Tag Archives: Fat loss

Endurance, Exercise Physiology, Strength, Weight/Fat loss, Mobility

12 Reasons Why Older Adults Need To Do Resistance Training Exercise: Part 2

March 15, 2024 seanwilso 4 Comments

Share this:

In part 1 of “12 reasons why older adults need to do resistance training exercise” I outlined some of the benefits to health that have been shown to occur as a result of partaking in regular resistance training exercise. The scientific evidence supporting the inclusion of resistance training as part of a healthy lifestyle is now indisputable. Whilst improvement of health is an obvious goal of many older athletes, it is the enhancement of sports performance that drives many in a quest to remain competitive, both against fellow competitors, but also – somewhat egocentrically – against their younger self. Even if you aren’t an elite masters athlete these benefits as outlined below can be truly life-changing.

Resistance training exercise remains an integral component of programs of most elite sportspeople. Increased maximal strength and power developed through the application of progressive resistance training has been shown to improve performance above and beyond that achieved by limiting training to sports specific training. This is now recognised by sports scientists, exercise physiologists, strength & conditioning experts and coaches.

strength training for over 60 female — Resistance Training Improves Older Athletes Performance (Picture: Pixabay)

Of particular note for older athletes is that the performance benefits may be even greater than that of younger elite athletes. One of the hallmark changes to occur with age is the progressive loss of strength with significant atrophy or loss of skeletal muscle playing a significant role. This fundamental biological change that occurs with ageing manifests in a gradual deterioration of physical function and performance.

However, there is compelling evidence that the trajectory of this decline is modifiable and can be attenuated by lifestyle factors. The data to support regular exercise as a key factor in preserving skeletal muscle and physical function is overwhelming. Resistance training is one of the very best methods currently available for older adults and masters athletes to stimulate the physiological processes required to increase myofibrillar protein synthesis rates, skeletal muscle hypertrophy and muscular strength. These skeletal muscle adaptations lie at the core of why this type of exercise improves the functional performance of older adults and athletic performance of masters athletes.

The following 6 compelling reasons explain why resistance exercise should be included in all training programs of older adults where enhanced performance – for activities of daily living or sporting – are desired.

Enhance skeletal health. Stronger bones can handle greater training loads and transfer muscular forces more effectively and efficiently. Bone mineral density (BMD) decreases as we age however this can be slowed by regular physical activity and appropriate nutrition. Risk of musculoskeletal injury is increased when bone strength is decreased with age, especially during falls that can cause catastrophic consequences for some.

Resistance training has been shown to be quite a potent stimulus for improving bone mineral density. Some evidence suggests that plyometric-type or jumping activities also provide an excellent training method to stimulate significant and positive bone adaptation which yields increased BMD and therefore stronger bones.

Masters cyclists as a group are unfortunately at an elevated risk of reduced BMD (weaker bones) due to the non-weight bearing nature of cycling. It is strongly recommended that all masters cyclists – in fact, all cyclists – should perform adjunctive resistance exercise in their training program (see links 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5).

Maintain or increase lean body mass (skeletal muscle). Remember muscle is critical to both speed and endurance performance. From age 50 onwards muscle loss accelerates but there is a substantial amount of evidence that this is exacerbated by increased sedentarism (inactivity). Resistance training attenuates muscle mass loss.

Ageing is accompanied by reduced muscle mass and this has been mainly attributed to type II muscle fibre atrophy or reduction in size. It is unlikely that there is substantial muscle fibre loss however this remains to be elucidated. In older adults that have demonstrated substantial lean body mass loss and type II muscle fibre atrophy, prolonged resistance training has demonstrated significant increased muscle mass and this was shown to occur exclusively in type II muscle fibres. Nonetheless, some research has shown both type I and type II muscle fibre hypertrophy so more data is required to ascertain whether such things as age, gender, training status and training program parameters, affect muscle fibre changes and responsiveness to resistance training exercise (see links 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6).

Increased muscular strength, power and speed. Research investigating the effects of progressive resistance training programs demonstrate that muscle strength, power and speed improve, and in many case, quite impressively. In fact, even in nonagenarians, skeletal muscle strength and functional mobility assessed by a gait velocity test improved dramatically (>170% and 48% increase, respectively) after only 8 weeks of resistance training.

As mentioned above, the significant atrophy that occurs with age in fast-twitch type II muscle fibres, directly impacts performance of activities that require speed. Resistance training can reverse some of this decline, restore some of the lost contractile protein of these critical muscle fibres, increase maximum skeletal muscle strength and therefore elicit substantial improvements in movement speed of various specific sporting skills.

