ArticlePDF Available

Bodyweight Training for Muscular Strength & Endurance

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

The COVID Pandemic and cost of living crisis have created renewed interest in home gymnasiums, and outdoor exercise regimes as the stay-at-home economy continues to grow. Emerging from the revolution in stay-at-home exercise has renewed interest in bodyweight exercise training regimes which have stood the test of time against conventional exercise modalities. This mini-review highlights the benefits of bodyweight exercise to develop muscular strength and endurance and provides recommendations on using bodyweight training to improve muscular strength and endurance.
Mini Review
Volume 10 Issue 2 - October 2022
DOI: 10.19080/JYP.2022.10.555783
J Yoga & Physio
Copyright © All rights are reserved by Luke Del Vecchio
Bodyweight Training for Muscular
Strength & Endurance
Luke Del Vecchio*, Shannon Green and Hays Daewoud
Department of Australian Combat & Exercise, Australia
Submission: September 05, 2022; Published: October 10, 2022
*Corresponding author: Luke Del Vecchio, Department of Australian Combat & Exercise, Australia
J Yoga & Physio 10(2): JYP.MS.ID.555783 (2022) 001
Abstract
The COVID Pandemic and cost of living crisis have created renewed interest in home gymnasiums, and outdoor exercise regimes as the stay-at-
home economy continues to grow. Emerging from the revolution in stay-at-home exercise has renewed interest in bodyweight exercise training
                 
exercise to develop muscular strength and endurance and provides recommendations on using bodyweight training to improve muscular
strength and endurance.
Keywords: Bodyweight training; Strength; Endurance; Calisthenics; Relative strength
Trends in Bodyweight Training
The COVID pandemic has decreased reliance on gym and
        
population has become more motivated to continue exercising at
home [1]. By way of example, surveys conducted since the COVID
pandemic show only 30% of gym members have returned since
covid [2]. Moreover, home exercise gyms, online exercise classes
and outdoor activities such as hiking, climbing, and running are
increasingly popular as consumers look to reduce discretionary
spending due to the increased cost of living pressures [3,4].
Together, these research and survey data suggest that consumers
 
environment.
With a move away from gymnasium-based exercise training,
there has been growing interest in programs performed with little
    
to externally loaded resistance training, bodyweight training
maximizes relative strength while promoting spatial awareness
and gross movement competency [6]. The origins of bodyweight
training can be traced back to the early days of human civilization;
Our ancestors used their bodies to perform various tasks, from
hunting and gathering to farming and building shelter [7]. This
          
served as a form of recreation. As time went on, bodyweight
training became increasingly formalized. The ancient Greeks and
Romans developed elaborate exercise systems using their body
weight. Historical records suggest that bodyweight exercise was
used by the armies of Alexander the Great and the Spartans [7].
In more recent times, bodyweight training has been popularized
by several different people and groups, including the physical
culturists of the early 20th century, the military, and the counter-
         
bodyweight training include improved muscle tone, increased
strength and endurance, improved joint stability, cardiovascular

Benets of Bodyweight Training
Bodyweight exercises are divided into two main categories:
callisthenics and bodyweight strength training. Callisthenics
are exercises that use your body weight and gravity to provide
        
       
balls, wearable resistance garments, resistance bands, or TRX
suspension trainers [6]. Unlike bodyweight training, gymnasium-
based strength training incorporates many open-kinetic chain
exercises [6]. Open kinetic chain (OKC) exercises are exercises
in which the distal extremity is free to move in space, which is
characterized by a rotary stress pattern to the joint [12]. For
example, when doing a biceps curl with a dumbbell, your hand
holding the weight is free to move throughout the range of
motion. This exercise allows for a greater range of motion and

How to cite this article: Luke Del V, Shannon G, Hays D. Bodyweight Training for Muscular Strength & Endurance. J Yoga & Physio. 2022; 10(2): 555783.
DOI: 10.19080/JYP.2022.10.555783
002
Journal of Yoga and Physiotherapy
for hypertrophy training. However, because the distal extremity
is not stabilized, OKC exercises may not be suited for particular
rehabilitation objectives, such as improving balance [13].
In contrast to gymnasium-based exercise, bodyweight
exercises are performed in a closed-kinetic chain (CKC) pattern.
Closed kinetic chain exercises are exercises in which the distal

     
movement. This type of exercise is often used in sports training as
it better simulates the movement patterns in many sports [12,14].
         
