The Leangains Method: The Art of Getting Ripped. Researched, Practiced, Perfected.

by Martin Berkhan

If someone had told me this was possible when I was fifteen, I would’ve rolled my eyes, reached for a snack, and directed my attention toward the next gemstone in some video game. Or resumed my reading of the latest book in the Wheel of Time series—after securing a snack, I should add. That was the kind of guy I used to be. Still am, to some extent.

Me? First time deadlifting, I pulled 80 kilograms (176 pounds) six times, benched half of that, and struggled with 60-kilogram (132-pound) squats. But I stuck to it—kept pulling, pressing, and squatting my way through two decades of life’s ups and downs.

The world is unfair, and like most teens, I saw myself riddled with more curses than blessings. Weight training taught me the value of effort: if you worked hard, you got to reap what you sowed, and there were no ifs, ands, or buts about it.

Like a universal law, the reward was in direct proportion to the effort, and it didn’t care about how popular you were or how much money you had. I saw the weight room as the ultimate equalizer. Still do, even if my perspective is a bit more nuanced. Regardless of where you start, you can change for the better. But the scope and magnitude of that change is dependent on you, no one else. That much is still true, and that’s a textbook example of empowerment, if you ask me.

I wasn’t elated with the course plan at the Public Health program, but there were two parts I appreciated and took a great deal of interest in: epidemiology and statistics. These were tangible disciplines that helped me understand science, but more importantly, how it should be interpreted. With a curious mind, lots of free time, and a fast-as-light internet connection, I started applying my new skills to the nutritional sciences.

It seemed ludicrous, I thought, that everything said and believed about nutrition was wrong when there were so many well-educated people around to prove this point and inform the community. But I was right when no one else was—and took it upon myself to carry this information to every corner of the internet. The next step in the crusade for nutritional enlightenment was my website, Leangains, in 2007.

I understood that I kept myself busy all those years to avoid writing the book I secretly dreaded to put out. Because in the back of my mind, I knew intermittent fasting wasn’t the magic pill everyone thought it was. I knew too much for my own good. And feared the repercussions of revealing the truth.

“Improvement at anything is based on thousands of tiny failures, and the magnitude of your success is based on how many times you’ve failed at something. If someone is better than you at something, then it’s likely because she has failed at it more than you have. If someone is worse than you, it’s likely because he hasn’t been through all of the painful learning experiences you have.”

The Leangains Method is formulated for lifters who want to shed fat as fast as possible while maintaining or increasing muscle mass and strength, with a minimum of effort and needless complexity. That is, effort and complexity that cannot be scientifically, logically, or behaviorally justified shall hold no place in the diet, or dominion over the individual.

“Calories 2.0,” is a general introduction to diet-induced thermogenesis (DIT). You may be familiar with this phenomenon as the more commonly used term thermic effect of feeding (TEF). But as you will come to find out, food isn’t the only regulator of thermogenesis.45

The current food values and nutrition labels are based on the Atwater system, named after nineteenth-century American chemist Wilbur Olin Atwater. He became America’s leading authority on nutrition after establishing that each gram of carbohydrate and protein contributes 4 calories of metabolizable energy (ME), while fat and alcohol contribute 9 and 7 calories, respectively (ref. 1).

Leucine doesn’t provide 4.6 calories; the actual number is somewhere between 3 and 3.7 calories. That’s because ME doesn’t factor in the thermic effect of food (TEF)—that is, the increased resting energy expenditure after feeding attributed to the digestion and storage of nutrients consumed (ref. 3). It’s the key element of diet-induced thermogenesis (DIT)—a term you’ll become friendly with throughout this book.

At a rate of 127 calories per hour, you’ve more than doubled your resting metabolism simply by eating—a lot. That’s not a trivial amount. You’re burning more calories resting than walking at a leisurely pace—for hours.

It is, along with basal metabolic rate (BMR) and physical activity level (PAL), one of the three components of daily energy expenditure.

In essence, DIT burns energy to store energy,

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.50

In the case of carbs, those 95 calories become blood sugar, directly or indirectly (as liver glycogen), or muscle glycogen.

Remarkably, after exercise that percentage generally increases another 5 to 10 percent, to 15 percent total (ref. 3).

The greatest carb-induced DIT results when converting glucose to fat. For this to occur to a meaningful degree, liver and muscle glycogen stores must be saturated. A few days of stuffing your face will do the trick. The name for this phenomenon is not Thanksgiving or Christmas, but de novo lipogenesis (DNL), and it yields 20 to 25 percent DIT (ref. 5).

Essentially, then, carbs are 3 calories, not 4—after you’ve filled glycogen stores.

The second component of DIT is facultative thermogenesis, and it is unique to carbs.

fructose, produces higher DIT (8 to 10 percent) than glucose (5 percent).

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.

Fat from food goes to adipose tissue quickly, entering as lipid droplets virtually unaltered. This obligatory component alone yields a negligible 0 to 3 percent DIT.55

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.

That’s exactly what Dr. Geoffrey Livesey, one of the world’s leading authorities on metabolism and human nutrition, did during the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) meeting of the United Nations in 2001.57

Why is the DIT of protein so high? In short, protein contains nitrogen, which needs to be removed before amino acids can be put to use. Once amino acids are freed, they’re used for energy-demanding processes such as protein synthesis and de novo gluconeogenesis (DNG). Studies looking at the latter found 20 to 33 percent of calories from ingested protein were lost, depending on the nutritional state of subjects—20 percent when fed, and 33 percent when glycogen depleted (ref. 1,12).