Older athletes that are avoiding or not adjusting their program to allow a little time to perform some resistance training exercise are missing out on some incredible benefits (see links 1, 2, 3, 4, 5).

Lose body fat and get leaner. As outlined above, skeletal muscle mass decreases significantly from age 50 with concomitant decreases in resting metabolic rate (RMR). RMR is the largest component of total daily energy expenditure (TDEE) accounting for 60-80%. Whilst reductions in muscle mass account for a significant proportion of the accommodating changes in RMR, decreasing organ mass and decreases to specific metabolic rates of individual tissues also contribute to the decrease in RMR.

These age-related changes in RMR reduce TDEE. This may contribute to increased adiposity as we grow older given that energy intake to maintain body mass decreases proportionally to the degree of reduction in RMR and TDEE. In other words, if dietary habits and energy intake remains constant over time but RMR and TDEE decrease subsequent to the loss of skeletal muscle, positive energy balance may ensue and fat mass may therefore naturally increase.

Resistance training is well known for stimulating muscle hypertrophy or increasing skeletal muscle mass and has been shown to elicit reductions in fat mass in obesity during ad libitum diets. In contrast, aerobic exercise-induced weight loss consistently leads to reductions in lean body mass and RMR which may make the propensity of rebound fat gain more likely.

Inclusion of resistance training exercise in programs of older athletes or non-athletes doesn’t guarantee that there will be body fat loss (nutrition and diet obviously play a key role) but it certainly makes weight management easier and supports weight loss efforts if modifying the diet in an attempt to get leaner. Much of the research that has investigated the utility of resistance training in older adults demonstrates that it is a very effective fat loss strategy when performed with other lifestyle-based interventions aimed at improving physical function and body composition (see links 1, 2, 3, 4, 5).

Improves endurance. Resistance training that is designed to increase muscle strength and power has been shown to improve endurance performance. More evidence exists to support such exercise in younger adult athletes as there has been limited research exclusively focused on older athletes.

Nonetheless, the research completed to date is strongly suggestive that resistance training enhances endurance in older athletes and non-athletes. A study conducted in 2010 demonstrated that strength training consisting of 10 sets of 10 repetitions of 1RM load, 3 minutes rest between each set, 3 times/week, increased both knee extensor maximal voluntary contraction torque and cycling efficiency. It is reasonable to postulate that had they utilised a program that incorporated more compound, complex, multi-jointed exercises such as squats and deadlifts – such that all major lower body muscle groups were strengthened – significantly greater cycling economical benefit would have been elicited.

When masters endurance runners were studied after following a resistance training program designed to increase maximal strength (4 sets of 3-4 repetitions at 85-90% of 1RM, two times per week), a significant improvement in running economy at marathon pace (6.1%) and dynamic leg strength (16.3%) was achieved.

It is proposed that the following training adaptations may facilitate endurance performance improvement:

the delayed use of the fast-twitch type II muscle fibers;
enhanced neuromuscular efficiency;
increased proportion of more fatigue-resistant fast-twitch type IIa fibres;
improved musculo-tendinous stiffness (see links 1, 2, 3).

Reduce injury risk. Regularly performed resistance exercise can minimize the musculoskeletal alterations that occur during ageing. It may also contribute to the health and well-being of the older population.

There is strong evidence that suggests such exercise can prevent and control the development of several chronic musculoskeletal diseases. Improvement of physical fitness, function, and independence in older people, plus successful management of musculoskeletal disorders, results in dramatic improvements in quality of life.

Stronger muscles, bones, connective tissue, ligaments and tendons mean our limbs and joints are more able to handle the rigours of training, competing and activities of daily living (see links 1, 2, 3, 4, 5).

In conclusion, based on the 12 reasons that I have explored which demonstrate profound benefits to both the health, functional and sporting performance of older athletes and non-athletes, resistance training is a must-do and should be a pivotal component of any exercise program.

To read “12 reasons why older adults need to do resistance training exercise: part 1” that explores the health-related benefits in older adults see here.

For local Townsville residents interested in FitGreyStrong’s Exercise Physiology services or exercise programs designed to achieve the mentioned benefits or to enhance athletic performance, contact FitGreyStrong@outlook.com or phone 0499 846 955 for a confidential discussion.

For other Australian residents or oversees readers interested in our services, please see here.

