The Leangains Method: The Art of Getting Ripped by Martin Berkhan

Rating: 2/10

Review:

Blog posts written into a book by an arrogant author who has binge eating disorder. He also wants you to literally throw your money down the toilet by eating too much protein while he is talking about giving you freedom of choice while eating.

I weight around 90 kg(200lbs) and I have 3000 calories daily requirement to not lose weight. I would have to eat around 300 – 400g of protein by his logic every day which is in 3 meals quite impossible.

Let’s take a look at one of his meal plans:
Noon:
500g of beef steak
Veggies
Apple

I can eat that but wait, what is this?
Post-Workout:
500g of beef steak – hahaha – sure, I want to eat that again
500g of cottage cheese – yeah, after eating another steak, I want to eat another 500g of cottage cheese

Let’s quote the author: “ In my experience, long-term success can only be enjoyed when you have the freedom of choice

Yeah mate, eating 4g protein per kg of bw isn’t giving you the freedom of choice, it’s the opposite. Then he explains why protein should be counted as only 3 calories instead of 4 (which was the only interesting part of the book) and I started thinking that’s why are always high protein diets superior in losing weight to low protein diets.

Read this instead
Or watch this

Notes:

About information:
If it was hard back then, it’s impossible today. While there are more reasonable voices today, there’s exponentially more bullshit as well. If finding a needle in a haystack pertained to good information two decades ago, finding the right grain of sand in Sahara applies today. That’s how confusing and diluted information has become.

In my experience, long-term success can only be enjoyed when you have the freedom of choice—when you’re able to modify your diet based on personal preferences, such as when you eat, how many times you feed, and what foods you eat, for example. Only then will you be able to consistently stay on track and feel at ease around food. Everything else is just a short-term fix, whether you want to admit it or not

On the typical Western diet, 10 percent DIT is a stretch. Crunch the numbers, and you get 7 percent. (You’ll know how later.) That means 175 calories of Average Joe or Jane’s 2,500-calorie requirement is attributed to DIT. Yet if they’d only adjust their daily macronutrient ratios, they could keep eating 2,500 calories daily and still lose 25 to 30 pounds (11.3 to 13.6 kilograms) per year.

Is it to blame for all our ills? Modern-day news media are quick to point their fingers. Perhaps we’ll find the answer here. Carbs yield a rather modest 5 to 10 percent DIT (ref. 1). In simpler terms, consuming 100 calories from carbohydrates results in 90 to 95 calories the body can make use of. This number can change radically, however, depending on circumstance. Exclusive to carbs, there are two components of DIT to consider: The first, obligatory thermogenesis, relates to the digestion, absorption, and processing of nutrients. DIT always features an obligatory component—a thermogenic response induced by a nutrient that affects energy regulation. Think of it as processing cost—a price paid in a percentage that varies depending on how the nutrient is altered before it can be stored or used. If the cost is 5 percent and 100 calories are ingested, 95 calories can be “used” while 5 calories are lost due to the administrative cost of making those 95 calories usable. In the case of carbs, those 95 calories become blood sugar, directly or indirectly (as liver glycogen), or muscle glycogen. Burning glucose directly by drinking a sports drink only yields 1 percent DIT[…]24

And a note for all fruit phobes: the black sheep of carbs, fructose, produces higher DIT (8 to 10 percent) than glucose (5 percent). This occurs in spite of lower insulin levels, and is explained by the higher energy costs of storing fructose as liver glycogen. Counterintuitive, perhaps, since fructose is preferentially transported to the liver. As such, one would think it requires less thermic expenditure than glucose to store, but that’s not the case.

Yes, because the modest DIT of carbs is not a cause for revision. However, there are instances in which carbs are closer to 3 calories: post-exercise and overfeeding (depending on glycogen stores).53 And that’s worth remembering.

Protein leads the way in body weight regulation, producing the greatest satiety and highest diet-induced thermogenesis of any macronutrient: a staggering 20 to 35 percent.56 It’s a large enough number that any reasonable person might propose counting protein grams as 3 calories instead of 4

Veggies provide bulk and satiety—important on any diet—and fiber, extra important on a high-protein diet, to avoid constipation. Note how the majority of carbs in dark leafy vegetables derive from fiber

The problem at the core of the fuckarounditis epidemic is the overabundance of information we have available to us. If there are so many theories, articles and opinions on a topic, we perceive it as something complex, something hard to understand. An illusion of complexity is created.

We must read everything. Think long and hard about our choices. Only then can we hope to make an informed choice, we reason. And there are so many choices. Finally, that which we perceive as a good and informed choice is often the complete opposite, usually the result of whatever fad routine is trendy at the moment. Sometimes we do a little bit of everything— “can’t

be bad trying to be ‘well-rounded’ now, can it?” we foolishly argue.

A Brief History of IIFYM
IIFYM is not a diet. It’s certainly not a junk food diet. It’s a fricking acronym we used to drop in forum posts for the sake of saving our fingers. Diet quality absolutely matters. The moderation & judicious control of discretionary calories is necessary for the purpose of preserving diet quality while bolstering long-term adherence.

That’s why this hunt for a metabolic benefit is doomed to fail. Because adherence is everything. All else is window dressing to secure funding for the next useless study.

The journey was long, and the price was high. But at the end of the road, I found the magic bullet. Not recognizing it for what it was, I called it intermittent fasting. For years. Until one day, it revealed its true form in all its mystique and glory, leaned in, and whispered on a frequency I was finally attuned to hear. “Freedom. My name is freedom.” And that’s how I finally understood what it was all about.

The Perfect Diet For me, intermittent fasting was the last piece to complete a puzzle called the Perfect Diet. It was a puzzle I had been laying for years. I was able to complete most of it with scraps collected from the internet and a few books here and there. The kind you find in a small-town library, not a university.

Benefits found in the controlled settings of clinical trials disappear in the real world. Every one of them. Why? Adherence

I’ve been fasting for twelve years now, and I’m never going back, because I know that finding the perfect diet is about two things—and these are true for nearly everyone, regardless of whether they’re lifting weights or playing beer pong.

A high-protein diet. Undeniably the superior diet, as evidenced in countless clinical trials. Whenever two or more diets are compared, results always favor the one with the highest percentage of protein intake (all else being equal).