Resistance Training for Health, Fitness, and Body Composition

speciificity of load and volume

strength: increase load but decrease volume or repetition range

power: increase load or decrease load but have lower volume

Endurance: increase volume but decrease load

hypertrophy: increase load, many volumes

strength/power

strength/power (speed) related to number and type of motor units recruited (rate, synchronicity, coordination of motor unit recruitment), increase load and or velocity needed for type II recruitment

type II produces the most force so increase the velocity especially during power to increase that force output

for strength/power you want to do heavy load sets cuz it recruits more muscle fibers including type II. increase intensity = recruiting more motor units and type II fibers

strength predicted on maximum force production (increase load), power predicted on rate of force production (increase load and/or decrease load with increase velocity. you want heavy weight but also a lighter weight with high speed movement/high velocity

for power: with heavy load: working on force production, with light load at high velocity: working on speed

strength can be increased using low loads (=< 60% 1RM) (untrained, low trained)

higher load (>60% 1RM) more effective

higher loads necessary with greater training experience (approaching genetic ceiling, train closer to 1RM)

power

speed component: rate of force production, high rapid MU recruitment, polymeric training is often used in people who wan to develop more power

non athlete, functional approach (get up and go): lower load, increase speed of movement, jumping, throwing (helps increase speed of movement))

endurance

more repetition = more endurance = resist fatigue

local muscular endurance capacity related to ability to sustain submax force and resist fatigue (pH buffering, angiogenesis, metabolic enzyme activity, mitochondrial biogenesis)

low load, high volume seems more effective (particularly, lower body, ~40-60% 1RM)

hypertrophy

inducing mechanical stress on muscle tissue that causes mTOR and MPS, muscle mass related to loading (mechanical stress) of the muscle tissue (myofibrillar, sarcoplasmic hypertrophy), high overall volume (reps, sets, exercises) at varying loads, don’t have to stick to 8-10-15 reps, you can do a lot or very few reps, BF% impacted by LBM

lean body mass gains can be produced from wide range of loads and rep ranges (~5-35 reps, the goal point is that you can get to mechanical fatigue, traditional Rx 8-15 reps, >60% 1RM), higher(moderate) load and low load effective when training to fatigue (volume important, linear response), low load may be more beneficial (or practical) in older adults, minimum effective load ~30% 1RM, moderate loads may be most practical (lower loads may produce discomfort and time-heavy, higher load may be taxing on joints and NS), can vary and program

training to fatigue or failure

failure not necessary for LBM gain or strength (stopping “several” repetitions short of failure similar outcomes, repetitions in reserve (RIR), still challenging, fatiguing) stopping 1-2 reps before failure seems to produce similar hypertrophy gains, less trained individuals can hypertrophy training further from failure (RIR>2), more trained individuals hypertrophy benefit from training closer to failure (RIR 1-2), more trained individuals hypertrophy benefit from including training to failure (no consensus Rx, one multiple sets per session? Last sets? intermittently or a period? MJ or SJ? Lower loads?), training to failure not necessary for strength but not detrimental, training to failure may not be advisable for older adults, harder sets (sets close to failure), train to fatigue not failure for older adults (fatigue the musculature at the end of the set for hypertrophy)

hypertrophy leads to strength

increase in myofibrils, sarcomeres (force production additive), recent literature question relationship (strength increases without hypertrophy, hypertrophy not sufficient to increase strength), some purpose hypertrophy does not contribute strength at all (relationship theoretical, associative data),

Schoenfeld & Philli[s et al: hypertrophy likely contributes, unclear how much, specific tension would need to decrease, few data, nearly impossible to design study on

volume

ACSM Rx: 8-10 exercises total body (overall health), does response (greater volume greater adaptation, to a certain threshold), 10 sets per muscle group per week (minimum, start point), upper limit unclear (>= 20 sets?) (particularly, body composition (hypertrophy) depends on individual, level of training, seriousness of training)

frequency

depends client’s experience level, healthy population (2-3 non-consecutive days/wk), novice (3 days per week ), advanced lifters (4-6 sessions/wk; split routines), max strength (>= 2 times/wk per muscle group), rest musculature group 48 hrs, you can train more frequently for strength than hypertrophy cuz hypertrophy is way more volume (way more sets) of RT so they need more recovery period.

strength: increase intensity but decrease volume

stress on musculature is less

use frequency to increase training load (additive sets with sessions), use frequency of training to distribute training load (sets over several sessions, may be upper limit to MPS, >10 sessions split across multiple sessions), when volume equated there is no difference in hypertrophy (1,2,3,>4 days/wk), whether or not you get your training in 1 or 2 days, there’s no difference in hypertrophy, strength can train more often than hypertrophy (less loading and damage)

resting period

longer rest periods to maximize recover between each set, to maximuze the ability to stress muscle each set (optimize, maintain intensity and volume (weight, reps), to increase strength, power, hypertrophy, want to have max force applied and max mechanical stress that is taken on by muscle, shorter rest periods for muscular endurance (1-2 minutes) because you want to challenge fatigue

depends on load and on goal, force production and loading: longer rest periods, endurance: shorter rest periods

Cr rephosphrylation, metabolic byproduct clearance, buffering

selection of exercises

free weight: greater motor activation, movement, skill development, greater synergist, stabilizer activation

machines: greater agonist activation

multi-joint: more musculature, synergist, stabilizer, more life like movement patterns, performance multi-joint?

single-joint: greater agonist activation, easier

depends on the goal (strength/performance specific v body composition)

strength/performance specific: select movement/performance specific exercises, add “accessory” movements, ROM specific

body composition (hypertrophy): combination of exercises most effective, muscle hypertrophies non-uniformly, ROM includes placing muscle in stretched position, different angles, multi joint not better than single joint (similar, SJ may be better able to “focus” individual muscles)

use of super/compound sets

multiple body/part splits: push/pull, upper/lower, larger/smaller

pre-exhaustion training not more effective than tradition training (performing SJ exercises to exhaustion prior to MJ)

maximize training stimulus

large, multi-joint exercise v small, single joint, different/multiple planes of movement, different/multiple types of muscle action (one side isometric and other side dynamic), different/multiple exercise/movements combined, instability addition, contralateral movement, contra-differential loaded movement, free weight/open chain movements v machines

RT and mitochondria

high-load RT and fatigueuing low -load RT, mito biogenesis, greater data toward high-load RT, RT causes mitochondrial biogenesis which is good for health

concurrent training

interference effect, concurrent training has an interference effect where AMPK inhibited mTOR, aerobic = increase in AMPK, RT= increase in mTOR, mechanistically AMPK inhibits mTOR

difference signaling, metabolic vs myogenic, different signaling = different outcomes, and perhaps there was a blunting effect

RT adaptations attenuated (especially in trained individuals, 6-8 hours between trainings attenuates fatigue interference), aerobic exercise adaptations maintained (potentially enhanced)

concurrent training does not impair strength or hypertrophy, concurrent training does impair explosive strength (power)(when strength and aerobic training performed in the same session v separated >= 3h, neural aspects), both sexes included in analysis, not impacted by aerobic type (running v cycling(, concurrent training frequency, training status (trained v untrained), age, there can be impacts in power

if your total training volume (both aerobic and lifting) is relatively moderate, then you shouldn’t worry about losing gainz from concurrent training. Alternatively, if your program includes high training volumes, particularly when in an energy deficit, then the chances of chronic interference increases.