Disclaimer: All contents of the FitGreyStrong website/blog are provided for information and education purposes only. Those interested in making changes to their exercise, lifestyle, dietary, supplement or medication regimens should consult a relevantly qualified and competent health care professional. Those who decide to apply or implement any of the information, advice, and/or recommendations on this website do so knowingly and at their own risk. The owner and any contributors to this site accept no responsibility or liability whatsoever for any harm caused, real or imagined, from the use or distribution of information found at FitGreyStrong. Please leave this site immediately if you, the reader, find any of these conditions not acceptable.

© FitGreyStrong

Share this:

Weight/Fat loss, Exercise Physiology, Nutrition

Regular Exercise Doesn’t Promote Weight Loss: Fact or Fiction?

June 28, 2022 seanwilso 3 Comments

Share this:

Several years ago researchers and authors Malhotra, Noakes & Phinney published an article in the British Journal of Sports Medicine titled:

“It is time to bust the myth of physical inactivity and obesity: you cannot outrun a bad diet” (see here)

This created quite a storm in several fields of scientific research including many fitness and nutrition blogs. It was lambasted by some though as inaccurate and misleading – just Google the title of the article and you’ll understand what I mean. Essentially, their article claimed that regular physical activity does not promote weight loss and that excessive consumption of carbohydrates, in particular, sugar, is the primary cause of the obesity epidemic. Whilst excessive sugar consumption has played an important role in exacerbating the obesity crisis, it would be naive and short-sighted to suggest that this is the be-all and end-all in explaining society’s current predicament.

More recently Julia Belluz and Javier Zarracina published (April 2016) an article at Vox titled:

“Why you shouldn’t exercise to lose weight, explained with 60+ studies” (see here)

This article posits that exercise is unhelpful for weight loss and makes very similar claims to the Malhotra et al. paper. Of course, the real question is, are these claims valid? Could it really be true that weight loss is not facilitated by increasing daily energy expenditure and exercise? I think the answer to these questions are not black or white. My main concern with the articles mentioned above is that they are rather myopic, polarising and do not provide a fair and balanced assessment of the current evidence.

Instead, the evidence published to date demonstrates that ‘our’ increasing waistlines are closely related – but not confined to – the interaction of the following 3 factors. Firstly, the sum total of all physical movement performed whilst awake has substantially decreased over the last 50 years. Secondly, activities of a sedentary nature have dramatically increased. What are you doing right now? Thirdly, total energy intake over the last 50 years has continued to increase over and above total daily energy expenditure requirements. If movement levels are low and energy intake high – irrespective of where the excess is derived from – body weight, body fat and BMI will naturally increase. But does increasing physical activity levels via a formalised exercise program and/or non-exercise based physical activities (e.g. leisure time movement, domestic chores/activities) facilitate weight loss by increasing total daily energy expenditure? The answer to this is yes and no.

Today I want to focus on the evidence that was accessible following a brief Google Scholar search that supports exercise as well as other non-exercise increases in daily physical movement as being promoters of weight loss. For anybody not familiar with Google Scholar (https://scholar.google.com.au), it is a search engine by Google that searches for only published, peer-reviewed journal-based research and consequently provides information that is evidence-based rather than ‘opinion-based’ which is largely what would be accessed via Google, Yahoo or any other search engine. So, what did I find?

One of the more interesting pieces of research that directly contradicts the article by Malhotra and co. is that written by Church et al. (2011). They concluded that over the last 50 years in the U.S., daily occupation-related energy expenditure was estimated to have decreased by more than 100 calories per day, and this reduction in energy expenditure could account for a significant portion of the increase in mean U.S. body weights for women and men. What this would suggest is that rather than increased obesity rates being caused exclusively by too many carbs or too much sugar, as argued by the “you can’t outrun a bad diet” article, the current problem has been driven by large reductions in energy expenditure due to changes to occupation-related physical movement. In other words, we have transitioned from jobs that are active and require a lot of physical movement to jobs now that have most of us sitting on our backsides for hours on end.

Work places changes to physical activity — Doing this all day can’t be helpful

Previous reports based on estimated caloric consumption from food production and food disappearance (food waste) estimates have concluded that increased caloric consumption could account for most, if not all, of the weight gained at a population level in the U.S. Nonetheless, a recently validated differential equation model was used to identify a conservative lower bound for the amount of food waste in the U.S. (Hall et al. 2009). This analysis determined that prior estimates of national food waste were grossly underestimated; indicating that the national average caloric intake was much lower than previously estimated. As such, these results and those of Church imply that increased caloric intake or for that matter, increased sugar consumption, cannot solely account for the observed trends in national weight gain in the US.

