Influence of two different modes of resistance training in female subjects

Myofiber hypertrophy adaptations following 6 weeks of low-load resistance training with blood flow restriction in untrained males and females

The effects of low-load resistance training with blood flow restriction (BFR) on hypertrophy of type I/II myofibers remains unclear, especially in females. The purpose of the present study is to examine changes in type I/II myofiber cross-sectional area (fCSA) and muscle CSA (mCSA) of the vastus lateralis (VL) from before (Pre) to after (Post) 6 wk of high-load resistance training (HL; n = 15, 8 females) and low-load resistance training with BFR (n = 16, 8 females). Mixed-effects models were used to analyze fCSA with group (HL, BFR), sex (M, F), fiber type (I, II), and time (Pre, Post) included as factors. mCSA increased from pre- to posttraining (P < 0.001, d = 0.91) and was greater in males compared with females (P < 0.001, d = 2.26). Type II fCSA increased pre- to post-HL (P < 0.05, d = 0.46) and was greater in males compared with females (P < 0.05, d = 0.78). There were no significant increases in fCSA pre- to post-BFR for either fiber type or sex. Cohen's d, however, revealed moderate effect sizes in type I and II fCSA for males (d = 0.59 and 0.67), although this did not hold true for females (d = 0.29 and 0.34). Conversely, the increase in type II fCSA was greater for females than for males after HL. In conclusion, low-load resistance training with BFR may not promote myofiber hypertrophy to the level of HL resistance training, and similar responses were generally observed for males and females. In contrast, comparable effect sizes for mCSA and 1-repetition maximum (1RM) between groups suggest that BFR could play a role in a resistance training program.NEW & NOTEWORTHY This is the first study, to our knowledge, to examine myofiber hypertrophy from low-load resistance training with blood flow restriction (BFR) in females. Although this type of training did not result in myofiber hypertrophy, there were comparable increases in muscle cross-sectional area compared with high-load resistance training. These findings possibly highlight that males and females respond in a similar manner to high-load resistance training and low-load resistance training with BFR.

The role of exercise selection in regional Muscle Hypertrophy: A randomized controlled trial

There is emerging evidence suggesting that muscle growth is not homogeneous through the muscle. The aim of the present study was to analyse the role of exercise selection in regional hypertrophy. Two randomly allocated groups with equal training volume and intensity performed squats in the smith machine (SMTH group) or the leg extension exercise (LEG group). Growth in proximal, central and distal regions of the rectus femoris (RF) and vastus lateralis (VL) muscles, jump height and body composition were analysed. Results show that the three regions of RF grew significantly in the participants of the LEG group (p < 0.05), while only the central region of VL grew significantly in the SMTH group (p < 0.05). In summary, this study confirms that exercise selection plays a role in regional hypertrophy. Whilst there may be still other factors that determine how muscles grow, it seems that the chosen exercises may be responsible of the differences observed in this study.

Resistance Training Load Effects on Muscle Hypertrophy and Strength Gain: Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This study aimed to analyze the effect of resistance training (RT) performed until volitional failure with low, moderate, and high loads on muscle hypertrophy and muscle strength in healthy adults and to assess the possible participant-, design-, and training-related covariates that may affect the adaptations.

METHODS

Using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science databases were searched. Including only studies that performed sets to volitional failure, the effects of low- (>15 repetitions maximum (RM)), moderate- (9-15 RM), and high-load (≤8 RM) RTs were examined in healthy adults. Network meta-analysis was undertaken to calculate the standardized mean difference (SMD) between RT loads in overall and subgroup analyses involving studies deemed of high quality. Associations between participant-, design-, and training-related covariates with SMD were assessed by univariate and multivariate network meta-regression analyses.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight studies involving 747 healthy adults were included. Although no differences in muscle hypertrophy between RT loads were found in overall (P = 0.113-0.469) or subgroup analysis (P = 0.871-0.995), greater effects were observed in untrained participants (P = 0.033) and participants with some training background who undertook more RT sessions (P = 0.031-0.045). Muscle strength improvement was superior for both high-load and moderate-load compared with low-load RT in overall and subgroup analysis (SMD, 0.60-0.63 and 0.34-0.35, respectively; P < 0.001-0.003), with a nonsignificant but superior effect for high compared with moderate load (SMD, 0.26-0.28, P = 0.068).

