It would have been nice to ask the author about repetitions in the one set group. Lifting to exhaustion in one set of 8-12 reps would require a heavy weight and a greater risk of injury. I wonder if one set of 15-20 reps with a lower weight would suffice. My guess is that lifting to failure is the key, not numbers of reps.
Interesting that this article reports on a survey that included only men. Where are the women in this? Women don’t lift weights? How about a little more balanced reporting next time….and include a survey that reports on weight training for women too. We are different, our bodies aren’t built to do the same things men’s bodies do. We aren’t just smaller men.
1
Have you looked around at our 50 plus neighbors lately? Just put some reasonable resistance on your muscles on a regular basis and keep it up (decades). Let the true fitness buffs debate the esoteric details. Have fun and don't hurt yourself trying to help yourself!
Maybe I'm being picky but I have to wonder how much someone really knows about weightlifting if they think the word "lat" in "lat pulldown" is short for lateral. There is absolutely nothing lateral about the move. "Lat" is short for "latissimus dorsi," the muscles that are worked by that particular exercise.
1
“Fitness” is not necessarily the same as strength or muscle mass. Someone who can list a lot of weight or say, run a fast 100 meters might be “fit”, but it is specific to that type of activity. It does not translate to the type of fitness needed for endurance events like a marathon or century cycling ride. Those athletes favor being lean and they train to build the ability to exert a lower amount of power for several hours, going to failure is a recipe for injury. Some weight training is beneficial, especially to retain muscle mass and bone density as one ages.
I am 72 and have been using the one set to failure for decades. I also do a warmup set at 70-80% of the one set to failure. Also, as I got older I have increased reps to about 15 and adjusted weights accordingly, so that failure will occurs between 13-17 reps. This and good technique should keep you from injury.
2
After engaging in progressive resistance exercise (lifting weights) since I was 39 and am now 81, doing extensive reading on the subject and even getting certified as a trainer after I retired from teaching, here is my experience for whatever it's worth.
What does it mean to lift to failure? There is "failure" and then there is FAILURE. I used to work with a partner. When I could no longer raise the weight my partner would help just enough so that I could move it with maximal effort. Then my partner would push down on the weight during the negative phase and I would resist mightily. This went on until I was unable to resist the negative (return) part at all. That is FAILURE.
I used to do three sessions a week. Now I can only do two. I need two days recovery. I used to do a pushed Nautilus workout with no rest between exercises. Now I need 2-3 minutes of recovery between each set. I no longer have a partner and even if I did I probably could not tolerate the intensity that I did when I was younger. There are other older men at the Y where I work out. None of them push themselves like me and none of them have my strength.
But the best I can hope for is to slow the process of losing muscle and strength. And I have lost a lot even though I'm a good deal stronger than most men my age.
Warmup: Ten minutes on the recumbent bike with three high intensity intervals. The intervals get my pulse up to 90% of maximum. That's all the warmup I need. I do two sets of each exercise.
12
@Berchman ,
Thank You for your input,will keep your defining the types of failure In mind.Keep punching.
A comment was made there was no mention of women in this article. From a physiological perspective, there didn't really need to be. There is no difference in the type, quality, or even quantity of skeletal muscle between men and women. More importantly, there is no difference in how a man's or a woman's physique responds to an increasing workload, which is what progressive weight training is all about.
About the biggest difference between men and women, is of course, hormonal: men's physiques operate in a testosterone environment while women have an estrogen base. And it's this difference which governs how much a muscle can hypertrophy, or grow. So women cannot (usually) get as big as men, all things being equal like training, diet and rest. Other than that, a woman's weight training regimen shouldn't differ at all from a man's. It all depends on what you're going for: strength, endurance, shape, definition, or some combination of the four.
I was a trainer for many years, and my female clients were surprised when I put them through the same paces as their male counterparts. And then they were further surprised when their gains in three out of the four categories I mentioned (excluding strength) matched the men.
One more thing: You guys who are recommending this or that exercise regimen without ever laying eyes on the people you're advising are doing them a great disservice. Stop, before you hurt someone. There's a difference between a guideline and a commandment.
11
Jack Voltaire, 73, former middle weight (165 lb pro wrestling champion of the SE USA back in the 1930s and super heavyweight dead lift record of 800 lbs in 1939, taking it from George Hachensmint (so?), had a gym on Pike St for firemen and pro wrestlers until his death in the late 1970s.
Across the gym were cables and weight to pull down. At least 8 reps. Can’t yet do those, drop down to what you can just do 8 reps with. As soon as you can do 15, add five lbs.
For the pecs: Handle in each hand 8-15: pulled down from outstretched to crossing at the hips. Then bent over, alternating which hand is closest. Then behind the back for the lateral triceps with L pulling (R stack) down, R pulling L stack.
Face R to one stack of weights, pull from above waist past R hip while past from behind L hip to extended for anterior deltoid. 8-15
Face L and do the same. Spin around and fave L with R hand extending straight from R shoulder (triceps) and L hand curling (biceps). Repeat equivalent to the opposite side.
Put a bench in the middle, kneel down and simulate wrist wrestling with your elbows planted.
Always at least 8 reps and increase as soon as 15.
The NCAA 195 lb champion and the #2 at 177(6?) came in and made fun of the other two 73 year old 165 lb wrestlers pushing each other back and forth. Finally, slightly exasperated at the insults, the old men invited to two young men to join them. Within ten minutes both NCAA were vomiting, exhausted, and totally winded.
No women in the study. Again.
5
First thing I noticed too. When hormones clearly have an impact on muscle growth, how can one gender be left entirely out of the study? Reminds me of the studies done on heart disease that only included men. And then it was discovered that estrogen was a protective factor.
1
This is all old news.... very. The trend in exercise physiology is to ignore older studies to get your new and revelatory data published. Anyway, nearly fifty years ago, a guy named Arthur Jones popularized what is still referred to as "High Intensity Training"; the idea that you worked a muscle -- or muscle group -- to complete failure for just a single set, maybe twice per week, to maximize muscle strength and hypertrophy. Jones, who died in 2007, was the inventor of the "Nautilus" weight machines he designed for the purpose.
I, myself, have been weight training for fifty years as of 2019 and have seen the high intensity theory promulgated in one form or another throughout that period. Rather than jump on the latest bandwagon (which, in this case, really isn't late at all), use good common sense in your approach to resistance training: try a bunch of different workout regimens and see what works for you. Most important, find a routine you can stick with for the duration. Don't read just one article on the subject, read a hundred. A thousand would be better.
Everybody has different percentages of the various types of muscle fibers in their bodies, as well as the electrolyte pumps and gas exchange and nitrogen-balance mechanisms that feed an nourish them. Exercise, yes. Nourish yourself well, absolutely. But the most important fact when it comes to building your body? Get educated!
1
After reading thru submissions, many excellent, I would suggest adding, to strength and size, strength endurance, such as pushups, sit-ups, chin-ups, half squats.
Leonard Morehouse, PhD exercise physiologist, trainer of Olympic athletes, astronauts, and first president of the ergonomics association, in his 1970s classic Maximum Performance, recommenced two to three times per week ten to thirty sets of half as many reps as you can do, with, for youth, retesting max once every two weeks. Older folks like me, once ever three to four weeks.
Ten sets of 50% does well. Twenty on M, W, and thirty on Friday for those in a hurry. One set in the morning between heavier days and perhaps once in the evening seems to speed it up slightly, at least at first. (Muscle tone?)
If getting ready in your 30s for jump school or young and getting ready for playoffs or the state track meet, ease back to one set of 50%/day two to three weeks beforehand to keep tone but regain spring and explosiveness.
This article or study is very incomplete, and fails to mention the importance of the type of food and amounts needed, to accomplish continued strength & muscle size gains. without the proper nutrition this study is not representative of what's possible, even just in the different types of weight lifts studied. The failure for many who aspire to strength & muscle mass gains, is that proper nutrition is half the battle and maybe even the hardest part...
3
I read the original study when it first was published. It’s not incomplete. The researchers wanted to determine whether and what the difference was between one set, three sets, and five sets. So, all other conditions, including nutrition, were the same for all groups. The only difference between the groups was the number of sets they did.
That’s the only way you can tell if the number of sets makes the difference. You have to eliminate every other variable.
The study’s authors, including Brad Schoenfeld, discuss nutrition in the article and they are careful to point out that for hypertrophy you still need more sets. It actually was a well designed study.
Gretchen Reynold’s, the Times’ fitness writer did a good job in reporting this, but you are right. She should have briefly mentioned something about nutrition. Any lifter can tell you it’s a crucial factor in muscle building.
2
I am 62 and I have been lifting weights for years off and on and these last two years more on because of two total knee replacements and wanting to stay stronger and mobile. In the past I used more free weights but have drifted to more controlled exercises with cable machines. I lift slowly and have always increased the weight to what my body can handle without hurting myself. I do lift until failure. Start out with light weights and build up. I do four reps and take no more that a 60 second rest in between sets. I don't listen to music and play with my phone while I am working out. I go to the gym and work hard at it. I also ride a bike for cardio.
2
Here's my best advice for weight lifting beginners gleaned from 18 years of experience beginning in my mid-50s when, due to heat related issues, I gave up running. For any routine you choose and to prevent muscle soreness undermining your gym resolve: Start. Easy! Help your muscles adapt to new requirements. Begin with a weight that's easy to move. For each exercise, do one set and low reps, four or five. Stow your competitive urges and self-consciousness, these two human traits will harm your beginner's gym resolution. Add a rep each session for each exercise. When you can do one set of ten reps with a weight, you create a foundation for the lifting routine you choose. You should experience some muscle soreness, but it should be mild. It takes two or three weeks of three sessions a week for your body to adapt. If you're still working out after 6 months, allow some reasonable competitive urges to re-emerge.
7
"Less than a fourth of someone's lunch hour"?!? Who has a whole hour for lunch?
6
Whew, some of these comments suggest many of the commenters have "reading deficit disorder!" I just made that up to emphasize how poorly some folks read controversial news articles.
This was a limited study (2 months) with limited goals, and the data suggests the researchers identified useful, if incomplete information re the benefits of weight training. To the commenters, especially those who disparaged the research methodology I say: "different strokes for different folks."
If you chose to lift weights (to begin lifting weights, that is), for whatever reason, and at whatever age, your first few sessions are meant to establish a baseline of your current condition. You select a certain mix of movements and then work to find a weight in each you can comfortably handle, and a number of repitions that allow you to complete the workout without becoming so discouraged you abandon the endeavor. In other words, you need to stay motivated.
Then, like magic, because the body is magic, if you persevere, you get stronger, or fitter, or prettier, or whatever your goal is, because the body adapts to work, and very quickly. The way to make progress with weight training is to push yourself just a little harder each session than the previous session, be that an extra rep, an extra set for one or a few of your movements, or a few more pounds. At some point you will reach a plateau, and then slowly go downhill, but that could take a lifetime. Good, is if it makes you happy.