The following is a summary of some of the research that has been published investigating whether obesity is related to physical inactivity and what effect increased physical activity has on obesity risk and management.

1. Banks et al. (2010) reported that: “Obesity increases with increasing screen-time, independent of purposeful physical activity.”

2. Goodpaster et al. (2010) found that: “Among patients with severe obesity, a lifestyle intervention involving diet combined with initial or delayed initiation of physical activity resulted in clinically significant weight loss and favourable changes in cardiometabolic risk factors.” In the group where physical activity was delayed, the addition of such physical activity promoted greater reductions in waist circumference and hepatic fat content.

3. Banks et al. (2011) showed that: “Domestic activities and sedentary behaviours are important in relation to obesity in Thailand, independent of exercise-related physical activity. In this setting, programs to prevent and treat obesity through increasing general physical activity need to consider overall energy expenditure and address a wide range of low-intensity high-volume activities in order to be effective.”

4. Villareal et al. (2011) demonstrated that: “…in obese older adults a combination of weight loss and exercise provides greater improvement in physical function than either intervention alone.”

5. McGuire & Ross (2012) reported that: “…light physical activity, incidental physical activity and sedentary behaviour were not associated with abdominal obesity amongst inactive men and women whereas moderate-to-vigourous physical activity predicted lower visceral adipose tissue.”

6. The study by Fan et al. (2013) was: “…to test if moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) in less than the recommended ≥10-minute bouts related to weight outcomes.” Both higher-intensity short bouts and long bouts of physical activity related to lower BMI and risk of overweight/obesity whereas neither lower-intensity short bouts nor long bouts related to BMI or risk of overweight/obesity. They concluded that: “The current ≥10-minute MVPA bouts guideline was based on health benefits other than weight outcomes. Our findings showed that for weight gain prevention, accumulated higher-intensity PA bouts of <10 minutes are highly beneficial, supporting the public health promotion message that ‘every minute counts’.”

7. Cleland et al. (2014) found that: “High sitting and low activity increased obesity odds among adults. Irrespective of sitting, men with low step counts had increased odds of obesity. The findings highlight the importance of engaging in physical activity and limiting sitting.”

8. Jakicic et al. (2014) concluded that moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA > 10) of 200-300 min per week, coupled with increased amounts of low-intensity physical activity (LPA), are associated with improved long-term weight loss. Interventions should promote engagement in these amounts and types of physical activity.

9. Murabito et al. (2015) discovered that moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) as measured by accelerometry was associated with less visceral adipose tissue (VAT) and subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT) and better fat quality as assessed by multi-detector computed tomography. With increasing MVPA, there was a concomitant decrease in VAT. Higher levels of MVPA were associated with higher SAT fat quality, even after adjustment for SAT volume. They concluded that:

“MVPA was associated with less VAT and SAT and better fat quality.”

10. Mekary et al (2015) reported that: “….over 12 years long-term weight training is associated with less waist circumference increase, whilst moderate-to-vigorous aerobic activity was associated with less body weight gain in healthy men.”

11. Hume et al. (2016) concluded that: “….counter to the energy surfeit model of obesity, results suggest that increasing energy expenditure may be more effective for reducing body fat than caloric restriction, which is currently the treatment of choice for obesity.”

12. Myers et al. (2016) suggests that there exists clear associations among objective measures of physical activity, sedentary behaviour, energy expenditure, adiposity and appetite control. They produced data that indicates strong links between physical inactivity and obesity with this relationship likely to be bidirectional.

13. Wu et al. (2017) tested 12-weeks of low- and high-intensity exercise training in Mexican-American and Korean premenopausal overweight/obese women. Results showed that such exercise reduced body mass index, body fat percentage, fat mass and visceral adipose tissue with concurrent increases in lean mass.

14. Quist et al. (2018) examined the effects of 6-months of active commuting and leisure-time exercise on fat loss in women and men who were overweight or obese. Clinically meaningful fat loss of over 4 kilograms was elicited. Vigorous intensity exercise was shown to be more effective in reducing body fat versus moderate intensity exercise.

15. Stoner et al. (2019) concluded that the findings of their meta-regression “lend support to the use of exercise prescription for promoting weight loss and improving health outcomes in adolescents with overweight/obesity.”

