter who can squat 500 lbs. Health, or lack of in this example, would be that same powerlifter has arthritis and a huge gut…So who really cares if he can squat 500 lbs, as his own methods are slowly making him less functional by many measures.
Nowadays, it is easy to be impressed by the glitz of videos showing impressive accomplishments in sporting events, mostly by the genetically blessed, or by videos of people being tired, lying sweaty on the floor after some cardio cross-training, perhaps indicating how ‘bad a$$’ and macho their exercise methods are. Don’t be. Laugh it off. Exercise your muscles rationally for best results. Actually THINK about how you are exercising.
Rating: 5 / 5