14
Speed, form, number of reps, and whether the reps are continued to exhaustion are all important in training and each affects different aspects of muscle and neurology. For overall fitness, it's important to ensure all muscle groups are trained, routines are flexible and varied, and resistance training is combined with aerobic exercise which in turn is combined with low intensity activity like walking. Repeating fixed exercise regimes, whatever form that regime takes, is a poor way to achieve or maintain overall fitness.
2
Speaking for myself, I am an example of n=1 study. But I am a 60-year-old woman who is much stronger at deadlifting, back squats and bench pressing that when I was 20 because I learned to train to exhaustion. The key is having an excellent personal fitness trainer who knows his stuff.
11
It is sickening that health studies continue to focus on men only.
12
@H I agree, but perhaps more non-male authors would be a good start. We tend to write from our experience and we tend to write for our anticipated audience. I would guess that on average, male objectives for exercise and fitness differ from female objectives. There may be more wisdom in the latter than the former.
4
@H A separate study would be needed. Men and women are worlds apart in physical strength.
1
@Dale This was a non-male author. The studies are the problem, not the authors.
1
I am close to 80 and found early on that you must lift until your muscles ache.
The quickest and most excruciating way to do do that is too lift very, very slowly. It does not matter how many but how slowly.
15
@Edward Blau
Absolutely correct. I see your studs lifting too much, too fast- and incorrectly. There's a reason there aren't many older guys in the gym, they hurt themselves as young studs. I'm 64 and, like you, I left slowly. Slow lifting means you lift less with fewer reps but your muscles absolutely feel it. Keep it real, my man.
9
@Bill, so glad to hear that others subscribe to the "slow lift" regimen. I'm 67 and have been doing resistance training for over five years now. It's very easy to get sucked into doing more and more weight, but after realizing that I was feeling sore and beat-up all the time, I backed off. Now I do some warm-up on the elliptical, then hit the weights, and do fewer reps but VERY slowly, then finish up with some time on the rowing machine to make sure I'm getting a total body work-out. Believe me, you still feel the "burn" when working slower with lighter weights because you aren't cheating by using momentum to lift the heavier weights and do more reps, and my joints feel better, too. Once you damage your joints everything gets harder, so gotta be careful!
1
You are right. I don’t do super slow but I go slow enough that I absolutely feel it, it hurts, and I go until I just can’t. That’s usually about 8 to 12 reps. When I can go longer than that, I up the weights. If it doesn’t hurt near the end, you aren’t going slow enough or your weight is too light. It usually takes me 20 minutes to a half hour twice a week.
For the past 28 years I have trained for 10 minute three times a week at a high intensity and not only was I among one of the top lifetime drug free bodybuilders of my time, but I have used the same formula in training clients for almost three decades. I was laughed at when I started, as there were no studies back then backing up what I did, but my success and the success of my clients helped tremendously. It's heartening to see those principles validated and you can see more about this form of training at https://www.naturallyintense.net. Thanks for reading!!!
9
The lesson is as expected: strength gains come from intensity (weight lifted), while size gains come from volume. I might change the title, but this is a high-quality study by well-respected researchers.
4
Yes. Brad Schoenfeld and Brad Contreras are among the most respected in the field. It was a well designed study.
A similar study was published in one of the Scandinavian sports medical journals back in the 90s. They were using off-season athletes, and the group that did one set to near exhaustion got approximately 85% of the strength gains of the group that did three set .
1
When I was a young man I made various forays into weight lifting. However, I felt so intimidated by others around me -- look at those biceps, oh, for those pecs -- that I seldom lasted more than a few months. Fast forward: now that I am a gentleman of a certain age (sixty three) I find that I embrace the anonymity that age affords one. I am free from comparisons or concerns. No one takes the slightest notice of me or my workout....and I even have some biceps now. More importantly, I feel better that I ever have: my posture has improved; my waistline has reduced.
17
I've been doing this for at least 3 years. A set of 25lbs dumbells, a yoga mat for crucnhes(or carpet/rug), and push-ups. Curls, cleans, squats, various lifts...it doesn't take much time but you gotta get the most out of the exercise using perfect form and truly exhaust yourself. Gym memberships, meh!
8
Research done by Nautilus years ago showed this to be true. Some large, powerful men, including bodybuilding champ Casey Viator, were put through hard, but simple, workouts doing just one set per exercise. The key was to go to failure, but also to do the exercises slowly, both in the positive and negative phases. Nautilus researchers believed the negative phase was equally important and helps develop more muscle fibers. In other words, weightlifters who just let the weight fall back into the starting phase without resisting it on its way down, were missing out on an important muscle-building technique. I always made good gains in strength by following the Nautilus principles.
14
Everybody forgot about Ellington Darden and his work with Nautilus. Great principles great machines. These princip,especially still apply and great post.
3
Elders, be careful. Start with low and comfortable weight and work up. Be prudent. If possible, add a walk to your program. I'm 82 and under exercised to the point that sometimes a good sneeze hurts. Just saying . . .
9
@Cone
I am 73, and got back into a regular exercise routine a year ago after moving from Italy to Canada. Prior to moving to Italy in 2010 I worked out regularly for years, mostly with the NordicTrack cross-country ski machine (best ever).
I started slowly, but have steadily increased the weights on the Universal Gym I use. If a particular exercise is causing discomfort (as the military press was doing with my right shoulder), I explore slight changes in position that provide better results with no pain. My workout takes about 1 hour 20 minutes, and includes 14 exercises.
After 1 year I have dropped 23 pounds (180 to 157 - 5'9")(I also do a lot of walking), and have gained greatly in muscle size and strength. I'm not as good as I was 35 years ago, but I'm feeling good about where I am for the next 25 years.
21
@Richard Congratulations and I wish you many more years of successful training!
4
Mike Mentzer wrote a book on this years ago. He is also Mr Olympia in his weight class.
2
@Chris Don't forget he and his brother are both dead from the anabolic regimen they were on. Begs the question "what was the true reason for their success?".
This may be a new study but the essence of the content has been well proven in “super slow strength training”. It is intense, and best done with a trained trainer. All ages can do it and it is highly effective. Based on my experience with it, strength, a well sculpted shape and better bones are all real benefits.
11
This study is based on young men. There isn’t a study set that includes older men who may have complicating factors like previous injury. There are no women in this study. What would a woman do if pregnant or after delivering a baby? What would a seventure year old or teener do? This is one of those studies that gives advice for a limited group without a lot of information for a wider audience.
13
@Llewis This is a start, and more studies will be done in time.
2
My wife was~130 and on single cables 55 lbs (~110 on two pulley) for 8-15 in a wide range of cross over pulls and extensions within two months. Pound for pound, physically strong women such as some farm women are stronger in all but the pec muscles.
The rule for women is the same as for men: never lift more than 5 more pounds than you have been lifting and you will not likely get hurt. There are days when all your circadian rhythms are together and you can lift much more, but your ligaments and tendons taking much longer to toughen than muscles and that is a good way to get hurt. It commonly takes professional dancers 6-10 years to build their ligaments and tendons strong enough for performance. Young men often join classes later but also often are injured early.
If your strength is really there it will likely still be there next week unless you are coming down with a bug. Then a 10-25% drop in strength is common 1-3 days before other symptoms set in.
I am not a lifting enthusiast. Even with my limited knowledge, however, I knew strength and hypertrophy are distinct goals requiring different training. Honestly, I thought that was common knowledge. More reps for hypertrophy, more weight for strength.
The article is written as if this were a totally new and unexpected insight vs. confirmation of common practice.
2
@Stephanie The value of this insight into hypertrophy vs. strength is to have documented evidence that a common knowledge "fact" actually is true.
4
@Stephanie
Are you sure you have that right? I think it's more weight for hypertrophy and more reps for strength.
1
How can you recommend going to failure if you're including barbell benchpress? That's a recipe for disaster.
2
Always have a spotter for safety.
1
I think doing dumbbell bench press is a suitable alternative and you can go to failure on those without danger. Once you can't move the dumbbells anymore, just lower them and drop them, carefully to the floor by your sides. Barbell squats would be harder to go to failure without spotters. Because of my arthritic knees and many back injuries, I do squats holding heavy dumbbells in each hand. They don't work the legs as good as barbell squats but still give me a good work out when combined with leg press. Of course you are limited in to how much weight you can hold. @John
5
Okay, I'm almost 70. I was very glad to read this article because 1) it's based on actual control-group research and not some guy's personal subjective experience, and 2) it gives you a choice of two good alternatives. If I was young and single I might opt for the multi-set larger-muscle option, but for seniors like me the one set to failure option is a great alternative. Simply put, it's a lot easier to motivate myself to do one set of each exercise to failure if I know I don't then have to repeat the same excruciating experience two more times. The one suggestion I would make - again, for seniors and others more interested in body fitness than body size - is to consider body-weight exercises in lieu of weights when possible. For example, push-ups and dips in lieu of bench press, chin-ups in lieu of lat pulls. They work more muscle groups, reduce the injury risk, and to get to failure you can just do more reps, which another study has shown works just fine.
12
@obiwan Hah! Pushups and dips are fine if you already have the strength to do them. I'm 86 and I don't. In fact, I could barely do 15 pushups (or maybe it was only 10) in high school. So I have an assortment of weights in my basement.
2
The comments below affirm that most NYT readers don’t understand the difference between body-building and strength training. As someone noted below, personal appearance is the primary motivation behind the great majority of those that workout. Those seeking health benefits and performance improvements are a distant second and third, respectively. Sadly, as building and sculpting muscle comes with significant pain, most gym users don’t have the mental fortitude to make more than minimal gains. And thus, treadmills are in demand and pilates classes are full. Yet, free weight rooms are largely under-utilized (where they still exist). There is just one PROVEN method to tone and build muscle. Get off the treadmill, put some weight on the bar and lift to the edge of injury. Period.
16
The premise of this article is wrong at its core. It assumes that gaining strength is a desirable objective in and of itself for most people. Sure, one can build some (I stress “some”) strength on limited numbers of sets. Most trained athletes would tell you that based on their own personal experience. However, most people are in the gym to achieve one of a couple objectives: a better body (more muscle, less fat), or numerical improvements in health (which is basically another way of saying a better body). For those goals, a little strength improvement will not make a dent. The article alludes to this point when it qualifies that muscle mass was not improved among the study participants.
I hope that this article does not encourage some inexperienced readers to abandon tried and true exercise methods in favor of a magic 13 minute routine that will not deliver what they seek.
1
@Paul Gaining strength is a good goal for many of us, depending on where we're starting from. Years ago, when it was unusual to see women lifting weights, I attended a talk by a man who owned a gym. He brought some of his female clients of varying ages with him, and each of the women talked about their experience. Each of them did mention gaining strength as a huge benefit to them, since it made a lot of everyday tasks much easier.
3
@Paul
As a 73 year-old, who works out in the gym, or walks, every day, I can tell you that strength is critically important. Strength exercises help maintain bone density, improve balance, and provide protection in the increasingly liklihood of a fall.
10
@Paul I agree with the commenters., Once you hit 60, you are looking for strength vs looks. Looks are great, but as you age strength becomes a lot more important.