strengthening the core and preventing injuries. However, because
the range of motion is more limited, it may not be suitable for
those with existing injuries.
Bodyweight training has many advantages and should not be
        
For instance, bodyweight training may not match the absolute
strength (the ability to move an absolute amount of load) gains
achieved from free-weight or machine training [6,15]. However,
research suggests that adding resistance bands to bodyweight
strengthening exercises such as push-ups can rival the absolute
strength improvements of barbell training [16]. Furthermore, the
load in bodyweight exercises such as push-ups approach 75%
of body weight [17], which for a 100-kilogram individual would
  
to meet established guidelines for the development of strength
[18].
On the other hand, bodyweight training develops relative
strength (the ability to move a load, as a certain percentage of
body weight) and cardiovascular endurance. By way of example,
researchers from McMaster University, Canada, reported

inactive adults after completing an 11-minute bodyweight circuit
training program for six weeks. Other researchers have reported
 
training [8,10]. Taken together, these data suggest bodyweight
       
       
        
progressing to single-limb variations.
Principles of Bodyweight Training
Akin to the conventional strength training guidelines [18],
bodyweight training for enhancing muscular strength should
follow similar principles, with a few important caveats. Firstly, the
assumption that bodyweight exercises are easy must be addressed
to avoid potential injury. Most beginners do not possess the

dip, two common bodyweight exercises for the upper body. Nor
may they in common bodyweight exercises for the legs, such as

trunk 54% of their body weight [19]. This means they will be lifting
approximately 60-70% of their superincumbent body weight each
repetition, which is more than enough to cause excessive muscular
soreness if the starting number of sets and repetitions is too high.
Thus, for heavier individuals, bodyweight exercise becomes more
demanding on the musculoskeletal system.
Secondly, the spinal compressive forces need to be taken into
account. Bodyweight exercises such as push-ups, supine pull-
ups, back raise, and planks position the spine in a perpendicular
position against gravity, which can create tremendous compressive
forces on the spine. These compressive forces can easily exceed
the tissue tolerances of the spine and lead to injury. For example,
the National Institute for Occupational Safety & Health (NIOSH)
recommends spinal compression forces never exceed 3,400
newtons [20]. Repetitive exposure to compression loads above
this level is associated with injury (McGill, 2015). A single-arm
push-up imposes 5,484 newtons of compression [21], whereas
popular core strengthening exercises, such as sit-ups, impose
3,506 newtons of compression on the spine. Collectively, these
     
that certain variations of popular bodyweight exercises, such as
push-ups and sit-ups, can present a real risk of injury to the spine.
Further examples of the compression loads in various bodyweight
exercises can be seen in Table 1.
Finally, the level of muscle activity must be considered if
there is a desire to use bodyweight training to increase strength.
Electromyographic analysis (EMG) determines muscle activity in
different exercises. (Ekstrom) EMG is normalized and expressed
as a maximum voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC). For
        
improvement, MVIC values should be >45%. In contrast, MVC
         
or for improving muscle endurance. Examples of Muscle activity
and MVIC values for different bodyweight exercises can be seen
in Table 1.
Notwithstanding these considerations of excessive loading
and spinal compression penalties, bodyweight training, as an
alternative to conventional, gymnasium-based exercise, can target
        