16. Zhang et al. (2020) found that 12-weeks of intense exercise (without concurrent nutritional intervention, i.e. ‘put on a diet’) significantly improved cardiometabolic parameters (i.e. fasting blood glucose) and decreased weight, total percent body fat, whole-body fat mass, android, gynoid, and trunk fat mass, abdominal subcutaneous fat and abdominal visceral fat. Reductions of over 15 cm² of abdominal visceral fat were achieved in just 3 months!

17. Berge et al. (2021) produced clinically significant weight loss in people with severe obesity despite the study having no specific focus on body weight reduction. The group that performed moderate‐intensity continuous training combined with high‐intensity interval training lost an average of 5 kilograms in 24-weeks.

Weight training, older adults and quality of life — Staying strong as we age is critical to health

What does this research tell us?

Quite a lot I would say. Of particular note is that this only represents a very small sample of the evidence that directly counters the claim that widespread societal levels of physical inactivity have little to do with burgeoning obesity rates. What is more, it crystallizes just how contentious Malhotra, Noakes & Phinney’s editorial was. Exclusively assigning blame for the obesity epidemic to the excessive intake of sugar is not supported, I believe, by the current evidence. The dramatic reductions in the sum total of all physical activity accumulated during the day appears to account for a substantial amount of the increased weight seen in recent decades.

Firstly, there is a substantial amount of research which demonstrates that sedentary behaviours, sitting time and low physical activity levels manifestly increase one’s risk of becoming overweight or obese. Secondly, moderate-to-vigourous physical activity compared to light physical activity has been shown to be associated with less visceral and subcutaneous adipose tissue, impacts positive effects on fat quality, is related to lower BMI, lowers risk of overweight/obesity, prevents weight gain following weight loss, promotes greater reductions in waist circumference and produces favourable changes in cardio-metabolic risk factors.

So to conclude, my Google Scholar search unveiled that there is a large body of evidence that demonstrates that there may be no myth to bust regarding obesity and physical inactivity or foundation to suggesting that physical activity plays no role toward promoting weight loss. Others have been critical of this line of thinking too, in particular Dr Steven Blair, so I would suggest that if you wanted to read further on this here would be a good place to start.

My next article will explore the evidence that exercise does not assist weight loss in all exercisers due to various compensatory mechanisms (see here). Until then, stay active, keep moving and don’t forget to include some resistance exercise in your week.

For local Townsville residents interested in FitGreyStrong’s Exercise Physiology services or exercise programs designed to improve health, physical function and quality of life or to enhance athletic performance, contact FitGreyStrong@outlook.com or phone 0499 846 955 for a confidential discussion.

For other Australian residents or oversees readers interested in our services, please see here.

Disclaimer: All contents of the FitGreyStrong website/blog are provided for information and education purposes only. Those interested in making changes to their exercise, lifestyle, dietary, supplement or medication regimens should consult a relevantly qualified and competent health care professional. Those who decide to apply or implement any of the information, advice, and/or recommendations on this website do so knowingly and at their own risk. The owner and any contributors to this site accept no responsibility or liability whatsoever for any harm caused, real or imagined, from the use or distribution of information found at FitGreyStrong. Please leave this site immediately if you, the reader, find any of these conditions not acceptable.

© FitGreyStrong

Share this:

Strength, Weight/Fat loss, Nutrition, Tidbits

Higher Dietary Protein is More Effective During Energy Deficit And Intense Exercise

August 30, 2019 seanwilso Leave a comment

Share this:

Published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, researchers Dr Thomas Longland and co. showed that during marked energy deficit a diet higher in protein was more effective in promoting increases in lean body mass (muscle) and losses of fat mass when combined with a high volume of resistance training (weights) and anaerobic exercise (sprints).

Protein requirements are increased during intense exercise training

When attempting to decrease body fat through intense exercise and an energy deficit diet, ensure you consume high protein foods (i.e eggs, fish, meat, WPC etc) regularly across the day to maintain a steady supply of amino acids to help facilitate muscle recovery and adaptation. This study provides further confirmation of the importance of adequate protein to support muscle protein synthesis.

This is particularly important in older adults with the latest review of the evidence (discussed here) showing that maximising skeletal muscle protein synthesis rates during recovery from resistance training exercise in younger adults being different to older adults. The ingestion of ∼20 g of protein or ∼0.25 g protein/kilogram bodyweight appears to be sufficient. Older adults, on the other hand, demonstrate a blunted post-prandial muscle protein synthetic response. Older adults as opposed to younger adults therefore require higher amounts of protein during recovery from resistance training exercise to optimally stimulate muscle protein synthesis. Intakes even up to ∼40 g appear necessary. Currently, no consensus exists regarding the amount of protein required to maximally stimulate skeletal muscle protein synthesis rates during recovery from resistance training exercise in older adults.