10
Maybe. Maybe not. I find that research in this field is all over the place and that it goes in trends. It is like diet advice. Eat fat, don't eat fat, less carbs, more carbs, caffeine is fine, don't drink caffeine. Etc. "Less is more" has been the trend for a while. It is not what it seems to me is what the people in the best shape are doing less has never worked for me, personally.
Age, testosterone production and other genetic factors probably play the biggest roles, as they do in so many things we attribute to our wisdom and know how.
7
This is the principle on what the founder Arthur Jones Nautilus equipment was founded on. 1 set to exhaustion, however I believe the majority of people believe that more is better and couldn’t adapt to this theory.
9
I would recommend searching for and reading an article named "Sensible Training - A Logical Approach to Size and Strength" by Dr. Ken Leistner. One set, done to momentary muscular failure, is all that is needed for both size and strength. It is brutal and it works.
7
1. I wonder why arm and leg curls were left out. Aren't they important?
2. Should people who have had knee replacement still try to do squats or leg press? How about leg extensions and curls?
9
@An Engineer
My knee replacement surgeon said that if I want the replacements to last do NOT do squats, leg presses, leg extension or leg curls and do not do deadlifts. He said that my walking and bike riding were sufficient.
"Only the size of the men’s muscles differed. Those who had completed five sets per session sported greater muscle mass than those who had done three sets or one."
So what else matters ? :)
3
I have found great results in 14-20 minutes daily with training exercises that use only bodyweight. Jay Cardiello's book BodyWeight Strength Training is highly recommended.
You can get a more complete workout in shorter time because bodyweight exercises don't isolate muscle groups and rather rely on offsetting muscle groups as well as the target area, and unlike the routines in this article, you don't need any equipment whatsoever.
4
I know a lot of people who have inured them selves lifting weights
I wouldn't be surprised if
a) the net benefit to the entire population is negative, due to injuries
and
b) our kids will say what were you thinking lifting weight
3
@ezra abrams Weight lifting actually has one of the lowest rates of injury compared to any other form of exercise. Especially if you ignore world-record setting power lifts of several hundred pounds, the rate of injury for ordinary participants is very minimal. Compare that, to say, running, for which the rate of shin splints, blisters, torn achilles, plantar fasciitis, sprained ankles, ACL damage, blown out knees, fractures, and even heart attacks is many times greater than injuries experienced during weight lifting.
17
Drawing conclusions such as these are akin to saying that climate science is false because the temperature in your city seems fine. Both rely on inconclusive or incorrect observations. The evidence is clearly in on the benefits of weightlifting: injury rates are know to be low and the health benefits are proven to be high.
3
Unless you're a professional athlete or in the armed forces , your primary goal is most likely sculpting a great head turning physique (you'll need a more than 13 minutes to do that), being strong is just the icing on the cake.
3
It really bothers me to read this frequently repeated advice for people to do "8 to 12 reps to failure". If I chose weights with which I could only manage 8 to 12 reps, I would be injuring myself every week. Studies have also shown that lifting excessively heavy weights also causes microtears in muscle fibre, that end up causing chronic pain and reducing performance.
I usually choose weights with which I can do at least 20 reps and usually 30. They don't strain my muscles or joints but they do give a good workout. Once my muscles are warmed up, I might do an occasional short set with heavier weights, but only when it feels right.
4
@Joe B With all due respect, I normally adhere to the 8-12 rep protocol. Actually, I'm more usually between 6-9 reps since I'm usually lifting the heaviest weight that I can do while doing at least 6 reps. I have had no issues with injury nor do I have any problems with performance in other athletic endeavors. I simply like the feeling of overload more than exhaustion and my gym visits are more efficient. Like dieting, I suppose that whatever honestly works for someone is what's good for them.
7
@Joe B You're not doing sets properly if weights would injury you on the 8-12th rep. Microtears are exactly the type of stress needed to trigger physiological changes that increase strength and muscle mass..
12
@Chucks agreed Chucks, and, for JoeB, that "chronic pain" is what some of us accept as DelayedOnsetMuscleSoreness. More of a satisfying feeling than a crippling one for some mindsets, and it can be adjusted by adjusting workout intensity for those who like to tinker with stuff.
A cursory glance at the comments reveals how much misinformation (and misreading) is out there. Taken at face value, if one wishes to increase their strength (not fitness) this is welcome news. I can see the next article now: the NYT workout, the 7 minute workout + 13 minutes of strength training. For those who really have an hour for lunch.
4
If you find any of this article even remotely interesting, you should read The 4-Hour Body by Tim Ferriss. In a nutshell it's about efficiency in exercise - how to get as much gain with the least effort. It's fascinating.
Susan
Expat in Ireland
5
Look up "Stronglifts 5x5." Still takes about 45 minutes to 1 hour.
6
This study is the biggest piece of nonsense I’ve ever read. I sincerely hope that your readers don’t go and try to apply these findings. There is no “express” anything when it comes to strength or any other type of body transformation. But if you’re the type of person who thinks this study’s findings would make you strong, you’re not interested in strength anyways.
1
@lifting Not sure what you are talking about. Clearly, these studies cited show hard data. Furthermore, they seem to make significant sense as taking muscles to failure, even for a single set, is indeed taxing to the CNS. The article was also clear in that it takes much more time in order to build muscle than a single set, but the strength gains from that single set are substantial. Not everyone has as much time to devote to the weight room as others or perhaps, they don't care to. This needn't mean that they aren't interested in strength and getting fit. Goals are different for everyone.
6
more informative wpuld be 5 or 6x per week
1
What has shocked me weight training for the first time at 68 and now through age 73 is the definition and increased strength of my old muscles. Anyone who is medically cleared might be equally surprised in their retirement by the benefits of thrice weekly weight training. To me an added benefit has been my diminished angst post workout.
16
Anyone who has read the simple but amazing work of Mark Rippetoe (e.g, Starting Strength - a workout bible) would not be surprised by this.
Too many people go to the gym purely to "exercise" or "get in their reps." Any fitness path one chooses should be thought of as "training" towards a real goal. Every set of lifting should be geared towards reaching that goal and then increasing: Increase, Fail, Succeed, Repeat. Hypertrophy and volume grows muscle while heavier weights with fewer reps at peak failure grows strength. In concert, these actions (with adequate rest and appropriate diet) increase physical and mental strength.
Training should also reach all aspects of life. As obnoxious as he may be, Henry Rollins' essay on "Iron and the Soul" must be read by anyone who wants to move past simple exercise and begin training their body and mind for peak strength at any age.
Also, avoid the fads (i.e. Crossfit), get Rippetoe's book or watch his videos and start training for functional mental and physical strength. A good trainer will help you shape and realize your training goals as well.
8
Avoid CrossFit? Why? CrossFit is constantly varied functional movements performed at high intensity. All CrossFit workouts are based on functional movements, and these movements reflect the best aspects of gymnastics, weightlifting, running. These are the core movements of life.
4
@Máximo Vizcaino CrossFit is mostly a social exercise fad that focuses on doing exercises that are the most visually ridiculous so that participants can signal their dedication to their special form of exercise. It takes on quasi-religious overtones, with participants engaged in particular rituals and quite vocally proclaiming their affiliation and participation in the group.
Oftentimes the ridiculousness of particular exercises has individuals moving extremely heavy weights extremely quickly in ways that encourage very poor form and open participants to injury.
In reality there's no evidence any of CrossFit's training methods produce superior results in terms of strength, endurance, agility or body composition compared to traditional best practices. It's not inherently poor exercise (besides the poor form often condoned) and people can see results, but the cult-like environment and religious zealotry which CrossFit participants often display I'd quite unnerving
7
I have worked out in many gyms and even owned one for a short period and I can say without hesitation that men, at least, do not strength train for strength, but for size, therefore, according to this study more is better.
2
There is a great post here by Paul Perkins who recommends using the Body for Life regimen by Bill Phillips. I agree. I have been using Phillips's regimen for over 2 decades and it is easy to maintain, easy to use, and it is a good use of one's time, even if it is limited.
Our bodies were not made to sit on a couch or at a desk for long periods of time. We need to move, to sweat, to push the limit. All kinds of bio chemical rewards occur when we follow that pattern, and all sorts of negative body ills occur when we don't.
It doesn't take much effort either.
4
If you've never used free weights, you don't "probably" need a trainer, you definitely need a trainer to set up a program and then show you the proper form. Otherwise, you will likely injure yourself.
However, there are other ways to achieve muscle strength than using free weights. There are several types of weight training machines which help you achieve proper from.
There is also a system called TRX, in which you use your own body weight to achieve results.
Any gym that has this type of equipment will help you in using them properly to achieve your goals.
5
@Cagey Finding a good,really qualified TRX coach is also essential for someone new to TRX let alone to exercise. TRX can be an incredible tool for working out to achieve strength and functional movement competence but you need to understand the mechanics of the straps, concepts of physics related to progressing or regressing resistance as applied to the straps, the principles of the functional movements on which the TRX system of exercise is based and how to properly perform exercises with proper form and technique. Then there are the multi layered approaches to structuring and programming effective TRX routines. You really need a TRX coach who knows this stuff. In this regard, note that many fitness facilities that have TRX don’t really have instructors that have been trained as TRX instructors. Many have instructors that have taken only the TRX Suspenstion Training Course (STC) which is a great 8 hour introduction but only that. It isn’t until someone has done the Advanced Group Training Course, that they are an actual certified TRX instructor. This two day course, while in the context of group training, takes a very deep dive into the biomechanics of the exercises, programming concepts and coaching techniques. You must pass both two practicum exams and a written exam to get certified and must have 16 hours of prior TRX course work as a prerequisite.
1
Sounds like an experiment in how transform a young, semi-fit "young" body into a more fit 98-year-old one.
Do the work, enjoy the strength and mobility comraderie, fine physique, sound sleep!
1
Lunch hour? What's that?
8
At the practical level, the headline "In a Hurry?..." is ridiculous. Anyone who "grunt[s] through repeated, hourslong sets of various weight-training exercises" doesn't know 'squat' about building strength.
Any office worker can find a private place for 20-100 deep knee bends done over 10-15 minutes. Pushup can be done while waiting in airport departure lounges. There are endless strength variations that can be done in public: waiting on a line, lift one foot off the ground and do a partial deep knee bend.
People who exhaust themselves in the gym don't build strength, they build weakness, because strength is not built in the gym, it is built during the sleeping recovery period.
And by the way, you can't rush strength building. Depending on the muscles group or cell type (brain. for example), it takes weeks to months for a complete cell turnover.
6
@Svirchev Of course, that’s why all professional athletes eschew longtime proven methods of building strength (such as weight training) and instead rely on doing “partial deep knee bends” while “waiting in line” at the movie theater. And there is little doubt that strength is truly built in the bed by “sleeping” as much as possible for “weeks to months” if possible. Personally, I like to flex my ear lobes and do toe lifts while standing in line for a burger, fries and a milkshake, while simultaneously thinking really hard to develop “brain cells.”
25
looking forward to posting this exchange at the,gym!
1
@Carlitos Corazon
@Carlitos Corazon
I like your sense of humor, but you read my statement wrong. Strength is built during the recovery period after strenuous exercise. Anabolism primarily occurs during sleep. You better check a few physiology books on this. Try and remember that this article is not directed towards professional and semi-professionals such as yourself. It is aimed towards ordinary people trying to "get into shape" who are looking for shortcuts.
1
Yikes. I hate to think what people will do with this study. A little knowledge can be a dangerous thing.
If you are truly lifting heavy enough to fail that is really, really heavy. Doing that without warming up is inadvisable, even foolish. Those that think they have been doing so for years may not understand what lifting to failure is and may not actually be lifting as heavy as they think they are. Or perhaps they have superhuman joints. Go talk to some Olympic power lifters and see if they would even consider lifting their max without warming up first. Young people might be able to get away with this scheme for a short time without injury and it might seem like it works. But it really isn’t a smart or sustainable plan. A few lighter sets before you go heavy is a great way to warm up and prevent injury. And the older you get the more you risk injury if you lift super heavy without warming up.
Besides, what is the deal with doing a workout in 13 minutes anyway? If you want real results there are no short cuts. You have to work hard and smart, and it will take time. Lasting results will take years of consistent work. There is no way around it. If you just want to improve your health and truly only have thirteen minutes, forget the weights and jump rope at home or use a boxing bag for 13 minutes.
19
Gretchen, it's not a "lateral" pulldown. "Lat" here refers to the latissimus dorsi muscle. And I'm highly skeptical of this study. First of all, such a simplistic exercise routine is not sustainable; exercising the same way all the time leads to injury, and it gets boring besides. Second, to have real strength gains after a certain point, you have to exercise a muscle in different ways. Third, strengthening muscles beyond a certain point requires strengthening supporting muscles, which require different exercises. Fourth, doing just one set leads to very limited conditioning. In the end, serious weightlifters have to do multiple sets and many exercises in order to achieve high-level strength.
7
@Strato
Progressive Resistance, the foundation of strength training includes the principles:
1) The same exercise be performed with increasing weight over a period of time
2) There is no "different" way to increase the force capability of a muscle
3) Strength training is not "conditioning"; it is specific load on a specific muscle, any physical movement can be conditioning.
Personal comment, pretty much everything you said about strength training is wrong, but you got the "lat" comment right.
9
@Michael -You don't lift weights, do you? You never heard of partial reps? Negatives? Why do Olympic weightlifters do high pulls to help their ability to clean a barbell? Have you ever increased the number of pushups you can do by supersetting them with cable bench flyes? Do you know what supersetting is? Do you know what pre-tiring a muscle is? Do you imagine those single-set boys' strength would match the multi-set boys' strength on a test of multiple sets? It wouldn't, because the single-set boys' muscles aren't conditioned.
I hope the study will be repeated with older men, and with women. I am 79 and, based on this article, have started on the 13-minute regimen, with the hope it will apply to m.
6
>After the two months, all of the young men were stronger, a finding that, by itself, is beguiling, since it suggests that people can continue to gain strength even if they already are experienced at resistance training.
Does the author think that once you reach a base level of fitness you just stop getting stronger?
2
Hi, @O. Good question about how to keep getting stronger.
I think most people would hit a plateau after doing a routine like this for a few months. I'm not sure the study really addressed that question, but I they'd likely find smaller additional strength gains if they continued it for another month.
One approach would be to vary the exercises for the next two months -- perhaps weighted dips, one-arm rows, incline dumbbell presses, chin ups, lateral raises, deadlifts, front squats and hamstring curls. Another useful variation would be to increase the weights so your sets vary from 12-15 reps at the beginning down to 2-4 at the end.
2
O,
In fact, that is exactly what the author is suggesting. When they conduct these fitness experiments, they are always careful to identify if participants were previously “trained” or “untrained”, since the expectations are so different for each group. Yes, strength improvements do decline precipitously for trained athletes.
Think of it this way. Let me counter your question with the inverse question: do you think that training will increase strength linearly, ad infinitum?
The one-set group would likely be lifting significantly heavier weight to reach the same level of ‘failure’ that the three-set and five-set groups would be achieving with less weight over more repetitions. That might explain the noted ‘strength’ versus ‘muscle mass’ outcomes.
7
Bad advice. A more natural approach to getting stronger is to do multiple...m-u-l-t-i-p-l-e reps with a light weight and increasing it over time, slowly. Human beings evolved to gain strength over time, not over night. The body's mitochondria take weeks to adjust. And WHY on earth would anyone want to build big muscles when a normal sized muscle can be, and is often, even stronger than a large, "damaged to failure" muscle.
2
@Dino Romano
I think the point of the article is that working to failure in only one rep did not result in big muscles. That's the result of doing multiple sets. They also said in the article that using lighter weight (not working to failure) did not produce the strength or endurance gains.
3
Your thoughts seem not to be backed by fact and don’t jibe with the article. To conform to the study, one needs to do 8-12 reps, which by definition implies a weight suitable to their level of conditioning. Over time, the weight increases but the rep range stays the same, improving slowly over time.
1
I have never subscribed to the 3 set orthodoxy, but I suspect it developed to allow people to warm up their muscles before lifting to failure (of note there's nothing here about increased risk of injury one way or the other). So, I think a warm-up set (and 2 total sets) is a good idea.
6
I have been following a similar routine for about ten years, doing only one set of each exercise, and only going to the gym between six and eight times a month. As a 5'2" 109lb female, I have gone from quadricep presses of 90lbs to 190lbs; not quite as impressive upper body strength. I have never been injured.
7
As a thin white female, one of the reasons I lift weights is to keep my bones dense. I assume that the longer I stress against weights, the stronger my bones will be. But perhaps I'm wrong. I'd like to see some science on this conundrum.
9
The science in fact is clear: weight training improves bone density over time. You are in the right!
@Susan
Yes, the longer you stress the stronger the bone. However, the stress is the holding of the weight, or body position in yoga or other exercises, for 20 or more seconds which triggers the strengthening of the bone. Books on bone strengthening exercise for osteopenia and osteoporosis recommend not only the repetition but the length of time the muscle is in the stressed position to be the trigger of bone growth.
1
The major source of nutrition for your bones is the piezoelectric effect of flexing the bone which draws ionic nutrients into the bone. So yes, flex them. It used to be thought that thick boned men became laborers. But studies revealed that usually they started as normal thickness of bone for their built but doubled the cross sectional area of their bones within ten years.
That applies just as much to women.
And you don't have to do this 13 minute routine more than once a week and maintain the strength.I am 72 and have been doing it for 4 years.
8
I've been suggesting this to friends and family for years. Ten minutes every morning, 120 leg reps on each side, 120 arm reps, no weights at all. Plus stretches. I started in my 50s, and built balance and leg muscles. I now can "power" (it's all relative, of course) up hills on a bicycle and, a few years ago, painted my house while high up on a ladder, w/o fear of falling.
4
I would not be surprised if there exists a positive correlation between higher intensity and increased incidence of injury.
7
With proper instruction, weight training is known to be lower risk than many other sports. The body is designed to perform movements like squats when done with correct form.
I have been lifting weights for 60 years. I tried every new fad and multiple formulas of lifting. I’m satisfied that if you want SIZE, you will need to do at least 3 sets with weights that are heavy enough to where you can only do 10-12 reps. The last rep doesn’t have to go to failure. Just a slight struggle to get it completed in good form. What they failed to test for was how long does the strength of the three groups last after stopping the lifting experiment. I would guess the group that did only one set would see their strength diminish much sooner than the other two. I am currently incorporating a BFR (blood flow restriction) into my routine at least once a week. I know people tend to not experience the same results after doing the same things others do. But I have been getting great results with a BFR routine. I experience retaining a “pump” much longer after the BFR workout. It usually lasts for three or more days. Also, the BFR workout can be completed in about 30 minutes.
1
@Tommy
Would you give me more details on the BFR routine.
"...34 fit young men who were not burly weight lifters but did resistance train with some regularity..."
This represents a tiny group, with no women, no age gradations, no comorbid physical conditions, over a short period of time.
As 71 years old, with a bad knee and shoulder (and still navigating an hour, 3 days a week in the gym), the workout here sounds like I'd aggravate an old injury and have to avoid my standard exercise routines for some time.
As is often the case, the preliminary report discussed here has a narrow range of application, for now. I'm not sure what it adds for older individuals, those with less testosterone, or what the long term implications might be beyond two months--say two years. I would be nice to believe that somewhat less exertion and shorter workouts would still be beneficial for most age groups, but that information is not provided with the study under discussion.
7
I think 3x a week is hard for a working person to achieve; with a family or spouse, doubly hard. I try to be a weekend warrior -get two sessions of exercise in on my days off, but a third is near impossible due to work or family commitments. But I have no small children at home.
2
@Meighan you can't find 13 minutes three times a week (including weekends)?
@mike You have to factor in the overhead - driving to the gym, changing, lifting, (hopefully) stretching. Then showering, changing again, driving to your next errand. It's really more like an hour...
5
There is no gym around here. Gotta drive down the mountain and into the city for that. 30 minutes each way. Not gonna happen. Instead I ride my mountain bike, split firewood, and dance.
some excercise is better than no excercise. Agreed that if you take your first set to failure, you need some serious warm-up. That warm up for most of us is done through 2 sets at lower weight. If you include a good warm up to the 13 minutes, we are probably getting a lot closer timewise..
3
Well its nice to know that someone has finally done a decent study which validates what many have known for like, ever. Its not the number of repetitions or even to a large extent, the frequency of any particular exercise that matters, but the amount of effort put into each kick at the can. The human body tends to remember and to preserve the ability to handle the greatest amount of strain any part or set of parts of it has experienced successfully - i.e. without injury, which sets the process back considerably. The combination of a) proper form (which is absolutely necessary in order to minimize the risk of injury), b) maximum endurable weight or effort, and c) repeating or enduring to exhaustion within a short time-frame (usually about 5 to 8 reps for weight-bearing exercises and 10 to 15 seconds for speed-related ones), produces surprising results with minimal time spent to achieve them. Interval training is based upon this principle, for example. It should be noted, however, that proper warm-up exercises are also vital to help prevent injury. I used these principles very successfully myself, so i know they work. Now if i can only get BACK to applying them, lol. That said, you really don't need a lot of time to get and stay fit: only the proper methods, motivation and a means of establishing and maintaining a good, regular pattern of training.
2
@Joseph Ross Mayhew
"I used these principles very successfully myself, so i know they work."
Personal testimonial is a lousy (and sometimes dangerous) way to push for broad recommendations involving the public's health. As many TV commercials show, it has been an effective sales technique--no surprise in a nation where almost everything pushed as a health benefit is oversold.
4
Personal experience is the pathway to unscientific results. Science is tough because studies try to get to conclusive results over a group of people, individual results notwithstanding. Your personal experiences may or may not fit the overall scientific conclusions.
For example, your town’s temperature might be cooler this year than last, but it does not mean that global warming is a hoax.
“In general, we are advised to complete eight to 12 repetitions of an exercise during a set, with the aim of making our working muscle so tired by the end of the set that we temporarily cannot complete another repetition.”