      
weight training should adhere to the general principles of exercise
program design which includes the following acute training
variables, described by Hayes et al. [30].
a) Choice of exercise: select bodyweight exercises that
utilize the major muscle groups. According to the minimal dose
approach for resistance training [31-33], As little as 2-exercises
per major muscle group can improve strength and functional
ability in younger and older adults [31]. Therefore, the choice
of exercises should be based on training status, goals and time
constraints.
How to cite this article: Luke Del V, Shannon G, Hays D. Bodyweight Training for Muscular Strength & Endurance. J Yoga & Physio. 2022; 10(2): 555783.
DOI: 10.19080/JYP.2022.10.555783
003
Journal of Yoga and Physiotherapy
Table 1: EMG, MVIC and Compression loads in di󰀨erent bodyweight exercises
Variation MVIC % Spinal Compression (N) Muscle Activity
Side plank on knees
RA [22]
EO [22]
ES [22]
Side plank on knees with abduction
Glute Bridge
ES 39% [23]
LM [24]
GMed 28% [23]
GM 25% [23]
Plank on toes
EO 47-76% [23,25] 1600-1800 [26] RA [24,27]
IO 58% [25] EO [24,27]
RA 43% [23] ES [24,27]
Plank on toes with hip extension
GM 106% [28]
GMed 75% [28]
Push-up Plank 1,838 [21] AD [23]
RA [23]
Side plank on toes
EO 69% [23]
2,500 [21]
RA 34% [23]
LM 40-42% [23]
GM 74% [23]
Rotational side plank
EO 60-62% [29]
RA 36-43% [29]
GMed 46-71% [29]
ES 36-46% [29]
LM 14-30% [29]
4-point kneeling with hip extension 2,000 [21]
Bird / dog
LM 36% [23]
3,000 [21]
ES 46% [23]
GMed 42% [23]
GM 56% [23]
Key: MVIC = Maximal Voluntary Isometric Contraction, IES=Erector Spinae, LM = Lumbar Multidus, EO=External Oblique, IO=Internal Oblique,
RA=rectus abdominis, GMed=Gluteus Medius, GM=Gluteus Maximus, HS=Hamstrings, AL; Adductor Longus, LD= Latissimus Dorsi, PM=
Pectoralis Major, AD= Anterior Deltoid, SA=serratus anterior, TB=Triceps Brachii
b) Order of exercise: large muscle groups before small
muscle groups to maximize the expression of strength. The
following program (Table 2) demonstrates how the principle of
exercise order can be applied to bodyweight training.
c) Load: The American College of Sports Medicine
Position Stand on Progression Models in Resistance Training [18]

100% 1RM to maximize muscular strength and 70-100% of 1RM
to maximize hypertrophy. More recent research suggests that
loads (>30% of 1RM) can stimulate improvements in muscular
strength and hypertrophy [34]. For bodyweight training focusing
on strength, a load can be applied by changing the starting position
or adding external objects such as resistance bands. Alternatively,
the load of different bodyweight exercises can be estimated
from known anthropometric data on the weight of varying body
segments [19]. To determine which body segments, contribute
to the load, add the weight of each body segment involved that
moves upward against gravity during the exercise.
How to cite this article: Luke Del V, Shannon G, Hays D. Bodyweight Training for Muscular Strength & Endurance. J Yoga & Physio. 2022; 10(2): 555783.
DOI: 10.19080/JYP.2022.10.555783
004
Journal of Yoga and Physiotherapy
d) Volume (sets x reps x load): The minimal dose
approach should be considered for beginners and time-poor
individuals. According to this theory [31,33], improvements
in muscular performance can be achieved from as little as
two sets per exercise, which means the exercise session can be
completed in as little as 15-minutes. On the other hand, making
gradual increases in volume and gradual decreases in intensity
is an effective training method to increase muscular (Table 3)
endurance [35].
e) Rest period between sets Conventional guidelines, such
as those provided by The ACSM [18], recommends 2–3-minute
rest periods between sets, for conventional strength training
      
minimal rest between sets or exercises, which has also been shown
to produce modest improvements in strength [36]. Collectively,
bodyweight training focusing on strength development should
use longer rests and, for muscle endurance, minimal or no rest at
between sets or exercises if the program is designed in a circuit
format.
f) Progressive overload Conventional resistance training
guidelines recommend increasing resistance levels by 10% per
week [18]. Bodyweight training programs need to compensate
for the lack of external resistance by adjusting other acute
training variables (sets x reps) and biomechanical factors such as:
increasing the total number of repetitions, adding multiple sets,
completing repetitions for time, speed and tempo manipulations,
varying the base of support, lever manipulation and changing the
starting position such as switching from a base position on the