Meat contains an abundance of essential amino acids, making it high quality, while proteins in vegetable and grain products do not.

the “filling” properties of protein are largely explained by its impact on peptide YY (PYY), an appetite-regulating hormone (ref. 13,14,15).

The DIT of alcohol is a relatively high 15 percent (ref. 27). Surprised? A gram is therefore 6.3 calories, per Livesey’s (updated) NME, and 7 calories in our current system.

In both red and white wine, 85 to 90 percent of the caloric content is alcohol and the rest is carbohydrate.

One cup of coffee every other hour throughout the day burns 150 calories—nothing to scoff at. Better yet, the increase primarily affects fat metabolism (ref. 17,18).

In the decaffeinated group, DIT was 6 percent, but in the caffeinated, 9 percent. Blood tests revealed that coffee drinkers started burning more fat, instead of carbohydrate, sooner than decaf drinkers. An increase from 6 percent to 9 percent isn’t bad—and possibly, the effect would be greater still after a more thermogenic meal. Importantly, this effect is additive to the effects of caffeine on metabolic rate. Other benefits of caffeine include appetite suppression, improved exercise performance, better insulin sensitivity and increased muscle glycogen synthesis (ref. 19,23,24,25).

Certainly, metabolic rate increases every time you eat. But the magnitude is proportional to the amount of calories and macronutrients consumed, as you’ve learned here. Not the frequency by which they are ingested, as believed back then.

22). In a curious twist of events, it now appears a lower meal frequency results in a higher metabolic rate due to greater effects on DIT.60

Taken together, research suggests a difference between one meal compared to four or six meals, but no difference between one, two, or three meals. Ironic, because it’s the exact opposite of what everyone believed, until I told them not to.

If they did nothing else except raise their protein intake from 15 percent to 60 percent, both would lose a quarter kilogram (half a pound) per week simply from elevating DIT.

We get hungry at the times we’re used to eating, governed by the hormone ghrelin. You’ll only make it harder on yourself by constantly varying meal times.

For men, I recommend a fiber intake of 45 grams per day, accomplished with 1 kilogram (2.2 pounds) of broccoli and two large apples. Women would do well with 30 grams per day, or 600 grams of broccoli and two large apples.62

But an interesting new study shows how these benefits extend beyond satiety and nutrient density. The thermic effect of whole foods are significantly higher than an equal number of calories from processed foods. In this study, subjects ate a “wholesome” meal of multi-grain bread and cheddar cheese, or a more processed meal of white bread and pasteurized cheese. Remarkably, results showed the wholesome meal produced nearly twice the DIT of the processed meal. Both groups ate the same number of calories, but DIT burned off 137 calories in the wholesome group and only 73 calories in the processed group. This suggests the former may produce higher DIT than the latter—even if calories and macronutrients are equal (ref. 10).

The authors of said study speculate that fiber, which was three times higher in the wholesome group, may be a causal factor for this. So if you need a better argument than satiety and effortless shits to meet your fiber intake, there it is.

So, RIP, IIFYM

Eating carbs directly before or after training yields a higher thermic effect (ref. 11,13). Additionally, eating carbs at these times may also lead to better workouts and enhanced post-workout recovery. With the Leangains Method, carb intake is limited, and usually not much higher than 100 grams per day—so make the most of it, and center them around training.

Include a fruit in your pre-workout and post-workout meal.

To make the most of carbs when supplies are limited, a combination of glucose and fructose is ideal for exercise performance (ref. 12,14). Fruit is therefore a perfect carbohydrate for the Leangains Method. An apple, pear, or orange are all good standbys, and cheap and practical to boot. More pricey and less practical are berries. But on the flip side, blueberries, strawberries, and raspberries have higher nutrient density and fewer calories.

case. On days where you train, say at six in the afternoon, for example, you’d then add fruit to the meal at noon (twelve o’clock) and dinner (eight o’clock). These would be your pre-and post-workout meals, respectively.

Lastly, to squeeze the most out of those pre and post-workout carbs, wash them down with a cup o’ joe. Aside from amping you up, and boosting strength and performance, studies suggest coffee enhances muscle glycogen storage after exercise (ref. 16,17).

This one’s a no-brainer. Caffeine increases metabolic rate and DIT (ref. 13,14). It also suppresses appetite if consumed before a meal (ref. 15). It’s the best legal fat loss supplement money can buy—plus it’s safe, cheap, and tasty. I suggest 100-milligram caffeine pills.64

Drink one cup of coffee or take 100 milligrams of caffeine first thing in the morning. From there, ingest 100 milligrams of caffeine every other hour for as long as possible without interfering with sleep. This protocol is identical to those used in studies mentioned in the previous chapter, and it will burn 150 calories if maintained for twelve hours. Doubling the dose results in nearly 300 calories over twelve hours.

Caffeine-sensitive individuals, women, and men who don’t consume more than 4 cups of coffee per day (400 milligrams of caffeine) must exercise caution, and start at the lowest dose (100 milligrams). People who don’t drink coffee, and those who drink coffee sporadically, would do well to start at half the dose (50 milligrams).