Yea, if you follow body building advice from the 1980’s. I don’t know anyone that I respect who follows this method of training unless they plan to walk around greased up on a stage. It’s been well established that strength training is different from hypertrophy training for years. Some of the strongest, most efficient weightlifters in the world are not trying to be big, and do not follow this protocol. Olympic lifters, kettlebell lifters and strongmen all abide by different regiments than this 8-12 til failure nonsense, and it is nonsense - again, popularized by people who focus on looks, not on actual health or strength. This study doesn’t say anything novel, it’s basically just “grease the groove” training which is already established and proven effective.
2
@P these recommendations are still offered for the folks who come in the gym and want to work out for some health benefits, and don't know anything to start with. Explaining 5x5 or other routines to soccer moms and old folks can be scary. Imagine some coach telling new clients they can come in and get their whole workout done in 13 minutes and be done; the first thing the client will ask is "why does my gym membership cost so much?"
3
@mike for a strength athlete, 13 minutes will only suffice for a brief period while they exhaust their potential for "easy" linear progression. However, even for these new trainees, I would never start them with a 13-minute, one set of 5 routine. New trainees benefit greatly from extra volume because it allows them to perfect their technique under the watchful eye of a coach. I would bet my last dollar that the men that participated in this study were NOT intermediate level strength athletes - that is, they still had the potential to make novice gains (i.e. progression from one session to the next). This study and this author don't really understand strength training.
wait. hypertrophy is important. who wants to do the work if it doesn't show? what is wrong with you people? ;-)
in the alternative, I'm old enough to be the participants' grandmother, so I'm mostly interested in carrying the groceries from the car.
17
"Any time I get the urge to exercise, I lie down on the couch and wait for it to pass." -- Everybody
12
I would like to know why they didn't also study 34 fit young women.
40
How about some studies on really old men and women. My body has probably changed more between 70 and 85 than it did between 20 and 70 but there is no guidance for those of us past 70 -- zero, and we probably need more information to stay fit and avoid injury than anybody.
1
This would be a very weird way to use weights. Doing one set all-in would be a great way to injure yourself. Nothing mentioned about the essential warm-up sets prior to the "work sets".
Finally the comparison with the 3-set approach is a poor one since anybody interested in gaining anything, is going to do 4-5 work-sets, not 3.
3
>anybody interested in gaining anything, is going to do 4-5 work-sets, not 3.
@KBD that's not true. Most strength routines prescribe three sets of five, including the one most-used (Starting Strength). Even the popular 5x5 strong lifts moves to 3x5 relatively soon after starting, because the 5x5 dose because too difficult after the initial early period.
5
This proves only what we heartland folk always knew; there’s no strong like country strong. Pretty muscles sculpted with multiple reps in a gym are no match for focused, steady hard work. Any power lifter or NFL lineman could have easily told and shown you as much.
5
@Bob Moorehead did you read the study? The participants ALL did 8-12 reps. In fact, the one NOT on the 13-minute program did MORE steady, focused hard work because lifting to failure multiple times with only 90 seconds of rest is pretty darn hard. There's no such thing as country strong or city strong or old man strong or girl strong or bricklayer strong or whatever else you want to throw in there. Strength is the ability to generate force against an external resistance. That's it.
4
Reading over some of these comments it seems many people have had success with this type of abbreviated lift to failure training. I think that’s great. I also firmly believe that the best exercise is the one you do and that lifting to failure is not a good recipe for long term fitness, for most people. You want a routine that inspires you and keeps you coming back for more, without risking injury. Working toward a slightly difficult last rep is better for most people in the long run.
12
It's a shame that studies in this field are always so tiny. Probably the biggest reason that every new study seems to prove something until the next study comes along and proves the opposite. If you follow the field, you can't help but feel that it's mostly just going in circles. Schoenfeld and Contreras are highly regarded, but you can't really prove anything with a group size of a dozen people, inter-individual differences are way too large for that.
The government should throw some serious money at this to fund proper studies with thousands of diverse participants doing proper standardized tests. The private sector will never do it because there is no money in it.
3
@GS what is your training in statistics that allows you to evaluate the required sample size of this study?
1
34 individuals. Not a large group. Strength training, not aggression mouthing. Hey, new study...?
Remember Nautilus?
7
Exercise science is a joke. How do these people get funded?
4
It would be refreshing to hear about exercise for our mind as well as our bodies. I’m interested in a balance of both.
1
I guess you can read, write, and do some math.
6
One summer in college, I worked for UPS unloading trailers. Each daily AM shift was 4 hrs. No one package was over 50lbs. By the end of summer I had lost weight, gained strength and was in the best cardio shape of my life. If you break a sweat, no matter what your activity, it’s all good.
67
It would be helpful if the NYT posted a video of this recommended routine or a follow up article showing the exercises and how much rest the lifters take between exercises.
52
@GChris the article names the exercises, and mentions 90 second rest period between sets.
1
Yes it would have been a wise accompaniment or at least better photos, however these days with YouTube videos it's easy for you to find the most popular and you can assess the ones that are correct that way.
What are the exercises used, please? The article only cites to 3.
3
The exercises performed were: flat barbell bench press, barbell military
press, wide grip lateral pulldown, seated cable row, barbell back squat, machine leg press, and
unilateral machine leg extension.
11
@Tony Buffington @Lorraine Kelly the important takeaway isn't what exercises were used but how hard you do them. If you do one set of pushups to failure, that's as worthy an exercise as any other. People who do mostly bodyweight exercises are often the best example of people who are strong without looking strong. But of course, nothing beats a healthy diet along with the exercise.
1
@mike I'd disagree. Show me a person that does weighted barbell squats and deadlifts versus a person that trains with only a resistance band or bodyweight, and the former person will be stronger every time. Strength is just the ability to apply force against an external resistance. If you can squat 1000lbs, you're objectively stronger than the person who can only squat 200lbs, even if that second person can do 150 bodyweight only squats.
Ahhh ...... so this is a new study, and it involves researchers, and it has been published.
Go read Arthur Jones, who invented the Nautilus machines AND popularized intense, abbreviated workouts with or without his machines. His was also a new concept, except it was back in the early 1970s. The ideas were parroted by Ellington Darden and Mike Mentzer and others, soon after.
Hundreds of training books and magazine articles by various authors have followed over the decades, but it's nice to see it's new again with this study.
8
@Dave More addition that builds on Jones' work is read Body by Science by Doug McGuff. Adds the science of the biochemistry and physiology behind the method.
2
Not only is Doug McGuff discussing this, his anecdotal (yes, I’m being explicit that it’s not double blind) results working with hundreds of clients shows that you most definitely don’t need to workout 3x/week either. Generally McGuff finds that 12 min every week or *two* is sufficient to gain strength just as well.
So it’s really 12-13 min a week or even once every 10 days to two weeks! I’ve followed this program successfully for a long time. Less than a half hour a month “in the gym” for me. He also explains why this program is the *least* likely to injure you as well. Read Body By Science and try it on a lark, you’ll be shocked at the results. Key is to lift (he recommends machines) to complete & utter muscle exhaustion, which takes mental fortitude to do. It’s quite hard to truly lift to complete exhaustion, but possible, & safe to do on machines.
This is a study of 34 young fit men. While this is a nice pilot study, perhaps demonstrating feasibility (important if the authors want to submit for funding for a larger study), this cannot say anything that isn’t generalizable beyond these 34 young fit men. Without internal validity due to small sample sizes and external validity due to lack of variation in the sample, the NYT could do a better job of describing the limitations or covering research with better internal and external validity.
8
@Jae what is your statistical background that allows you to evaluate the appropriateness of the sample size used? Have you come up with an estimate of the standard error that invalidates the results?
Less weight + more reps = Bruce Lee (definition)
More weight + less reps = Arnold (bulk)
10
@Shanala not really. Bodybuilders (the example of "definition") training in the 8-12 rep range. They are literally looking to bulk their muscles.
Strength trainers train in the 3-5 rep range. They don't care about size so much as strength. Fewer reps.
Your size as a person depends on how much you eat. Powerlifters eat A LOT. They generally don't care about body fat. This is why people have this misconception that low reps make someone bulky.
there is no such thing as a "lateral pull-down." the "lat" in "lat pulldowns" refers to the latissimus dorsi muscles. Mistakes like that diminish the credibility of reporting on exercise science, and that credibility is all too easy to lose in an environment of conflicting research and headlines that overstate research conclusions.
26
@Alex
Correct. Hopefully, The NY Times will publish a correction so that future readers of the article will learn the correct terminology. I am 76 years young and when I read “...lateral pull down…” I cringed as if hearing screeching chalk on a blackboard.
This has been around d a while now. It is called “Super Slow” look it up. Best workout ever if you are looking to increase and maintain strength.
6
For me, the biggest advantage for a shortened weight-training routine is that you now have more time to do other exercises like running, cycling, tennis and swimming. A big time-saver is for me is using dumbbells and kettlebells at home instead of trudging off to the gym and waiting in line for equipment to clear up there.
I think it is important for most of us to do exercise routines that are out of our comfort zones. If you are great at weight lifting, you should also run. If you are a great long distance runner, you should also lift weights and run some sprints. For both, you might want to show up at a skeet-shooting range sometime and try to break a few clay pigeons.
9
I start off with 8 reps at a lighter weight to loosen up. Then I move up to the higher weights and work between 8-12. This seems to work for me and is time efficient.
4
@vmdicerbo yeah, can't believe so many people are hating on the article because it doesn't mention a warm up. Jumping jacks, arm rotations, jog around the house once or twice, anything to get heart rate up and blood flowing.
My own thought is this is a good way to really mess yourself up. I lift 3x a week. I keep the weight down to where I'm in no danger of hurting myself, just do a lot of reps. 90-110 pounds on the bar for squats and deadlifts, 30-40 + the bar on the bench. I might do 40-50 squats or deadlifts, up to 100 bench presses. I'm 73 YO. This routine has really improved my posture and my ability to do things like heavy-duty gardening, home repair, hiking, etc.
It was my son got me into this. Then we worked on mama and she is doing the same thing: not too much weight, just enough to work her muscles, then as many reps as she can do.
She looks 20 years younger than her age.
34
@jonnorstog some excercise is better than no excercise. Agreed that if you take your first set to failure, you need some serious warm-up. That warm up for most of us is done through 2 sets at lower weight. If you include a good warm up to the 13 minutes, we are probably getting a lot closer timewise...
2
@jonnorstog Its fantastic you are still weight training at 73! I think the important thing is you found what works for you and you continue to do it! That's excellent!
My hope is I am still doing some sort of weight training at 73.
2
But I don't care about *strength*. All I care about is how I *look*. So this isn't helpful at all.
18
@Alonzo Mosley
Why do gyms have so many mirrors?
Are they catering to our common human vanity?
@Alonzo Mosley
I'm Mosely.
1
I have a clarifying question for all of you experts. Suppose that right now I can do 8 reps of an exercise with 100 pounds of resistance. I try and fail to do a 9th rep. Will my set be more effective at increasing my strength if I immediately reduce the weight, let's say to 90 pounds, continue to failure at 90 pounds, then reduce the weight to 80 pounds, etc.? Or are the additional reps to failure at reduced weights a waste of energy?
5
Hi @Neil, performing repeated sets with declining weights (sometimes referred to as a 'drop set') as you have described can be an effective way to continue to overload the muscle after an initial task/set 'failure'. This extra overload can lead to increased strength because you are providing extra stimulus for your muscle, which responds by increasing muscle mass (hypertrophy). Greater muscle mass, specifically a greater cross-sectional area, allows a muscle to produce more contractile force (i.e., strength). While this study did show that extra sets may not be superior for strength gain over a period of 8 weeks, longer periods that result in greater hypertrophy may lead to greater differences between single and multiple set training.
11
@Neil
Doing the additional reps would obviously make you stronger.
Interesting, but one big reason to lift weights is to increase muscle size so that they consume more calories and thereby reduce fat, especially abdominal fat, which is strongly associated with many diseases. The one-rep lifters did not gain muscle size.
10
The article says the muscle size difference was negligible. The one rep lifters did increase muscle mass.
4
There were no "one-rep" lifters, there were one *set* lifters, *per exercise.*
There is enough to criticize in how this study is reported here without piling on confusion from careless reading.
11
Article says strength and endurance were roughly the same. Muscle mass (size) only increased for those who did 5 sets.
3
Good to see this confirmed. I am 50 and for a while now have been doing push-ups at home a few times a week, one set, as much as I can, and the results are apparent (after gradually increasing, I now usually max out at 65-70, sometimes a few more). Takes about 1 minute. This plus a 2 mile run once in a while in addition to walking a lot (city, no car) and some recreational soccer and I feel I am in great shape without ever hitting a gym.
14
@tmann202
You do 70 pushups in a minute? Are you sure your form is correct? That is, back straight, chest coming down within 2" of the ground before going up to a full arm extension. At least that's the "military style" I learned for maximum benefit. (And, no, I cannot do pushups a second apiece.)
4
@Ron A
It’s certainly possible to do 60-70 correct pushups in “about a minute.” Keep practicing.
@E
Near impossible. I was in an exercise contest a few years back with the top jocks in the area and no one-with good form- could did this. One guy fudged his way to about 65 in the 2 minutes allowed because he didn't fully extend his arms coming up.
No surprise here. I have been doing a nine minute workout, one set, six different exercises, each to failure (or nearly so) for the last three years before I head off to the bus. At 61, I’m stronger than I was ten, maybe fifteen years ago. And, at least in the winter, that nine minutes makes the wait for the bus in freezing weather more tolerable.
17
The caveat is that hypertrophy is the goal of most recreational lifters while strength is a side benefit. The big chest, arms, legs and back come from hypertrophy only. The people looking for strength can only have short workouts by definition.
10
@DENOTE MORDANT
That's quite a generalization: I would say that most women I know are highly interested in building strength. For a long time in the past women even avoided weight training because they did not want to look bulky.
In other words, a lot of us ( men too) use weights to improve strength and endurance that will carry over into other areas of our lives; we aren't recreational lifters.
4
@DENOTE MORDANT Actually, this is good news for endurance athletes who would rather spend more time on their sport than lifting. They know weight training is good for them but...they enjoy their sport more. If the results of this study hold, they can spend minimal time in the gym and more time on their sport.
They are looking for strength to help them in their sport, not bulk.
1
@cheryl
Unless you are competing, you are a recreational lifter.
Do one set to failure (without warmup) - good recipe for injury, especially for older adults. Suggestion: Do three sets building up to the last with failure.
76
@Bjh Been doing a variant of this for 6 years with no injuries: Body by Science. About a I have run into trouble using heavy weights with more traditional tempo. Usually 60 - 90 sec time under tension.
@Bjh Or spend 6-8 minutes on the elliptical machine. If you have proper form, one should go to failure with every set.
@Bjh I have to disagree. After a year of this training, I know that you don't injure yourself using this methodology.
I'm living proof that 3 years of Pilates worked wonderfully except I was constantly hurting; my shoulders, my neck, and esp. my knees.
Now, I haven't had any of those reoccurring pains since dropping Pilates and starting with Everstrong, who uses this method.
Please read about it before you say it causes injury b/c it doesn't. It literally does not hurt you b/c it is a slow and short but intense constant pressure on muscle. You do NOT injure yourself if you follow your trainer's advice.
Once again, a shortcut to solve a lifestyle problem.
People are sedentary, and watch too much TV. So a quick aside for as little exercise as possible, and it's back to our screens, right?
I was a certified strength trainer for years, and no single weight or set does a variety of things, any more than one pair of shoes does. The rule of thumb is that heavier weights mean fewer reps (3-5), which result in higher muscle recruitment (strength gains) and moderate weights (7-12 reps) mean less muscle recruitment but greater muscle capacity (mass). And the more sets, the greater the strength or fatigue and the greater the gains. Ask a (natural) bodybuilder or athlete if one set got him or her that physique.
Then get off your sofa and talk to a good trainer.
20
@R Mandl It appears that more sets only achieve greater gains in mass. This may be helpful in, say, retarding sarcopenia, but evidently the strength gains are similar regardless of the number of sets. It also says nothing about whether one should be sedentary outside of that time or not - clearly, someone can use the time they've saved lifting weights to take a longer walk.
If the study was well-designed and the results end up reproducible, we should welcome good fitness science.
11
>more sets only achieve greater gains in mass
@Ben S this will be applicable only to novice strength trainees. I.e. the ones that can come in and lift 5 pounds more than they could last session (because they are still very sensitive to training). After your initial period strength training, you require a higher dose of stress to disrupt homeostasis and "get stronger". Thus, you will need more sets. A basic rule of thumb is three sets of five for a strength athlete. After this no longer works on a session-to-session basis, you become an intermediate level lifter, and begin to work on applying stress across multiple sessions to achieve adaptation (say, a week).
My guess is that the men used in this study did have a background in some type of resistance training, but were not late novice or intermediate level strength trainees.
@R Mandl "talk to a good trainer". I'd substitute "coach", but this is the best advice on this entire thread. This article doesn't really know what its talking about.
This is hardly new, though it is great that more people are learning about it. A foundational book on fitness, health, and strength training was published in 2009: "Body by Science" by McGuff & Little. Heck, the subtitle of the book is just what this article touts: "A Research Based Program for Strength Training, Body Building, and Complete Fitness in 12 Minutes a Week". They don't even claim to present anything new in their book, just summarizing the previous five years of peer reviewed literature. That they are excellent writers is a big plus, and they make it easily accessible to the layperson.
Body by Science even tackles the basics, like definitions of fitness, and health. They are countering the incredibly bad advice sloshing around in the fitness industry due to bad incentives, like genetic outliers on the covers of Men's Health magazine, while they sell you supplements inside. Exercise science has a big problem from retread football coaches from million dollar programs thinking they are scientists. Slowly the industry is establishing some rigorous standards.
Don't be fooled by genetic selection. In fact, most exercise experts say all studies should start with genetic testing, because if you do exactly what he did, you still won't get the same results. And be careful about all that "cardio" (doesn't exist) equipment in the gym. Do you want to look like a world champion marathoner, or a world champion sprinter? Didn't think so.
8
why would anyone not want to look like a world champion sprinter? have you seen them? that's what an abundance of muscle and near absence of body fat looks like... what most people in the gym are hoping to accomplish.
5
Some of us wouldn't mind looking like a world class sprinter, marathoner or in between, a middle distance runner. No other athletes other than soccer players can lay claim to superior power to weight ratio.
Elite marathoners generally have very little power, just endurance. At 115 lb at 5’6” there simply isn’t much room for fast twitch muscle. Gymnasts, for one, definitely have a claim to a superior weight to power ratio, probably over most soccer players even. Sprinters are another story, but marathoners and sprinters are on opposite ends of the spectrum.
1
a sample size of 34 men, broken down into 3 groups. and from that we publish a conclusion. I'm not a PhD in statistics but even I know that study and it's conclusion has no basis. go to the gym, do something. it's better than nothing.
8
And the other chicken ran away.
I'm an avid weightlifter and cyclist. Dr. Schoenfeld hasn't taken into account an individual's genetics. Some individuals respond better to strength training than others.
11
Please... no more diet and exercise articles. Every week there’s a new study contradicting the one before it.
13
@Mr. Grieves
To me, even the contradicting stories are of interest. They make me think. They remind me that I should exercise more. And I feel very sad when I see people suffering from all kind of ailments for which exercise is a well-established remedy.
So NYT, thanks for your diet and exercise articles!
46
Indeed. We Americans much prefer blissful ignorance.
9
Worth contemplating.
Now I want to see a similar study conducted with unfit or non-weightlifting men over 65. Have an ambulance standing by.
56
I think the point is "even a small amount of time weight lifting applied correctly is beneficial for an individual". Anything that gets a person in the door of gym to seek help is good! Maybe it could be a start for a person!
8
Great now a bunch of self proclaimed exercise experts, are gonna go full in with their to the max 13 min workouts. Not knowing exactly how the research testing was actually performed.
Which is always where the gap is created between these too brief articles and the actual work done under the parameters of a research project. Duplicate the actual methodology in these tests, and maybe you can get the same results.
Plus, failure, or working at ones max is so subjective its crazy how varied self prescribed workouts can be.
Also missing is how individuals react to strength training. Some people see bigger muscle size gains then others. Some do so quickly then plateau, others go in the opposite direction. All of which is pretty impossible to control for in a test conditions..
I wish new, small studies like this were not reported on so eagerly.
2
@Boregard
Also missed here...this isnt new to those who train regularly. It might be dismissed as anecdotal, but those of us who train regularly, and by that I mean 5, no less then 4 times a week, know we can cut back on our workouts, or go into a "laid back" mode for several weeks, even a month or two, and still stay healthy, while maintaining our fitness.
For me it kicks in late summer, when all my outdoor activities increase, days are still long and enjoying summer takes precedence. I still workout 4-5 times a week, but the time is dramatically shortened, as well as number of exercises. Focusing on big all body movements. Get it done and get out.
My fitness doesnt get hurt, in fact its also where I can make a few gains, and also to heal up, and get in touch with some aches, and/or weakneses that need attention come the fall thru winter...where I train more intensely. Focusing on learning new moves, or fixing issues and breaking bad habits.
Another thing missed in this "new" testing protocol. If you are pursuing an athletic event, or goal...you can't learn new habits with short burst, low numbers in pre-training. You gotta practice moves, and lifts. It doesnt have to be Crossfit level, but it should be where you are repeating the moves in sufficient numbers per workout. And not always to exhaustion, but by leaving something in the tank.
Athletes don't leave it all on the field or gym floor every training session...thats for the event, game day.
5
So the question is, if under these regimens, "normal" and hypertrophied muscle both provided the same strength, then why would the body invest all that extra energy in developing and maintaining larger muscles? Something is missing.
2
@stan continople Possibly larger muscles can operate at peak strength for longer periods. There is more muscle fiber to call upon.
2
Seriously? For vanities sake.
"These results suggest that 'there is a separation between muscular strength and hypertrophy,' or enlargement of the muscle..."
This is somewhat inaccurate. The distinction between muscular strength and size is down to two different *types* of hypertrophy: myofibrillar and sarcoplasmic. Performing low sets with very heavy weight will produce more of the former, while high sets wtih lower weights will result in more of the latter.
But a futher point is that this has been known for ages not just among lifters (with or without the nomenclature), but among exercise physiologists and kinesiologists. It's established science that hardly needed a new study to confirm.
10
You are talking bro science from the 90s. There is probably such a thing as a training modality that favors more sarcoplasmic hypertrophy than myofibrillar, and there is probably no such thing as a modality that is all one or the other, but the notion that this distinction is responsible for the long observed difference in relative strength between power/strength athletes and volume/muscle endurance athletes (like bodybuilders) is total bunk.
a pretty nuanced article on the topic is here. https://www.strongerbyscience.com/sarcoplasmic-vs-myofibrillar-hypertrophy/ and you'll find a meta analysis by the same Dr. Brad Schoenfeld linked at the bottom, from January of this year, showing (among other things) how nonsensical this attribution of causation really is.
1
What is missing in some of these articles is the concept of fitness versus health. Depending upon the exercise method, they are not necessarily correlated. Don't get me wrong - I think Ms. Reynolds does a good job with her reporting. It's just that the subject matter is nuanced and hard to encapsulate.
One would also need to look at metabolic profiles for these regimens over time to discern health effects. That being said, I believe that everyone should be lifting weights or engage in resistance exercise of some sort - bodyweight programs can work as well if designed well. There is evidence that sustaining muscle mass throughout a lifetime helps with health outcomes. However some programs seem to sustain / increase muscle mass with a corresponding negative effect on metabolic parameters.
One needs to measure an modify and keep in mind that recovery from exercise is vitally important.
6
If your not taxing the heart and lungs for at least 45/60 mins. a day 5/6 days a week you are not really receiving true benefits! Walking 3 miles a day unless your 85 doesn't reap any real benefits. Most of these studies are for the average sedentary "Joe" and "Mary" which is never noted. However a light exercise regimen is better then nothing at all.
3
@Max de Winter: Au contraire! My spouse walks to/from work, total of 4 miles/day at a brisk pace. That's 20 miles/week, for about 45 weeks a year = 900 miles/year. This is excellent for maintaining a cardio base, and keeps most blood test results in excellent range.
And if you think walking 900 miles/year has no value for fitness, you're just plain wrong!
8
I've been doing Super Slow weightlifting three times a week for 25 years or more. The technique was developed by Ken Hutchins (part of the original Nautilus team). It's similar to the 1 set routine in this article; i set of each exercise; there's no rest between exercises/sets; takes about the same amount of time for the workout (15 minutes); uses relatively lighter weights; involves just 6 or 7 reps for each set -- no injuries, no muscular pains.
It's efficient, effective, and feels terrific!
24
I am a 63 year old woman and have been using this method for several years. It works. I spend at most a half hour in the gym doing my routine once a week. An added benefit - it gets my heart rate up. I can outperform many of the younger women at my gym at this "advanced age." Functionally, my balance is better, I have more endurance and I'm strong. I did develop my program with a trainer and would advise anyone else considering it to do so. Form and concentration are key - to preventing injuries and getting results.
37
I highly recommend a book, "Body for Life" by Bill Phillips for all beginners. It is inspirational and informative. It explains how lifting, diet and rest work together. It includes sample routines to begin. It has videos to show the correct workouts...
I am now 70 and am very fit. Here is some unsolicited advice.
Walk 3 miles per day--except when it is nice enough to walk and play a round of golf.
Gym 3-4 times per week except in Winter when it is 5-6 times per week.
Many "Trainers" are a joke...so rely on yourself to learn the proper form...avoid injury, have fun, do not socialize too much at the gym... It is a workout, not a coffee break.
If something gives you a sharp pain, stop immediately... Do not attempt to "work through" it.
Learn to breath properly during the exercise.
Maintain a healthy diet, get plenty of rest...Meditate once or twice per day.
Own body weight exercises are wonderful too.
Push ups..Pull ups. Negative Pull ups.
Abdominal training while hanging from a pull up bar.
Oh, Pull up bars are fantastic these days... get a one recommended by "Wirecutter" here at the Times and you will have ample opportunity to improve your fitness level.
Do something every day...move...sedentary lifestyle is to be avoided.
Your memory will improve, your cognitive ability will improve...and you will be able to do the nice athletic things in life for a longer period of time. (Unfortunately, you will be able to rake more leaves longer as well.)
183
@Paul Perkins A great post, Paul Perkins, and one I could have written myself, from using the Body for Life Regimen (for the past 25 years), to your advice. Spot on.
2
@Paul Perkins Best advice ever. Read about it first.
My choice for info was a book:
Body by Science: A Research Based Program for Strength Training, Body building, and Complete Fitness in 12 Minutes a Week Paperback – January 1, 2009
by John R. Little
Amazing book. Some hard medical terminology but this book is key to understanding why you're doing what you're doing.
Highly recommend.
@Paul Perkins Terrific advice. I would add stretching to the routine, with yoga poses and others. My routine starts and finishes with stretches, 30 min of cardio daily and strength training 3-4 times. Going to the gym daily as part of a routine sets the pace for the rest of the day.
1
I've been at this since 1967 with varying levels of success. It wasn't until I got some advice from Pavel that I learned one really important thing.
Never train to failure.
What this study is suggesting will help you lose weight better than any cardio program I have ever done. Heavy and short in duration.
5
Pressed for time? Away from home and gym? Drop and knock out forty pushups.
15
Just as an aside, I was watching one of the old Hercules movies from the late 1950's starring Steve Reeves. He was a Mr. Universe and hence regarded as a "muscle man", but compared to today's competitors, he is a miserable specimen. What happened? Is it just steroids?
2
@stan continople - yes sadly, its just a bunch of different steroids. in conjunction with growth hormone and lastly for real crazies shooting insulin. if you saw a blood test from any of several of the *recently deceased" muscle heads *who died in their 20's* you'd fall over. seen it happen to too many friends.
nobody who's mentally balanced needs that much mass. its impossible to get naturally, costs $$$$$ for food, drugs (like $2K/month or more) and meal prep time and joints/connective tissue hurt all the time. I do crossfit now (I'm 60), lost 20#, can lift almost as much as before and feel like a million. and I ALWAYS lift to failure.
2
Steroids were a lot of it.
1
Looking more like reaching a peak during your workout matters the most. Just read about one-minute high-intensity workout (cardio mostly, I'd guess) and now one-set to failure for force.
With weights, I've been a one-set person, 3X per week, for decades and while not obviously getting beefier or stronger, not heading to sarcopenia either (at 78).
If you want to be on the road to strength, buy enough gear to work out at home. That's the way to ensure perseverance. Or have your office in same building as a gym.
1
This is not a new concept - the Nautilus equipment program of the 1970's pushed the one set, massive weight ideas which worked quite well. The problem that comes from using heavy weights is the vastly increased chance of injury, especially if the athlete has less than perfect form - which is most people. Better and safer is to use lighter weights and more reps event though it can become a boring process.
64
Hernia, anyone?
4
Here's what I know as a woman over sixty. I have done weight training since I was in my mid twenties religiously. I've noticed that as I get older I have decreased the amount of weight I am using during my reps because if I kept the weight the same or even tried to increase it, the workout would become less enjoyable and thus I would be less able to sustain it on a daily basis. I am at the point where I am unable to keep up with the decreasing muscle mass. But to increase weight or spend more time in the gym would make it impossible for me to complete the rest of my daily chores. Sometimes you just have to choose.
76
@Linda N
It is called sarcopenia. A direct approach to increase your strength is to supplement with "creatine monohydrate" pre- and post-workout. Immediately post-workout take a high quality whey protein drink with fresh and organic fruit juice.
You can easily research this approach on the internet, and I suggest you look up the creatine and whey in conjunction with "Michael Colgan."
Colgan writes the science in an easily understood manner, and everything he writes is backed by numerous peer-reviewed references.
Creatine monohydrate is inexpensive and is used by elite athletes...their are zero negative effects in the scientific literature. But you need to carefully research the whey protein, since many brands contain fillers. Personally I use Isagenix; if the whey comes from New Zealand, you increase the possibility of a reputable product.
1
@Svirchev Here is a negative assessment of Isagenix. http://shake-reviews.info/isagenix-isalean-shake-review.php?f=adwords_isagenix_1
A single study of fit MEN is significant? Useful? I don't think so. More and more support for individualized regimes- whether discussing nutrition/diet or ones personal exercise- is currently dominating discussions. One size fits all is cheaper, easier in many ways. What ever happened to publishing solid research e.g. double blinded, large enough sample size- then reproduced?
21
@nlitinme The study is SUGGESTIVE. Worth pursuing with other populations to see if it can generalize. No one said it was "one and done". So many people would be encouraged to know if 1 set was even 75% as good as 2 or 3 or 5 sets!
9
@nlitinme
It's difficult to get significant NIH or other funding for studying the physiology of normal, healthy people regardless of the proposed protocol.
2
@nlitinme
It's useful for those of us who are fit men.
Sorry that researchers have finite funds and resources and can't include anyone and everyone in their sample populations. That doesn't make this researcher of no value.
1
Dad got my first 110 pound set of Champion revolving sleeve in 1964, when I got to college dorms a guy traded for my dumbbells with two 7.5lb bars and 4 10lb disks he couldn't use. I still have those and glory be can use them pretty much as described here. The classic trade of time at the gym for heavy work at home is a) social, and b) that reps build cardio and burn calories (much more slowly than trainers pretend). Bursts of heavy lifting have always been the most economical way to build strength and muscle mass - it said so in Ben Weider's handbook for my weight set in 1964.
5
Are the researchers SURE that their results apply to all? Or were they just lazy in defining the study. Next time qualify the "everyone".
@Marilyn Schiffman Not "anyone" but as the title indicates in "trained men."
Resistance Training Volume Enhances Muscle Hypertrophy but Not Strength in Trained Men
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30153194
1
When I go to the Y I see many motor vehicles in the parking lot and maybe 1 or 2 self powered vehicles.
Weight training is great but aerobics are also necessary even doing super sets, my doctor say's the same.
What if you used you own energy to go places. maybe leaving your car home a few times a week and use a self powered vehicle to shop, go to the gym, anywhere that's feasible to transport yourself.
Think of the time saved, you're working out getting to and from your destinations.
I do it most of the time on my Me-Mover, it feels different than getting out of a car. My heart is beating faster, I feel my body starting to relax from the workout, the calming endorphins are helping me to relax. A completely different experience than sitting at home, then sitting in your car to maybe sit some more when you get where you're going.
5
@Moverme I'm a cyclist and don't even own a car. The best form of exercise is the kind you LIKE doing.
But ... one bad accident could prevent training for weeks or months. I live in the pleasant suburbs of North Jersey - no way would I ride a bike in the city - it's just too dangerous.
7
After about 50 years of weight training, here's my observations.
If you keep adding weight after each set you will improve your strength and muscle size. Faster when you're younger, but the dynamics are the same as we grow older.
As far as working out to failure, without realizing that's exactly what I did on most of my routines many years ago. When I bench pressed, I had a spotter when going for max lifts. I usually did 10 to 12 reps and continued to increase weights as i became stronger.
Now as then I continue to increase weight after each set, albeit with lighter weights. I also do negatives to failure, slow count up and down.
Everyone should do resistance training, no matter what other exercises they do to help slow down sarcopenia, muscle loss as we age.
Besides, it's fun to see the results the more we workout as our bodies respond to exercise at all ages.
22
Two words; dose response.
Group one has 1.75 times the volume of work as group 2 and over 5 times the volume of group 3. Dose response is a well-established principal in physiology. This information is not new, nor is it surprising.
In addition, weightlifting to failure on the first and only set is not an established behavior that can be translated outside this very small sample of young men.
2
Jumping into this type of training can be detrimental or even dangerous. I wouldn't start on a "total muscular exhaustion" routine unless I had a couple of months of gradually working up to it, with 2-3 sessions per week. A little soreness is normal, but after a couple of weeks, you shouldn't be sore.
21
Absolutely! This should have been emphasized in the column.
3
In a bodybuilding competition, the judges don't care how strong you are.
3
This is old news. In the 50's we called them super sets. This article could lead the naive to jump in without a thorough and complete warm up. Big mistake. There is no easy way. Other wise go back to your couch
10
@Ben I have always found warm ups to be worthless, even detrimental. Been at it since 1967.
1
@Michael J. Cartwright: Perhaps YOU have found warm ups (of whatever type, for whatever exercise you do) to be "worthless," but trust me: I studied ballet seriously for 18 years and doing warm ups is essential.
A cold muscle is a muscle that is NOT prepared to fully contract or release, and it will tear - and/or the ligaments/tendons around the joint will be damaged - and/or ALL of the above! That's basic human physiology, even without getting into slow twitch/fast twitch muscle fibers.
BTW, the older you get, the more essential warm ups are.
4
@Michael J. Cartwright. Mike I dont know what you do for exercise but as a serious cyclist for 40++ years I can safely say that body organs "wake up " at different rates. Throwing a load on a muscle before the rest of thebody catches up is just so counter productive and even dangerous. Get all the parts going in the same direction then hit the ball hard.
Once again a study with a sample of men and a headline and a leading sentence "good new for anyone.." to apply to all (or maybe you are addressing men by default.)
80
Just wondering if it works the same for women?
7
@Cheryl
It does. Basic human (or, as I said in another response, not even human, basic mammalian) biology, shared by both sexes
5
Careful on the beach, bullies. Maybe that 97-pound weakling is a strong-man. That's an old guy's perspective, remembering the Charles Atlas ads. Thank you so much for this encouraging report, Gretchen, and all your work!
11
My advice (and I am a novice)?
Get trainer, at least at the outset.
I recently went overboard using The Perfect Push-up (great device when used properly) and tore a muscle in my left shoulder. Needed meds physical therapy. Not fun.
Do this, yes, but do it right.
42
Eight weeks of any new movement/stressor is going to result in improvements, mostly due to neural adaptations. Muscle hypertrophy over a greater period of time is both more interesting and rarely studied.
20
Deads/overheads once a week. Squats/benches once a week. Start each lift at a challenging weight but low enough to allow you to add 5-10-20 pounds per set for five sets. Five reps per set. Add a bit to your starting weight every few weeks or so because getting stronger is key, stasis is lethal. Age is no excuse except that recovery stretch out as you get older.
13
Stu- best advice most clearly given. Starting it tomorrow. Thx
3
@stu
I use the opposite method of "drop sets". That is, when I repeat a set, which isn't often, I will do the 2nd and 3rd sets with progressively less weights. Also, no resting between sets.
Why is stasis lethal? I've been lifting pretty much the same 50-lb barbell for about 10 years. It's still hard. Some days harder than others. The way I see it, if I'm supposedly losing muscle due to biology, if I can still curl the same weight then I'm actually gaining muscle.
11
@Ron A I remember 2 friends, members at a gym I worked out in the early 70's. They also trained with the same weight on every set of their routine each workout session.
I worked out at that gym for a number of years, as time went by most of the members advanced in strength and body size. But those 2 members remained the same, using the same weight and routines.
I suppose they were satisfied with their time at the gym for the camaraderie. But I question the time spent with minimal results, in my opinion.
2
Now pushing 60, my days going to the gym regularly are gone.
I started to do this a few years back simply because I had no time but I wanted to train as hard as I could in as fast as I could and I thought it was "better than nothing".
Looking over my workout times in my health app on my iPhone, workouts are 11 to 13 minutes, and yes, by the end I am spent! My iWatch monitors my pulse and and I see heart rates peak in the 180s
And yes, in my haste, I felt and heard it when I did something to my forearm a while back. I kept going with my workouts with movements that did not aggravate the forearm, giving it time to heal. It has since healed with no issues.
Everyone is different, but I like this and it works for me. its a short enough workout I cant talk my way out of it. :) and was able to string several years of continuous regular exercise using this method, because whatever exercise you choose to do, the MOST important thing to so is to do it regularly and don't stop. I was able to keep doing this.
I will never be in the shape I was in my 20s, but you got to work with what you got. :)
21
l'm in my 60s as well. I started exercise about 6-8 years ago after being sedentary since I was 17. It started off slow, one or two classes a week now I exercise in the morning before work with 100 pushup and 30 burpees and after work at a HIIT class 4 times a week. I lost 35 pounds in 8 months and it stays off. i feel great, eat fairly healthy but still have one or two glasses of wine a week nearly every day. so my spare tire is still there. Don't give up just because you're 60.
3
@SteveRQA Steve, I’m 65 and weigh what I did in college and yet am much stronger and more muscular in appearance. Every “test” I take says I’m physically 52. So if you’re 58, for example, you could physically be 45 with some effort. But you’ve got to beat the fatalistic attitude and prioritize your health above all. Your days of going to the gym regularly are NOT gone. Now, put down the beer, push away from the pizza, get up from the easy chair and go to the gym and challenge yourself. Do it for life! (double entendre intended.)
2
I would also note that not gaining the muscle mass but gaining most of the strength is preferable for nearly everything beside metabolism and looks. The latter which is subjective anyway. Bulky muscles almost always reduce flexibility and are likely to weigh more. Which in absolute terms will put more stress on your joints, tendons, and ligaments.
5
@Still Waiting for a NBA Title Increased muscle mass is good for increased insulin sensitivity and disease prevention. Also, the incredible amount of muscle gain needed to reduce mobility is not going to be achieved by any but the most dedicated and skilled lifters, and probably not without steroids. Reduced mobility is usually the result of improper weight training.
Also, without steroids, the amount of muscle a person will gain is not enough to stress the connective tissues, and that's totally ignoring that your connective tissues become stronger through weight training.
20
@Ryan: I agreed with you right up to the part where you said "your connective tissues become stronger with weight training." Unfortunately, that is not true!
And, as you get older, it's EASIER than ever to damage connective tissue if you don't do your workouts carefully.
If you talk to anyone who's messed up the ACL in their knee, or repeatedly sprained their ankle, or damaged their rotator cuff, you'll find that what I'm saying is true.
I advise people to have a lot of respect for their tendons & ligaments, b/c most people only find out *after* an injury just how important those tissues are to normal movement!
1
You got that right, @L!
Joint pain is a major reason why those of a certain age are weight-lifting shy. When you're trying to avoid surgery on that shoulder or knee, strength training must be approached with caution.
A thoughtful trainer who really listens and understands is above the price of rubies.
I've been doing the one-set-per-exercise/machine for some time now, not because I thought it would give me the same strength as more sets (which I find to be a perplexing discovery), but because my gym has so many things to do. I do save a lot of time by not resting between sets. If a particular muscle is tired, I'll just do something that works another muscle. If I get completely tired, then I'll do some one-leg toe touches or leg kicks until I can do more weights. All in all, my weight routine these days is about 20-30 minutes.
7
This concept is not new. It has been around since the mid 1970s. Anyone interested can look up Arthur Jones and Nautilus training or the training ideas of Mike Mentzer. I used to train in the same gym as Mike and his brother Ray. They did one set per exercise with very heavy weight and were really strong. Caveat is that in order for this to work well the effort has to be really high. Not for for the faint of heart.
32
@Peter Agree this stratagem is not new and that Mentzer promoted it. Because he did, I tried it and found it failed for me: I lost strength (e.g., deadlifting). I definitely was going to failure and worked out regularly, and so gave it a fair shot. I don't know why the study's findings are different from mine.
How'd it work for you?
1
@gherson Good question. I think results are tied to genetics and physiology. I was bodybuilding at the time. I finally realized that I was never going to develop the necessary upper body mass to even be mediocre without some chemical assistance so I moved on. Still lift but mix it up with suspension training and distance cycling. I have seen this work on others.
7
@gherson
"Fit men that regularly lift" is one thing (let's say they are at 60-70% of their genetic potential for maximal strength), powerlifters is entirely another.
You can become stronger "generally" in that first range of sterngth with a single set "almost" to failure, but once you get "really" strong (80-90% of your gentic potential) you need definitely more volume AND more intensity that what a single set of 8-12 reps can give you.
Also, you need to start to pay attention to specific muscles that may lag, which the main lifts do not challenge adequately (lot of controversy here, though), and require additional assistance exercises to bring them up to par...
What works for general fitness may not be what works for continued improvement in powerlifting at a more advanced stage (or weightlifting, for what its worth)
1
The statement indicating “The catch is, that set has to be draining” is not supported by the study, which did not compare sets that completely drained the muscle versus sets that performed at 80% or 50% of that weight. If the study was conducted using weights that resulted in full muscle exhaustion the conclusion needs to include the caveat that that the result has only been shown to be true under that condition. However, writing an article that implies you “have to” do something in exactly the same way the study did it if you want to achieve a specific benefit is misleading.
38
There’s endurance strength (many repetitions, to slight burn) and absolute strength (fewer, to failure). This article (and study?) fails to distinguish between the two. It also fails to speak to the difference between gym strength and real world strength, i.e., transferring what goes on in the gym to other activities. For many of us, that’s half or more of the point.
18
"...[study participants were] 34 fit young men who were not burly weight lifters but did resistance train with some regularity."
That is an important requirement for anyone wanting to try express weight training. Otherwise, the potential for injury would likely be considerable, especially for those over 40 with no prior weight training under their belt.
53
@Emergence - Your assertion is incorrect. I am over 65 and lift to failure progressively heavier weights every second to third day. I never spend more than 20 minutes doing so, and often only 13 minutes. I take no rest between sets.
Combined with a near vegan diet, walking many miles the results are clear. All blood test results are stellar.
Anyone of any age can do this.
5
@D Priest How do people who profess to lifting weights for 20, 30, or more years REALLY lift progressively more weight over time? Are you now doing 800 pound deadlifts? 500 pound bench presses? No? Then I guess you added an ounce each week over 30 years? No - more than likely you plateaued but continue to lift, which is perfectly fine and laudible. Just don't keep saying you're lifting more and more when that stopped likely well before you were 10 years in.
2
@Renee Hoewing- I believe progressively heavier weights refers to the sets. So the second set uses heavier weight than the first, and so on.