Table 2: Bodyweight Circuit Complete as a circuit, beginners 1-2 rounds, intermediate 2-3 and advanced 3-5 rounds. Rest 1-2 minutes between
rounds.
Exercise Progressions Regressions Reps Tempo
 Single leg  15-Dec 2:01:02
Lunge Bulgarian Lunge TRX lunge 15-Dec 2:01:02
Supine pull-up Chin up Band-assisted pull-up 15-Dec 2:01:02
Push-up Incline push up Wall or knee push-up 15-Dec 2:01:02
Pike-Push up Handstand push up Pike push up on the bench 15-Dec 2:01:02
Bench Dips Bar dips Bench dip with knees bent 15-Dec 2:01:02
TRX Bicep Curls Single-arm TRX bicep curl Isometric bicep curls 15-Dec 2:01:02
Calve Raises Single leg calve raises Isometric calve raises 15-Dec 2:01:02
Plank Push-up plank Plank on a bench or kneeling 60-seconds
Table 3: Minimal Dose Resistance Training Guidelines [31].
Traditional Resistance Training (RT) Minimal Dose RT
The number of exercises and sets per
muscle group.
2-3 exercises per muscle group <2 exercises per muscle group
2-4 sets per exercise < 2 sets per exercise
Session duration 45 minutes + <15-minutes
Sessions per week 2-3 sessions per week 5-7+ sessions per week
Load 30-70% 1-repetition maximum (1RM) Bodyweight to <30% 1-RM
  
barbells, dumbells, machines Bodyweight, resistance-bands
How to cite this article: Luke Del V, Shannon G, Hays D. Bodyweight Training for Muscular Strength & Endurance. J Yoga & Physio. 2022; 10(2): 555783.
DOI: 10.19080/JYP.2022.10.555783
005
Journal of Yoga and Physiotherapy
Conclusion
Bodyweight training is a versatile mode of exercise that
continues to grow in popularity due to the lasting effects of
the COVID pandemic and cost of living pressures. When safety
considerations such as the percentage of body weight as load
and spinal compression are taken into consideration can produce
favorable outcomes in both strength and endurance. Although
bodyweight training may look simple, proper attention to
       
remains safe and enduring. However, the purpose of this article
  
strength training, as both methods can be complementary and

References
1. -

2. Rizzo N (2021) Only 30.98% of Gym Members Have Returned, Run-
Repeat.com.
3.        
ACSM’S Health & Fitness Journal 26(1): 11-20.
4. Ong AKS, Prasetyo YT, Picazo KL, Salvador KA, Miraja BA, et al. (2021)

pandemic: A conjoint analysis approach for business sustainability.
Sustainability 13(18): 10481.
5.          
ACSM’s Health & Fitness Journal 23(6): 28-35.
6. Harrison JS (2019) Bodyweight training: A return to basics. Strength &
Conditioning Journal 32(2): 52-55.
7. Kountouris M (2019) How ancient Greeks trained for war.
8. Bastian RH, M Tomoliyus (2018) Bodyweight Circuit Training for Bas-
ketball Beginner Athletes’ Aerobic Endurance, 2nd Yogyakarta Inter-
national Seminar on Health, Physical Education, and Sport Science
(YISHPESS 2018) and 1st Conference on Interdisciplinary Approach in
Sports (CoIS 2018), Atlantis Press.
9. Jung WS, YY Kim, HY Park (2019) Circuit training improvements in
Korean women with sarcopenia. Perceptual and Motor Skills 126(5):
828-842.
10. Archila LR (2021) Simple bodyweight training improves cardiorespi-
-
cation of the 5BX approach. Int J Exerc Sci 14(3): 93-100.
11. Ajjimaporn A, C Khemtong, W Widjaja (2017) Effects Of 8 Weeks Modi-

