Get Ripped Fast!

Body by Science A Research Based Program to Get the Results You Want in 12 Minutes a Week

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, and building muscle for a total fitness experience.

User Ratings and Reviews

5 Stars Body by Science
This book is well written. It is a great read for those who REALLY want to exercise correctly in a timely fashion without spending hour at the “gym”. As a personal trainer for over 20 years, I have taught this method of slow, high intensity training for over 10 years, and my clients have benefitted tremendously! This is a great book!

3 Stars worthwhile purchase despite lower rating
I have mixed feelings about Body by Science. It strives to prescribe a work-out routine that properly takes advantage of physiological knowledge to promote fitness, defined as the ability to take part in non-sedentary activities. The book does derive a work-out routine from a presentation of physiology. The recommendations include one short strength-training work-out per week with no traditional cardiovascular work (e.g., jogging) and a “hunter-gatherer”-type diet.

The physiology presented in this book is more extensive than what I’ve seen in traditional weight-lifting or diet-exercise books aimed at the public. Compared to two text-books for university courses in nutrition and exercise science, the physiology here is about as broad, presented in a slightly more truncated and easy to read format.

The thing that really distuingishes Body by Science, however, is that the physiology is presented in a manner that deconstructs traditional concepts of exercise. To sum up, the book contends (1) that cardiovascular fitness is something that occurs primarily in a diffuse manner throughout the body at the level of the musculature, not primarily as adaptations in the heart and lungs, and (2) that the musculature does not know if it is getting stressed by resistance training or traditional cardio work. The logical conclusion from these two premises is that the best overall fitness training is pure resistance strength training done in a manner that stresses the muscles without stressing joints, ligaments, etc.

I must confess that although I was aware that cardiovascular adaptations occurred at the muscular level, I was also under the impression that there are adaptations in the heart that occur specific to traditional styles of aerobic work such as jogging. However, I am at a loss to say what those are. I have a vague notion that sustained moderately elevated heart rate is important to the heart, but I couldn’t tell you what exactly it achieves.

Of course, my failure to refute the physiological and exercise science presented here does not make it correct. That is the biggest draw-back with this or any exercise book–you are always at the mercy of those with more expertise. The only recourse you have as a reader is to educate yourself with some basic knowledge about research and publishing standards and try to evaluate how honest and accurate a book appears to be.

From this perspective, Body by Science holds up well, but not as well as its hype. Subtitled “A Research-Based Program…,” you expect a book swamped by citations like an academic paper. The book does have more citations than a typical exercise book, but it is not near what I expected. For example, it says, “Virtually every study undertaken to assess the cardiovascular effects of proper strength training has concluded that they at least equal the effects of more conventional approaches such as running or other steady-state activities.” However, the citations given to support this statement are two studies from 1985 and 1988. This is really not acceptable, even if the statement is accurate. Either many more (recent) studies need to be cited or a review paper that examines this issue in depth. This is one example, but I think it fair to say it characterizes the whole book.

The book’s biggest drawback is its failure to present evidence that its specific program has been demonstrated to work. The authors repeatedly mention the years of experience they and other trainers have in using their techniques, but they present no study they’ve conducted and only one photo of someone they’ve trained. The use of photos showing muscled young men is dismissed at the beginning of the book by referring to genetic variability in response to weight training. This is true, but in the absence of studies, anecdote shows something. Maybe doing the Bill Phillips Body-for-Life workout won’t make you look like his contest winners, but at least we know it can do anything at all. Maybe eveybody’s training will stagnate with Body by Science. Who knows?

In addition to its central message, the book touches briefly on a variety of peripheral issues. Some, such as the connection between an attempt to moderate training and a regression in training, confirm my personal experience. Others are silly, like the suggestion to drink cold water all day in order to burn off about 125 Kcal through thermodynamic effects. Any lifestyle cost-benefit analysis of this proposal could not hold up, especially for people living north of Florida.

As other reviewers have mentioned, from what I can tell, the static contraction training discussion in the latter half of the book is hogwash. Although one of the authors is a doctor, the other’s major claim to expertise is sycophantic followership of a dead bodybuilder and having “published in every major fitness and martial arts magazine in North America.” Well, whoopy-do!

Despite the criticisms, I think this is a useful book for fitness hobbyists to read. I really want its core recommendations to be correct, and even if it is not the best program for otherwise fit and healthy individuals, I can see that it might still have applicability for the elderly, those needing rehab, or those with cardiac or respiratory disorders. It is worth investigation by health professionals.

If I were going to tell these authors how to get more stars out of my rating, I would say they really need to demonstrate more thoroughly how they live up to the claim of being “research-based.”

5 Stars The Most Advanced Weight Training Book.EVER.
I will admit it. I HATE John Little. He has made a decent living as an author by basically regurgitating whatever was said or written by Mike Mentzer. That being said, I absolutely LOVE this book. Without going into a long diatribe this is the most scientifically sound book ever written on weight training. The authors make an analogy of their recommended programs to investing in the market. They state that their programs are similiar to an S$P 500 index fund for investors in that in their simplicity 85% to 95% percent of investors will yield better returns that people who try to time the market. 85%-95% of people who blindly follow these routines without question will yield better results with these routines than any other program. They also include routines for specific sports as well as routines for the elderly. All of this is backed by the latest in scientific research and testing. But of even greater importance is the fact that it is logical and simple. A must read.

5 Stars Body by Science
I recommended this book for everyone. I followed this workout instructions. My 5th weeks workout and I did 12 to 15min workout a week. My body and strenght has improving. I am looking forward my 6th weeks!! I love it.

2 Stars GOOD READ BUT NOT SCIENTIFIC
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.

Buy/More Info