Further comments:

Interestingly, one of the key takeouts of this study is that an energy deficit diet was utilised to elicit fat mass loss. It is very important to acknowledge that the research conducted over the last 8 decades has conclusively demonstrated that weight or fat loss will only occur if this fundamental physiological requirement is met. For an extensive discussion of this research and what the metabolic-unit based weight loss studies reveal see here.

To lose weight you need to expend more than you eat — No caloric deficit = no fat loss

Therefore, don’t believe the hype. Food quality is a an absolute must and essential to good health. However, weight or fat loss will not be realised no matter how good your diet is unless an energy deficit exists. Increased total physical activity during all waking hours and an energy-deficit diet that is wholesome, natural, minimally-processed and nutrient-dense will provide a significant opportunity for weight loss to be achieved.

Lastly, there are a number of studies and anecdotal evidence that show a significant proportion of exercisers eating an ad libitum diet – possibly as high as 50% – do not achieve the weight loss expected with as much as 15% actually gaining weight. These individuals are often referred to as ‘non–responders‘. Those on the other hand that do achieve weight loss from exercise are referred to as ‘responders‘. The question is, how is this possible and are there any practical solutions? Please see here for more on the compensatory mechanisms that some suffer from that can thwart the success of an exercise program and some of things that can be done to combat this resistance to fat loss.

Reference: Longland, T.M. et al (2016) Higher compared with lower dietary protein during an energy deficit combined with intense exercise promotes greater lean mass gain and fat mass loss: a randomized trial. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (link to reference see here)

For local Townsville residents interested in FitGreyStrong’s Exercise Physiology services or exercise programs designed to improve muscular strength, physical function (how you move around during the day), bring about successful weight loss and change quality of life or programs to enhance athletic performance, contact FitGreyStrong@outlook.com or phone 0499 846 955 for a confidential discussion.

For other Australian residents or oversees readers interested in our services, please see here.

Disclaimer: All contents of the FitGreyStrong website/blog are provided for information and education purposes only. Those interested in making changes to their exercise, lifestyle, dietary, supplement or medication regimens should consult a relevantly qualified and competent health care professional. Those who decide to apply or implement any of the information, advice, and/or recommendations on this website do so knowingly and at their own risk. The owner and any contributors to this site accept no responsibility or liability whatsoever for any harm caused, real or imagined, from the use or distribution of information found at FitGreyStrong. Please leave this site immediately if you, the reader, find any of these conditions not acceptable.

Share this:

Weight/Fat loss, Strength

Is Resistance Training Better Than Aerobic Exercise For Improving Body Composition?

June 6, 2019 seanwilso 1 Comment

Share this:

It is often assumed that the best type of exercise – for treating obesity and therefore reducing current widespread levels of societal adiposity – is to preferentially increase aerobic or cardiorespiratory physical activity rather than resistance exercise or training. This assumption is based on the premise that aerobic-based exercise substantially increases total daily energy expenditure (TDEE) compared to the energy cost of resistance training. The argument goes that for the same amount of time invested (aerobic vs resistance exercise), significantly greater energy expenditure will occur in the former.

In fact, a good solid hour of ‘cardio’ can yield a net caloric expenditure of over 500 kcal. This of course varies depending on things like body mass, fitness level, the type of cardio exercise performed, exercise intensity and exercise efficiency. Nonetheless, it makes sense that an increase in TDEE would make it essentially easier to create an energy deficit which would thereby translate into improved body composition and decreased fat mass.

is strength training better than cardio for weight loss — Is Aerobic Exercise The Best For Fat Loss?