Body Circumference and Resting Metabolic Rate in Sedentary Obese
Woman. Journal of Sports Science and Technology, pp. 109-120.
12. Ellenbecker TS, GJ Davies (2001) Closed kinetic chain exercise: a com-
prehensive guide to multiple joint exercises, Human Kinetics.
13. Kim YS (2019) The Comparative Analysis of Body Muscle Activities in
Plank Exercise with and without Thera-band. Journal of the Korean Ap-
plied Science and Technology 36(3): 758-765.
14. Manske RC (2006) Postsurgical orthopedic sports rehabilitation: knee
& shoulder, Elsevier Health Sciences.
15. Muñoz-López A, R Taiaran B, Sañudo (2021) Resistance Training Meth-
ods: From Theory to Practice, Springer Nature.
16. Calatayud J, Borreani S, Colado JC, Martin F, Tella V, et al. (2015) Bench
press and push-up at comparable levels of muscle activity results in
similar strength gains. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Re-
search 29(1): 246-253.
17. Suprak DN, J Dawes, MD Stephenson (2011) The effect of position on
the percentage of body mass supported during traditional and modi-

18. (2009) American College of Sports Medicine, American College of
Sports Medicine position stand. Progression models in resistance
training for healthy adults. Med sci sports Exerc 41(3): 687-708.
19. Plagenhoef S, FG Evans, T Abdelnour (1983) Anatomical data for ana-