CONCLUSIONS

Although muscle hypertrophy improvements seem to be load independent, increases in muscle strength are superior in high-load RT programs. Untrained participants exhibit greater muscle hypertrophy, whereas undertaking more RT sessions provides superior gains in those with previous training experience.

Influence of resistance training load on measures of skeletal muscle hypertrophy and improvements in maximal strength and neuromuscular task performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis

This systematic review and meta-analysis determined resistance training (RT) load effects on various muscle hypertrophy, strength, and neuromuscular performance task [e.g., countermovement jump (CMJ)] outcomes. Relevent studies comparing higher-load [>60% 1-repetition maximum (RM) or <15-RM] and lower-load (≤60% 1-RM or ≥ 15-RM) RT were identified, with 45 studies (from 4713 total) included in the meta-analysis. Higher- and lower-load RT induced similar muscle hypertrophy at the whole-body (lean/fat-free mass; [ES (95% CI) = 0.05 (-0.20 to 0.29), P = 0.70]), whole-muscle [ES = 0.06 (-0.11 to 0.24), P = 0.47], and muscle fibre [ES = 0.29 (-0.09 to 0.66), P = 0.13] levels. Higher-load RT further improved 1-RM [ES = 0.34 (0.15 to 0.52), P = 0.0003] and isometric [ES = 0.41 (0.07 to 0.76), P = 0.02] strength. The superiority of higher-load RT on 1-RM strength was greater in younger [ES = 0.34 (0.12 to 0.55), P = 0.002] versus older [ES = 0.20 (-0.00 to 0.41), P = 0.05] participants. Higher- and lower-load RT therefore induce similar muscle hypertrophy (at multiple physiological levels), while higher-load RT elicits superior 1-RM and isometric strength. The influence of RT loads on neuromuscular task performance is however unclear.

The Effect of Resistance Training in Women on Dynamic Strength and Muscular Hypertrophy: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The effect of resistance training (RT) on adaptations in muscular strength and hypertrophy has never been examined in an exclusively female synthesis of the literature.

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this study were threefold: (1) to systematically review the literature on female adaptations to RT, characterising the effect in terms of muscular strength and hypertrophy; (2) to distinguish the individual effects of intervention duration, frequency, and intensity on these adaptations via sub-analysis; (3) to draw evidence-based conclusions regarding training expectations in female populations.

METHODS

Three electronic databases were searched using terms related to RT combined with females or women. Random-effects meta-analyses were undertaken to estimate the effect of RT on muscular strength and hypertrophy in females. Possible predictors that may have influenced training-related effects (e.g., training intensity and volume) were explored using univariate analyses.

RESULTS

The systematic search identified 14,067 articles of which a total of 24 studies met the inclusion criteria and were eligible. Upper body strength was assessed in 15 studies, lower body strength in 19 studies, and muscular hypertrophy in 15 studies. Study duration lasted between 4 weeks and 12 months. Large-effect sizes were found for upper body strength (Hedges' g = 1.70; p < 0.001) and lower body strength (Hedges' g = 1.40; p < 0.001). Following use of the Trim and Fill method (due to presence of publication bias), a large effect still remained for upper body strength (Hedges' g = 1.07), although a medium effect was found for lower body strength (Hedges' g = 0.52). A medium effect was found for muscular hypertrophy (g = 0.52, p = 0.002). Sub-analyses revealed that the moderating variables "training frequency" and "training volume" significantly influenced lower body muscular strength (p < 0.001). "Training frequency" and "sets per exercise" moderated the RT effects on upper body strength (p < 0.01). No moderating variables were found to significantly influence muscular hypertrophy. A trend for a moderating effect on upper body strength was found for "age of participants" (p = 0.08), whereby younger participants experienced a greater effect. A moderating effect was also observed where supervised training had a larger influence on the adaptation of lower body strength (p = 0.05) compared with unsupervised training. Methodological quality for the studies included in the review was found to be moderate.