However, there are several caveats that must be mentioned which could affect just how successful weight loss and weight loss maintenance is if doing aerobic-only exercise. They include:

Overestimating the energy expenditure of an activity therefore stifling weight loss with erroneous values assigned to a cardio session.
Compensatory adaptation whereby weight loss is curtailed in some individuals with changes to Resting Metabolic Rate (RMR), non-exercise activity thermogenesis (NEAT), fasting appetite, satiety and increased fat consumption (see here for further information). Professor Neil King, currently based at Brisbane’s QUT Faculty of Health in Australia, has been instrumental in bringing these issues to light (see here).
Recent evidence (see here) also suggests that TDEE may be constrained as aerobic activity levels increase. In other words, it has been shown that a plateauing effect on total energy expenditure occurs in those performing high amounts of aerobic-based physical activity. This lends support to the notion that metabolic adaptation constrains energy expenditure with increased physical activity. Theoretically, it is proposed that this would have probably helped facilitate survival during our evolution.
Research demonstrates that nutritional manipulation combined with aerobic exercise so that an energy deficit exists (a prerequisite for fat loss), causes a loss of lean body mass (LBM) with such loss causing decreases to RMR (see Villareal et al). It is very common to see exercisers lose significant amounts of LBM when only aerobic exercise is undertaken while in an energy deficit state.
The loss of LBM is not desirable for 2 key reasons. Firstly, functional physical capacity could be affected in both the short and long term (see Villreal et al). Secondly, resting metabolic rate will be reduced thereby making weight loss more difficult and weight regain more likely (see here for further discussion). Such alterations would make continued fat loss increasingly more difficult as energy intake would have to adjust to allow for the decrease in TDEE that would occur concomitantly with decreased LBM.
Some research has shown that appetite is suppressed more so with resistance versus aerobic exercise. Appetite attenuation would help facilitate the likelihood of achieving sustainable weight loss.

Recently Clemens Drenowatz from the Department of Exercise Science, University of South Carolina, headed up a study to examine the effect of different exercise types on measures of adiposity across different fat categories i.e. healthy, overfat and obese.

The term overfat was probably used instead of overweight so that a distinction could be made between high adiposity, low LBM versus low adiposity, high LBM. By that I mean, measuring body weight alone does not discern the proportionate breakdown of fat mass and lean body mass. As an example, you could have 2 men, same height, same weight, but with totally different body compositions in terms of percentage body fat. Increased chances of premature death and health morbidism are correlated not to LBM but to increasingly high levels of adipose tissue, in particular, visceral adiposity (internal fat rather than subcutaneous fat).

The key difference noted for this study was that the researchers did not prescribe an exercise program but rather allowed those involved in the study to self-select what activities to partake in and then assessed what effect those choices had on subsequent measures of body composition.

Three-hundred and forty-eight young adults (n=348) provided valid data over a 12 month period. Body composition, fat mass (FM) and lean mass (LM) were measured via a procedure known as dual x-ray absorptiometry every 3 months. Following this, percent body fat was calculated and then used to distinguish normal-fat, overfat and obese. Specifically, percent body fat ranges were less than 20% and 33% for normal fat, 20%-25% and 33%-39% for overfat, and equal to greater than 33% and 39% for obese in men and women, respectively.

Every 3 months participants reported engagement in aerobic exercise, resistance exercise and other forms of exercise such as tennis or football. Time per week spent engaged in endurance exercise, resistance exercise and other exercise was calculated. TDEE, RMR, physical activity level, and energy intake were also ascertained.

The majority of participants (93%) reported some exercise in the observation period. Surprisingly, differences existed as to what type of exercise showed the greatest benefit – for those either classified as normal-fat, overfat and obese – on reducing fat mass, increasing lean body mass and improving overall body composition.

For normal-fat participants, any type of exercise positively affected lean body mass; however fat mass was unaffected by any type of exercise. BMI and percentage body fat in normal-fat participants held steady. It was not an explicit aim of the study to bring about weight or fat reduction so this demonstrates that in those that are relatively lean, homeostasis for fat mass is robust.

Contrastingly, in overfat and obese participants, fat mass was reduced with increasing resistance exercise but not with aerobic exercise. Even adjusting for objectively assessed physical activity did not alter these results thereby suggesting that the real-world effectiveness of resistance exercise is particularly more potent than aerobic exercise to induce a decrease of fat mass in obesity.

The findings of this study have some important implications for exercise program design aimed at achieving body fat loss and reducing adiposity. With reliance on aerobic exercise continuing to dominant most weight/loss programs, we now have a growing body of evidence that is questioning this approach despite the fact that there is a greater ‘per-minute’ energy expenditure associated with aerobic compared to resistive exercise.

As mentioned above there are several factors that may constrain just how effective aerobic exercise is for altering body composition. Resistive but not aerobic exercise has also recently been shown to increase non-exercise physical activity (Hunter et al. 2015). Furthermore, resistive exercise was shown recently in a 12-year cohort study to have the strongest association with less waist circumference increase compared to aerobic exercise (Mekary et al. 2015). Taken together, these novel findings suggest that resistive exercise should always be included with aerobic exercise in those considered overfat or obese if the primary objective is to reduce fat mass.