169-178.
20. https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/hhe/reports/pdfs/2003-0146-2976.pdf
21. McGill S (2015) Low back disorders: evidence-based prevention and
rehabilitation, Human Kinetics.
22. Calatayud J (2017) Progression of core stability exercises based on the
extent of muscle activity. American journal of physical medicine & re-
habilitation 96(10): 694-699.
23. Ekstrom RA, RA Donatelli, KC Carp (2007) Electromyographic analysis
of core trunk, hip, and thigh muscles during 9 rehabilitation exercises.
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 37(12): 754-762.
24. Ko M, C Song (2018) Comparison of the effects of different core exer-
cise on muscle activity and thickness in healthy young adults. Physical
therapy rehabilitation science 7(2): 72-77.
25. Evens B, Muscles that Yields More Force in the Plank, Radford Univer-
sity, Virginia, US.
26. Freeman S (2006) Quantifying muscle patterns and spine load during
various forms of the push-up. Med Sci Sports Exercise 38(3): 570-577.
27. Park DJ, SY Park (2019) Which trunk exercise most effectively activates
abdominal muscles? A comparative study of plank and isometric bilat-
eral leg raise exercises. J Back Musculoskeletal Rehabil 32(5): 797-802.
28. Boren K (2011) Electromyographic analysis of gluteus Medius and glu-
teus maximus during rehabilitation exercises. Int J Sports Phys Ther
6(3): 206-223.
29. Youdas JW (2014) Surface electromyographic analysis of core trunk
and hip muscles during selected rehabilitation exercises in the side-
bridge to neutral spine position. Sports Health 6(5): 416-421.
30. Hayes L, G Bickerstaff, J Baker (2013) Acute resistance exercise pro-
-
ing Stud 3(125): 2161.
31. Fyfe JJ, DL Hamilton, RM Daly (2021) Minimal-dose resistance training
for improving muscle mass, strength, and function: a narrative review
of current evidence and practical considerations. Sports Med 52(3):
463-479.
32. Steele J (2021) Long-term time-course of strength adaptation to mini-
mal dose resistance training: Retrospective longitudinal growth mod-
elling of a large cohort through training records.
33. Spiering BA (2021) Maintaining physical performance: the minimal
dose of exercise needed to preserve endurance and strength over time.
J Strength Cond Res 35(5): 1449-1458.
34. Schoenfeld BJ (2021) Loading recommendations for muscle strength,
hypertrophy, and local endurance: a re-examination of the repetition
continuum. Sports (Basel) 9(2): 32.
How to cite this article: Luke Del V, Shannon G, Hays D. Bodyweight Training for Muscular Strength & Endurance. J Yoga & Physio. 2022; 10(2): 555783.
DOI: 10.19080/JYP.2022.10.555783
006
Journal of Yoga and Physiotherapy
35. Rhea MR (2003) A comparison of linear and daily undulating peri-
  -
lar endurance. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 17(1):
82-87.
36. Harber MP (2004) Skeletal muscle and hormonal adaptations to cir-
cuit weight training in untrained men. Scand J Med Sci Sports 14(3):
176-185.
Your next submission with Juniper Publishers
will reach you the below assets
Quality Editorial service
Swift Peer Review
Reprints availability
E-prints Serv ice
Manuscript Podca st for convenient underst anding
Global att ainment for your research
Manuscript accessibility in d ifferent formats
( Pdf, E-pub, Full Text, Audio)
Unceasing customer service
Track the below URL for one-step submission
https://juniperpublishers.com/online-submission.php
This work is licensed under Creative
Commons Attribution 4.0 License
DOI: 10.19080/JYP.2022.10.555782
Article
The purpose of this study is to evaluate and compare the effects of pull-ups, push-ups, and burpees on arm muscle power, strength, and endurance. A total of 40 male untrained students (aged 16-18 years) were randomly divided into four groups: G1 (burpee), G2 (push-up), G3 (pull-up), and G4 (control group). All subjects performed respected exercise for six weeks. The main outcome variables were arm muscle strength, strength, and endurance that were measured at pretest (week 0) and posttest (week 6). All statistical analysis were performed using SPSS 30 for Mac. The burpee group (G1) demonstrated significant improvements in muscular power (p=0.000) and strength (p=0.002). The push-up group showed significant gains in muscular strength (p=0.000) and endurance (p=0.002). The pull-up group demonstrated significant improvements in power, strength, and endurance (p<0.005). Meanwhile, G4 did not show any significant changes in all measured variables. These results underscore the importance of selecting exercises based on specific training objectives and show that bodyweight training, if designed appropriately, can result in meaningful improvements in various aspects of upper arm muscle fitness.
Article
Full-text available
Resistance training (RT) is the only non-pharmacological intervention known to consistently improve, and therefore offset age-related declines in, skeletal muscle mass, strength, and power. RT is also associated with various health benefits that are underappreciated compared with the perceived benefits of aerobic-based exercise. For example, RT participation is associated with reduced all-cause and cancer-related mortality and reduced incidence of cardiovascular disease, hypertension, and symptoms of both anxiety and depression. Despite these benefits, participation in RT remains low, likely due to numerous factors including time constraints, a high-perceived difficulty, and limited access to facilities and equipment. Identification of RT strategies that limit barriers to participation may increase engagement in RT and subsequently improve population health outcomes. Across the lifespan, declines in strength and power occur up to eight times faster than the loss of muscle mass, and are more strongly associated with functional impairments and risks of morbidity and mortality. Strategies to maximise healthspan should therefore arguably focus more on improving or maintaining muscle strength and power than on increasing muscle mass per se. Accumulating evidence suggests that minimal doses of RT, characterised by lower session volumes than in traditional RT guidelines, together with either (1) higher training intensities/loads performed at lower frequencies (i.e. low-volume, high-load RT) or (2) lower training intensities/loads performed at higher frequencies and with minimal-to-no equipment (i.e. resistance ‘exercise snacking’), can improve strength and functional ability in younger and older adults. Such minimal-dose approaches to RT have the potential to minimise various barriers to participation, and may have positive implications for the feasibility and scalability of RT. In addition, brief but frequent minimal-dose RT approaches (i.e. resistance ‘exercise snacking’) may provide additional benefits for interrupting sedentary behaviour patterns associated with increased cardiometabolic risk. Compared to traditional approaches, minimal-dose RT may also limit negative affective responses, such as increased discomfort and lowered enjoyment, both of which are associated with higher training volumes and may negatively influence exercise adherence. A number of practical factors, including the selection of exercises that target major muscle groups and challenge both balance and the stabilising musculature, may influence the effectiveness of minimal-dose RT on outcomes such as improved independence and quality-of-life in older adults. This narrative review aims to summarise the evidence for minimal-dose RT as a strategy for preserving muscle strength and functional ability across the lifespan, and to discuss practical models and considerations for the application of minimal-dose RT approaches.
Article
Full-text available
The COVID-19 pandemic has had a great impact on the fitness centers industry. The purpose of this study is to analyze the preference of gym-goers on fitness centers in the Philippines during the COVID-19 pandemic by utilizing a conjoint analysis approach. One thousand gym-goers voluntarily participated in this study and answered 22 queries created from the orthogonal design. The results indicated that Price was the highest attribute considered (21.59%), followed by Ventilation (17.56%), Service (16.59%), Trainer (14.63%), Payment Method (11.95%), Operating Hours (8.90%), and Login (8.70%). The results also indicated that comfort, security, and fitness center services were the main aspects that gym-goers would consider as their main preference. The study highlighted how gym-goers are sensitive to the price set by the fitness centers. Moreover, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, ventilation and size are considered highly important attributes among gym-goers. Comfort, safety, and security are the main consideration to have sustainable fitness centers during and even after the COVID-19 pandemic. The outcome of this study may benefit fitness centers and increase their business market by considering the preference of customers. Finally, the result of this study can be utilized by fitness centers to promote a generalized fitness center for gym-goers of different generations, statuses, and even socioeconomic status during and even after the COVID-19 pandemic.
Article
Full-text available
Maintaining physical performance: the minimal dose of exercise needed to preserve endurance and strength over time, Spiering, BA, Mujika, I, Sharp, MA, and Foulis, SA. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2020-Nearly every physically active person encounters periods in which the time available for exercise is limited (e.g., personal, family, or business conflicts). During such periods, the goal of physical training may be to simply maintain (rather than improve) physical performance. Similarly, certain special populations may desire to maintain performance for prolonged periods, namely athletes (during the competitive season and off-season) and military personnel (during deployment). The primary purpose of this brief, narrative review is to identify the minimal dose of exercise (i.e., frequency, volume, and intensity) needed to maintain physical performance over time. In general populations, endurance performance can be maintained for up to 15 weeks when training frequency is reduced to as little as 2 sessions per week or when exercise volume is reduced by 33-66% (as low as 13-26 minutes per session), as long as exercise intensity (exercising heart rate) is maintained. Strength and muscle size (at least in younger populations) can be maintained for up to 32 weeks with as little as 1 session of strength training per week and 1 set per exercise, as long as exercise intensity (relative load) is maintained; whereas, in older populations, maintaining muscle size may require up to 2 sessions per week and 2-3 sets per exercise, while maintaining exercise intensity. Insufficient data exists to make specific recommendations for athletes or military personnel. Our primary conclusion is that exercise intensity seems to be the key variable for maintaining physical performance over time, despite relatively large reductions in exercise frequency and volume.
Article
Full-text available
Loading recommendations for resistance training are typically prescribed along what has come to be known as the “repetition continuum”, which proposes that the number of repetitions performed at a given magnitude of load will result in specific adaptations. Specifically, the theory postulates that heavy load training optimizes increases maximal strength, moderate load training optimizes increases muscle hypertrophy, and low-load training optimizes increases local muscular endurance. However, despite the widespread acceptance of this theory, current research fails to support some of its underlying presumptions. Based on the emerging evidence, we propose a new paradigm whereby muscular adaptations can be obtained, and in some cases optimized, across a wide spectrum of loading zones. The nuances and implications of this paradigm are discussed herein.
Article
Full-text available
The COVID-19 pandemic has brought this fast-moving world to a standstill. The impact of this pandemic is massive, and the only strategy to curb the rapid spread of the disease is to follow social distancing. The imposed lockdown, resulting in the closure of business activities, public places, fitness and activity centers, and overall social life, has hampered many aspects of the lives of people including routine fitness activities of fitness freaks, which has resulted in various psychological issues and serious fitness and health concerns. In the present paper, the authors aimed at understanding the unique experiences of fitness freaks during the period of lockdown due to COVID-19. The paper also intended to explore the ways in which alternate exercises and fitness activities at home helped them deal with psychological issues and physical health consequences. Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 22 adults who were regularly working out in the gym before the COVID-19 pandemic but stayed at home during the nationwide lockdown. The analysis revealed that during the initial phase of lockdown, the participants had a negative situational perception and a lack of motivation for fitness exercise. They also showed psychological health concerns and overdependence on social media in spending their free time. However, there was a gradual increase in positive self-perception and motivation to overcome their dependence on gym and fitness equipment and to continue fitness exercises at home. Participants also tended to play music as a tool while working out. The regular fitness workout at home during the lockdown greatly helped them to overcome psychological issues and fitness concerns.
Article
Full-text available
The aims of the first-ever European survey on fitness trends were to i) identify the top 20 trends for Europe based on input from survey respondents, ii) use the most popular trends in the European health and fitness industry to support the fight against inactivity epidemic, and iii) explore demographic relationships among fitness trend survey respondents in Europe. Personal training, high-intensity interval training, body weight training, functional fitness, and small group personal training were identified as the top 5 trends, respectively. Interestingly, health-oriented fitness trends are very attractive demonstrating that 7 out of 20 top trends are associated with exercise for health and special populations. Technology-oriented fitness trends are not yet very popular, whereas boutique fitness studios seem to be an emergent work setting in Europe. The European survey of fitness trends was conducted for the first time aiming to support all involved stakeholders and to recognize the current status of the industry regarding the most popular exercise modes and programs. Moreover, it may assist both practitioners and entrepreneurs to enhance customer engagement and experience through applicable strategies within the health and fitness industry.
Article
Public health guidelines for resistance training emphasize a minimal effective dose intending for individuals to engage in these behaviors long term. However, few studies have adequately examined the longitudinal time-course of strength adaptations to resistance training. Purpose: The aim of this study was to examine the time-course of strength development from minimal-dose resistance training in a large sample through retrospective training records from a private international exercise company. Methods: Data were available for analysis from 14,690 participants (60% female; aged 48 ± 11 years) having undergone minimal-dose resistance training (1x/week, single sets to momentary failure of six exercises) up to 352 weeks (~6.8 years) in length. Linear-log growth models examined strength development over time allowing random intercepts and slopes by participant. Results: All models demonstrated a robust linear-log relationship with the first derivatives (i.e., changes in strength with time) trending asymptotically such that by ~1-2 years strength had practically reached a "plateau." Sex, bodyweight, and age had minimal interaction effects. However, substantial strength gains were apparent; approximately ~30-50% gains over the first year reaching ~50-60% of baseline 6 years later. Conclusion: It is unclear if the "plateau" can be overcome through alternative approaches, or whether over the long-term strength gains differ. Considering this, our results support public health recommendations for minimal-dose resistance training for strength adaptations in adults.
Article
Apply It! From this article, the reader should understand the following concepts: • Explain the differences between a fad and a trend • Use the worldwide fitness trends in the commercial, corporate, clinical (including medical fitness), and community health fitness industry to further promote physical activity • Study expert opinions about identified fitness trends for 2021
Article
Bodyweight training (BWT) is a style of interval exercise based on classic principles of physical education. Limited research, however, has examined the efficacy of BWT on cardiorespiratory fitness. This is especially true for simple BWT protocols that do not require extraordinarily high levels of effort. We examined the effect of a BWT protocol, modelled after the original "Five Basic Exercises" (5BX) plan, on peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak) in healthy, inactive adults (20 ± 1 y; body mass index: 20 ± 5 kg/m2; mean ± SD). Participants were randomized to a training group that performed 18 sessions over six weeks (n=9), or a non-training control group (n = 10). The 11-minute session involved five exercises (burpees, high knees, split squat jumps, high knees, squat jumps), each performed for 60-seconds at a self-selected "challenging" pace, interspersed with active recovery periods (walking). Mean intensity during training was 82 ± 5% of maximal heart rate, rating of perceived exertion was 14 ± 3 out of 20, and compliance was 100%. ANCOVA revealed a significant difference between groups after the intervention, such that VO2peak was higher in the training group compared to control (34.2 ± 6.4 vs 30.3 ± 11.1 ml/kg/min; p = 0.03). Peak power output during the VO2peak test was also higher after training compared to control (211 ± 43 vs 191 ±50 W, p = 0.004). There were no changes in leg muscular endurance, handgrip strength or vertical jump height in either group. We conclude that simple BWT- requiring minimal time commitment and no specialized equipment - can enhance cardiorespiratory fitness in inactive adults. These findings have relevance for individuals seeking practical, time-efficient approaches to exercise.