CONCLUSIONS

RT elicits large improvements in muscular strength and hypertrophy in healthy adult females. Training volume and frequency appear to be important variables that influence muscular strength.

Loading Recommendations for Muscle Strength, Hypertrophy, and Local Endurance: A Re-Examination of the Repetition Continuum

Loading recommendations for resistance training are typically prescribed along what has come to be known as the “repetition continuum”, which proposes that the number of repetitions performed at a given magnitude of load will result in specific adaptations. Specifically, the theory postulates that heavy load training optimizes increases maximal strength, moderate load training optimizes increases muscle hypertrophy, and low-load training optimizes increases local muscular endurance. However, despite the widespread acceptance of this theory, current research fails to support some of its underlying presumptions. Based on the emerging evidence, we propose a new paradigm whereby muscular adaptations can be obtained, and in some cases optimized, across a wide spectrum of loading zones. The nuances and implications of this paradigm are discussed herein.

Neural Drive is Greater for a High-Intensity Contraction Than for Moderate-Intensity Contractions Performed to Fatigue

Miller, JD, Lippman, JD, Trevino, MA, and Herda, TJ. Larger motor units are recruited for high-intensity contractions than for fatiguing moderate-intensity contractions. J Strength Cond Res 34(11): 3013-3021, 2020-The purpose of this study was to investigate whether moderate-intensity contractions performed to fatigue activate the motor unit (MU) pool to the same extent as a higher-intensity contraction. Subjects (7 men, 2 women, age = 22.78 ± 4.15 years, height = 173.78 ± 14.19 cm, mass = 87.39 ± 21.19 kg) performed 3 isometric maximum voluntary contractions (MVCs), an isometric trapezoidal contraction at 90% MVC (REP90), and repetitive isometric trapezoidal contractions at 50% MVC performed to failure with the first (REP1) and final repetition (REPL) used for analysis. Surface EMG was recorded from the vastus lateralis. Action potentials were extracted into firing events of single MUs with recruitment thresholds (RTs), MU action potential amplitudes (MUAPAMP), and mean firing rates (MFRs) recorded. Linear MFR and MUAPAMP vs. RT and exponential MFR vs. MUAPAMP relationships were calculated for each subject. The level of significance was set at p ≤ 0.05. B terms for the MFR vs. MUAPAMP relationships (p = 0.001, REPL = -4.77 ± 1.82 pps·mV, REP90 = -2.63 ± 1.00 pps·mV) and predicted MFRs for MUs recruited at 40% MVC (p < 0.001, REPL = 11.14 ± 3.48 pps, REP90 = 18.38 ± 2.60 pps) were greater for REP90 than REPL indicating firing rates were greater during REP90. In addition, larger mean (p = 0.038, REPL = 0.178 ± 0.0668 mV, REP90 = 0.263 ± 0.128 mV) and maximum (p = 0.008, REPL = 0.320 ± 0.127 mV, Rep90 = 0.520 ± 0.234 mV) MUAPAMPS were recorded during REP90 than REPL. Larger MUs were recruited and similar sized MUs maintained greater firing rates during a high-intensity contraction in comparison to a moderate-intensity contraction performed at fatigue. Individuals seeking maximized activation of the MU pool should use high-intensity resistance training paradigms rather than moderate-intensity to fatigue.

Emphasizing Task-Specific Hypertrophy to Enhance Sequential Strength and Power Performance

While strength is indeed a skill, most discussions have primarily considered structural adaptations rather than ultrastructural augmentation to improve performance. Altering the structural component of the muscle is often the aim of hypertrophic training, yet not all hypertrophy is equal; such alterations are dependent upon how the muscle adapts to the training stimuli and overall training stress. When comparing bodybuilders to strength and power athletes such as powerlifters, weightlifters, and throwers, while muscle size may be similar, the ability to produce force and power is often inequivalent. Thus, performance differences go beyond structural changes and may be due to the muscle's ultrastructural constituents and training induced adaptations. Relative to potentiating strength and power performances, eliciting specific ultrastructural changes should be a variable of interest during hypertrophic training phases. By focusing on task-specific hypertrophy, it may be possible to achieve an optimal amount of hypertrophy while deemphasizing metabolic and aerobic components that are often associated with high-volume training. Therefore, the purpose of this article is to briefly address different types of hypertrophy and provide directions for practitioners who are aiming to achieve optimal rather than maximal hypertrophy, as it relates to altering ultrastructural muscular components, to potentiate strength and power performance.

Strength and Hypertrophy Adaptations Between Low- vs. High-Load Resistance Training: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Schoenfeld, BJ, Grgic, J, Ogborn, D, and Krieger, JW. Strength and hypertrophy adaptations between low- vs. high-load resistance training: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Strength Cond Res 31(12): 3508-3523, 2017-The purpose of this article was to conduct a systematic review of the current body of literature and a meta-analysis to compare changes in strength and hypertrophy between low- vs. high-load resistance training protocols. Searches of PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Scopus were conducted for studies that met the following criteria: (a) an experimental trial involving both low-load training [≤60% 1 repetition maximum (1RM)] and high-load training (>60% 1RM); (b) with all sets in the training protocols being performed to momentary muscular failure; (c) at least one method of estimating changes in muscle mass or dynamic, isometric, or isokinetic strength was used; (d) the training protocol lasted for a minimum of 6 weeks; (e) the study involved participants with no known medical conditions or injuries impairing training capacity. A total of 21 studies were ultimately included for analysis. Gains in 1RM strength were significantly greater in favor of high- vs. low-load training, whereas no significant differences were found for isometric strength between conditions. Changes in measures of muscle hypertrophy were similar between conditions. The findings indicate that maximal strength benefits are obtained from the use of heavy loads while muscle hypertrophy can be equally achieved across a spectrum of loading ranges.

The effects of supramaximal versus submaximal intensity eccentric training when performed until volitional fatigue

PURPOSE

Our purpose was to compare supramaximal versus submaximal intensity eccentric training performed until volitional fatigue.

METHODS

Thirty-two young adults (19 males) were randomized into one of three groups: (1) ECC110 performed eccentric (ECC) only contractions at 110% of concentric (CON) 1-repetition maximum (1RM); (2) ECC80 performed ECC only contractions at 80% of CON 1RM; (3) a control group. Training progressed from 3 to 6 sets of unilateral ECC training of the elbow flexors over 8 weeks, with each set performed until volitional fatigue. Elbow flexors muscle thickness (via ultrasound) and 1RM were assessed pre- and post-training. Rating of perceived exertion (RPE) and muscle soreness was self-reported.

RESULTS

Both ECC110 (+0.25 cm) and ECC80 (+0.21 cm) showed a greater post-training increase in muscle thickness compared to control (-0.01 cm) (p < 0.05), with no differences between ECC110 and ECC80. ECC80 (+1.23 kg) showed a greater post-training increase in strength compared to control (p < 0.05), while ECC110 (+0.76 kg) had no significant difference post-training vs. control (-0.01 kg). ECC80 had significantly lower average RPE scores than ECC110 (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Both supramaximal intensity eccentric training and submaximal intensity eccentric training are effective for increasing muscle size, but submaximal eccentric training is perceived to require less exertion than supramaximal training. These findings suggest that submaximal eccentric training may be an ideal strategy to increase muscle size and strength in individuals whose needs warrant training at a lower level of exertion.

Intramuscular Anabolic Signaling and Endocrine Response Following Resistance Exercise: Implications for Muscle Hypertrophy

Maintaining skeletal muscle mass and function is critical for disease prevention, mobility and quality of life, and whole-body metabolism. Resistance exercise is known to be a major regulator for promoting muscle protein synthesis and muscle mass accretion. Manipulation of exercise intensity, volume, and rest elicit specific muscular adaptations that can maximize the magnitude of muscle growth. The stimulus of muscle contraction that occurs during differing intensities of resistance exercise results in varying biochemical responses regulating the rate of protein synthesis, known as mechanotransduction. At the cellular level, skeletal muscle adaptation appears to be the result of the cumulative effects of transient changes in gene expression following acute bouts of exercise. Thus, maximizing the resistance exercise-induced anabolic response produces the greatest potential for hypertrophic adaptation with training. The mechanisms involved in converting mechanical signals into the molecular events that control muscle growth are not completely understood; however, skeletal muscle protein synthesis appears to be regulated by the multi-protein phosphorylation cascade, mTORC1 (mammalian/mechanistic target of rapamycin complex 1). The purpose of this review is to examine the physiological response to resistance exercise, with particular emphasis on the endocrine response and intramuscular anabolic signaling through mTORC1. It appears that resistance exercise protocols that maximize muscle fiber recruitment, time-under-tension, and metabolic stress will contribute to maximizing intramuscular anabolic signaling; however, the resistance exercise parameters for maximizing the anabolic response remain unclear.

The influence of frequency, intensity, volume and mode of strength training on whole muscle cross-sectional area in humans

Strength training is an important component in sports training and rehabilitation. Quantification of the dose-response relationships between training variables and the outcome is fundamental for the proper prescription of resistance training. The purpose of this comprehensive review was to identify dose-response relationships for the development of muscle hypertrophy by calculating the magnitudes and rates of increases in muscle cross-sectional area induced by varying levels of frequency, intensity and volume, as well as by different modes of strength training. Computer searches in the databases MEDLINE, SportDiscus and CINAHL were performed as well as hand searches of relevant journals, books and reference lists. The analysis was limited to the quadriceps femoris and the elbow flexors, since these were the only muscle groups that allowed for evaluations of dose-response trends. The modes of strength training were classified as dynamic external resistance (including free weights and weight machines), accommodating resistance (e.g. isokinetic and semi-isokinetic devices) and isometric resistance. The subcategories related to the types of muscle actions used. The results demonstrate that given sufficient frequency, intensity and volume of work, all three types of muscle actions can induce significant hypertrophy at an impressive rate and that, at present, there is insufficient evidence for the superiority of any mode and/or type of muscle action over other modes and types of training. Tentative dose-response relationships for each variable are outlined, based on the available evidence, and interactions between variables are discussed. In addition, recommendations for training and suggestions for further research are given.

Effects of intensity and duration of exercise on muscular responses to training of thoroughbred racehorses

This study examined the effects of the intensity and duration of exercise on the nature and magnitude of training adaptations in muscle of adolescent (2–3 yr old) racehorses. Six thoroughbreds that had been pretrained for 2 mo performed six consecutive conditioning programs of varying lactate-guided intensities [velocities eliciting blood lactate concentrations of 2.5 mmol/l (v2.5) and 4 mmol/l (v4), respectively] and durations (5, 15, 25 min). Pre- and posttraining gluteus muscle biopsies were analyzed for myosin heavy chain content, fiber-type composition, fiber size, capillarization, and fiber histochemical oxidative and glycolytic capabilities. Although training adaptations were similar in nature, they varied greatly in magnitude among the different training protocols. Overall, the use of v4 as the exercise intensity for 25 min elicited the most consistent training adaptations in muscle, whereas the minimal training stimulus that evoked any significant change was identified with exercises of 15 min at v2.5. Within this range, muscular adaptations showed significant trends to be proportional to the exercise load of specific training programs. Taken together, these data suggest that muscular adaptations to training in horses occur on a continuum that is based on the exercise intensity and duration of training. The practical implications of this study are that exercises for 15 to 25 min/day at velocities between v2.5 and v4 can improve in the short term (3 wk) the muscular stamina in thoroughbreds. However, exercises of 5–15 min at v4 are necessary to enhance muscular features related to strength (hypertrophy).

Contraction force specificity and its relationship to functional performance

Best practice for improving strength and power through resistance strength training has been the subject of much research and subsequent conjecture. Much of the conjecture can be attributed to methodological discrepancies. The type of dynamometry used in testing, the training experience of research participants, the specific technique employed in a lift, and the methods of collection and calculation all impact on the final variables of interest. This review examines contraction force specificity by first addressing the methodological issues surrounding our interpretation of the results. Then we address the kinematics and kinetics associated with single and multiple repetitions in relation to the development of strength, power, and functional performance. This discussion provides the delimitations for analysis of subsequent training studies. Finally, recommendations are formulated with the aim of assisting assessment and training practice as well as providing directions for future research. The results of this review suggest that the enhancements in performance resulting from resistance training are context specific in experienced resistance-trained participants. Thus, specific conditioning could be required to achieve improvements in functional performance in this group.

A meta-analysis of periodized versus nonperiodized strength and power training programs

The purpose of this study was to quantitatively combine and examine the results of studies examining the effectiveness of periodized (PER) compared to nonperiodized (Non-PER) training programs for strength and/or power development. Two analyses were conducted to (a) examine the magnitude of treatment effect elicited by PER strength training programs compared to Non-PER programs and (b) compare these effects after controlling for training volume, frequency, and intensity. Studies meeting the inclusion criteria were coded based on characteristics that might moderate the overall effects (i.e., participant characteristics and characteristics related to the training program). Effect sizes (ESs) were calculated for each study, and an overall ES of 0.84 (+/- 1.41) favoring PER training was found. Further analyses identified the treatment effect specific to training variation to be ES = 0.25. Significant moderating variables included age, training status, and length of training program. As a result of this statistical review of the literature, it is concluded that PER training is more effective than Non-PER training for men and women, individuals of varying training backgrounds, and for all age groups. In line with the overload principle, additions to volume, intensity, and frequency result in additional training adaptations.

Strength training in older women: early and late changes in whole muscle and single cells

In order to examine the relative contribution of neural- and muscle-based adaptation to strength training, we studied early (2 weeks) and later (12 weeks) effects of strength training on muscle size and strength and type I single-fiber size and contractility in 14 elderly women (aged 68-79 years) and seven young controls. Older subjects were randomized to training (n = 7) or control (n = 7) groups. Strength did not change, but whole muscle size increased significantly after 2 weeks. After 12 weeks, strength, whole muscle size, and specific force all increased. No changes occurred in the control group. In single fibers, no changes in size and contractility were noted after 2 weeks, but specific force was higher in the training group after 12 weeks. Early adaptations to strength training in elderly women cannot be attributed to changes at the cellular level and therefore occur primarily in the central nervous system. Later, cellular adaptations in specific force track closely whole muscle changes.

Hormonal responses after various resistance exercise protocols

PURPOSE

This study examined the effects of the number of sets on testosterone, cortisol, and growth hormone (hGH) responses after maximum strength (MS), muscular hypertrophy (MH), and strength endurance (SE) protocols.

METHODS

Eleven young men performed multi-joint dynamic exercises using MS (5 reps at 88% of one-repetition maximum (1-RM), 3-min rest) and MH (10 reps at 75% of 1-RM, 2-min rest) protocols with 2, 4, and 6 sets at each exercise; and an SE (15 reps at 60% of 1-RM, 1-min rest) with 2 and 4 sets. Hormonal concentrations were measured before exercise, immediately after, and at 15 and 30 min of recovery.

RESULTS

The number of sets did not affect the hormonal responses after the MS protocol. Cortisol and hGH were higher (P < 0.05) after the four-set compared with the two-set sessions in the MH and SE protocols. No differences were observed between the six-set and the four-set sessions in the MH protocol. Cortisol and hGH were higher (P < 0.05) than the MS after the SE and MH protocols, and only when four and six sets were performed in the latter. hGH was higher than the MH after the SE protocol, whether two or four sets were executed, whereas cortisol (P < 0.05) was higher after the SE protocol only when two sets were performed. Testosterone did not change with any workout.

CONCLUSION

The number of sets functions up to a point as a stimulus for increased hormonal concentrations in order to optimize adaptations with MH and SE protocols, and has no effect on a MS protocol. Furthermore, the number of sets may differentiate long-term adaptations with MS, MH, and SE protocols causing distinct hormonal responses.

A meta-analysis to determine the dose response for strength development

PURPOSE

The identification of a quantifiable dose-response relationship for strength training is important to the prescription of proper training programs. Although much research has been performed examining strength increases with training, taken individually, they provide little insight into the magnitude of strength gains along the continuum of training intensities, frequencies, and volumes. A meta-analysis of 140 studies with a total of 1433 effect sizes (ES) was carried out to identify the dose-response relationship.

METHODS

Studies employing a strength-training intervention and containing data necessary to calculate ES were included in the analysis.

RESULTS

ES demonstrated different responses based on the training status of the participants. Training with a mean intensity of 60% of one repetition maximum elicits maximal gains in untrained individuals, whereas 80% is most effective in those who are trained. Untrained participants experience maximal gains by training each muscle group 3 d.wk and trained individuals 2 d.wk. Four sets per muscle group elicited maximal gains in both trained and untrained individuals.

CONCLUSION

The dose-response trends identified in this analysis support the theory of progression in resistance program design and can be useful in the development of training programs designed to optimize the effort to benefit ratio.

Berger in retrospect: effect of varied weight training programmes on strength

The evidence that multiple sets of exercise are superior to a single set for maximal strength gains, as suggested by Berger in 1962, is reviewed. The validity and practical significance of Berger's strength training study are questioned. Well controlled, methodologically sound studies that minimise confounding variables are required to support the hypothesis that multiple sets of exercise elicit superior gains in strength.

Is glucose/amino acid supplementation after exercise an aid to strength training?

BACKGROUND

The precise timing of carbohydrate and amino acid ingestion relative to a bout of resistance exercise may modulate the training effect of the resistance exercise.

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether regular glucose/amino acid supplementation immediately after resistance exercise could enhance the gain in muscle strength brought about by resistance training.

METHODS

Seven untrained participants with a median age of 23 years and mean (SD) body mass 68.9 (13.5) kg resistance trained on a leg extension machine for five days a week for 10 weeks, using four sets of 10 repetitions. Alternate legs were trained on successive days, one leg each day. Subjects ingested either a supplement including 0.8 g glucose/kg and 0.2 g amino acids/kg, or placebo, on alternate training days immediately after training. Therefore the supplement was always ingested after training the same leg (supplement leg). Isometric, isokinetic, and 1 repetition maximum (RM) strength were measured before, during, and after training. Blood samples were analysed to determine the acute responses of insulin and glucose to resistance exercise and supplementation or placebo.

RESULTS

Serum insulin concentration peaked 20 minutes after supplement ingestion at ninefold the placebo level, and remained significantly elevated for at least 80 minutes (p<0.01). Isometric, isokinetic, and 1 RM strength improved on both supplement and placebo legs (p<0.05). There were no significant differences in the gain in strength between the supplement leg and the placebo leg (p>0.05).

CONCLUSION

Regular glucose/amino acid supplementation immediately after resistance exercise is unlikely to enhance the gain in muscle strength brought about by resistance training.