FitGreyStrong’s recommendation: To optimise the effectiveness of exercise interventions in bringing about positive body compositional changes in those carrying excessive body fat, resistive exercise should be a pivotal component of any exercise program undertaken. Aerobic exercise remains a critically important component of any intervention for improving health and should still be incorporated on a daily basis if possible or for a minimum total period of 150 minutes/week at a moderate intensity. However, it is important to be mindful that a ‘Goldilocks’ or sweet spot may exist for some people whereby over-doing aerobic exercise may be counterproductive in terms of maximising fat loss due to factors that have been outlined above.

Basic weekly recommendations for a older beginners-to-intermediate resistance exercise intervention designed to reduce obesity would look something like this:

Two sessions per week
30-40 minutes in duration not including warm-up
Focus on working all major muscle groups primarily based on compound, multi-jointed non-machine orientated movements.
1-2 work sets
6-30 repetitions. The load is not important, the effort is. All loads in older adults have shown to be effective and produce comparable changes in muscle strength and hypertrophy, muscle endurance, bone density and physical function.
Controlled tempo (3-4 seconds on the eccentric, 0-2 seconds on transition, 1-2 seconds concentric, 1 seconds pause then repeat; if you are not sure what this mean please contact me)
60-180 seconds rest between sets. If stronger or more experienced, try longer rests on high effort sets.
At least 48 hours between sessions for recovery
Consume 40 g whey protein post-exercise to maximise muscle protein synthesis rates (see here for an outline on the research supporting post-exercise protein).

References

Blundell J. et al. (2010) “Appetite control: methodological aspects of the evaluation of foods.” Obe Rev 11(3): 251-270

Broom, D.R. (2008) “Influence of resistance and aerobic exercise on hunger, circulating levels of acylated ghrelin, and peptide YY in healthy males” American Journal of Physiology. 296(1): R29-R35.

Drenowatz, C. et al. (2015) “The prospective association between different types of exercise and body composition” Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise 47(12): 2535-2541.

Hunter, GR. Et al. (2015) “Exercise training and energy expenditure following weight loss” Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise 47(9): 1950-1957

King, N.A. et al (2012) “Exercise, appetite and weight management: understanding the compensatory responses in eating behaviour and how they contribute to variability in exercise-induced weight loss.”British Journal of Sports Medicine 46(5):315-22.

King N.A. et al. (2008) “Individual variability following 12 weeks of supervised exercise: identification and characterization of compensation for exercise-induced weight loss.” International Journal of Obesity. 32: 177-184

King N.A. et al. (2009) “Dual-process action of exercise on appetite control: increase in orexigenic drive but improvement in meal-induced satiety.” Am J Clin Nutr. 90: 921-927

Mekary RA et al. (2015) “Weight training, aerobic physical activities, and long-term waist circumference change in men” Obesity 23(2): 461-476

Melanson, E.L. et al. (2013) “Resistance to exercise-induced weight loss: compensatory behavioural adaptations” Med Sci Sports Exerc.August; 45(8): 1600-1609.

Peterson N.D. et al. (2014) “Dietary Self-Monitoring and Long-Term Success with Weight Management”. Obesity 22, 1962–1967

Villareal D.T. et al. (2011) “Weight Loss, Exercise, or Both and Physical Function in Obese Older Adults.” N Engl J Med 364(13): 1218-1229

For local Townsville residents interested in FitGreyStrong’s Exercise Physiology services or exercise programs designed to improve body composition, reduce body fat, increase fitness and strength or to enhance athletic performance, contact FitGreyStrong@outlook.com or phone 0499 846 955 for a confidential discussion.

For other Australian residents or oversees readers interested in our services, please see here.

Disclaimer: All contents of the FitGreyStrong website/blog are provided for information and education purposes only. Those interested in making changes to their exercise, lifestyle, dietary, supplement or medication regimens should consult a relevantly qualified and competent health care professional. Those who decide to apply or implement any of the information, advice, and/or recommendations on this website do so knowingly and at their own risk. The owner and any contributors to this site accept no responsibility or liability whatsoever for any harm caused, real or imagined, from the use or distribution of information found at FitGreyStrong. Please leave this site immediately if you, the reader, find any of these conditions not acceptable.

© FitGreyStrong

Share this: