1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Editorial makes unsubstantiated claims about high-load resistance training

      1 , 1 , 2
      Journal of Applied Physiology
      American Physiological Society

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references10

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Neither load nor systemic hormones determine resistance training-mediated hypertrophy or strength gains in resistance-trained young men

          We provide novel evidence of the effect of lifting markedly different (lighter vs. heavier) loads (mass per repetition) during whole-body resistance training on the development of muscle strength and hypertrophy in previously trained persons. Using a large sample size (n = 49), and contradicting dogma, we report that the relative load lifted per repetition does not determine skeletal muscle hypertrophy or, for the most part, strength development. In line with our previous work, acute postexercise systemic hormonal changes were unrelated to strength and hypertrophic gains.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Systematic review of high-intensity progressive resistance strength training of the lower limb compared with other intensities of strength training in older adults.

            To examine the effect of high-intensity progressive resistance strength training (HIPRST) on strength, function, mood, quality of life, and adverse events compared with other intensities in older adults. Online databases were searched from their inception to July 2012. Randomized controlled trials of HIPRST of the lower limb compared with other intensities of progressive resistance strength training (PRST) in older adults (mean age ≥ 65y) were identified. Two reviewers independently completed quality assessment using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale and data extraction using a prepared checklist. Twenty-one trials were included. Study quality was fair to moderate (PEDro scale range, 3-7). Studies had small sample sizes (18-84), and participants were generally healthy. Meta-analyses revealed HIPRST improved lower-limb strength greater than moderate- and low-intensity PRST (standardized mean difference [SMD]=.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], .40 to 1.17 and SMD=.83; 95% CI, -.02 to 1.68, respectively). Studies where groups performed equivalent training volumes resulted in similar improvements in leg strength, regardless of training intensity. Similar improvements were found across intensities for functional performance and disability. The effect of intensity of PRST on mood was inconsistent across studies. Adverse events were poorly reported, however, no correlation was found between training intensity and severity of adverse events. HIPRST improves lower-limb strength more than lesser training intensities, although it may not be required to improve functional performance. Training volume is also an important variable. HIPRST appears to be a safe mode of exercise in older adults. Further research into its effects on older adults with chronic health conditions across the care continuum is required. Copyright © 2013 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Optimal load for increasing muscle power during explosive resistance training in older adults.

              Muscle power (force x velocity) recedes at a faster rate than strength with age and may also be a stronger predictor of fall risk and functional decline. The optimal training paradigm for improving muscle power in older adults is not known, although some literature suggests high velocity, low load training is optimal in young adults. One hundred twelve healthy older adults (69 +/- 6 years) were randomly assigned to either explosive resistance training at 20% (G20), 50% (G50), or 80% (G80) one repetition maximum (1RM) for 8-12 weeks or to a nontraining control group (CON). Participants trained twice per week (five exercises; three sets of eight rapidly concentric and slow eccentric repetitions) using pneumatic resistance machines. Repeated-measures analysis of variance and covariance (ANOVA and ANCOVA) were used to determine the effects of training. Average peak power increased significantly and similarly in G80 (14 +/- 8%), G50 (15 +/- 9%), and G20 (14 +/- 6%) compared to CON (3 +/- 6%) (p < .0001). By contrast, a positive dose-response relationship with training intensity was observed for relative changes in average strength (r = .40, p = .0009) and endurance (r = .43, p = .0005). Average strength increased in G80 (20 +/- 7%), G50 (16 +/- 7%), and G20 (13 +/- 7%) compared to CON (4 +/- 4%) (p < .0001). Average muscle endurance increased in G80 (185 +/- 126%, p < .0001), G50 (103 +/- 75%, p = .0004), and G20 (82 +/- 57%, p = .0078) compared to CON (28 +/- 29%). Peak muscle power may be improved similarly using light, moderate, or heavy resistances, whereas there is a dose-response relationship between training intensity and muscle strength and endurance changes. Therefore, using heavy loads during explosive resistance training may be the most effective strategy to achieve simultaneous improvements in muscle strength, power, and endurance in older adults.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal of Applied Physiology
                Journal of Applied Physiology
                American Physiological Society
                8750-7587
                1522-1601
                November 01 2017
                November 01 2017
                : 123
                : 5
                : 1419-1420
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Neuroscience Research Australia, Randwick, NSW, Australia; and
                [2 ]School of Clinical Medicine, The University of Queensland, St. Lucia, QLD, Australia
                Article
                10.1152/japplphysiol.00315.2017
                aa330894-cbb7-4e86-8e40-4cb75e1eabab
                © 2017
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article