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.
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 herefor 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.
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 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 herefor 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 herefor 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.
Resistance Exercise Is Effective At Reducing Body Fat
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.
Resistive Exercise Is Beneficial for Men and Women
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.
You Don’t Have To Go To A Gym To Find Resistance
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.
Recently I published an article on my website titled:
“Strength training can alter the trajectory of ageing”.
After receiving feedback from some of those who regularly visit my website and social media channels, there were some suggestions to provide a summarised or bottom-line version of some of my articles for those that are looking for something that gets straight to the point. So here it is. The short version of the abovementioned article.
The research paper that everyone should read
The year was 1990 and researchers Maria Fiatarone and colleagues published their findings in The Journal of the American Medical Association after undertaking a study to determine the feasibility and the physiological consequences of high-resistance strength training in the frail elderly. These participants were very frail, had an average age over 90, suffered many co-morbidities and were basically not in very good condition. Their muscles were very atrophied, functional capacity was very poor and their physical movements were very slow.
After 8 weeks of progressive resistance training that only utilised one exercise that focused exclusively on the quadricep (thigh) muscles, the results were totally unexpected. Gains in muscle strength were impressive averaging over 170%, with some subjects making extraordinary gains of almost 400%. There was an accompanying increase is muscle size of over 10% as assessed by CT scans. Functional mobility accompanied the improvements in strength and muscle hypertrophy (growth). The time taken to complete the walking test improved substantially from 44 seconds to 29 seconds representing a 48% improvement. Two subjects no longer needed canes to walk at the end of the study and one of three subjects who could not initially rise from a chair without the use of their arms became able to do so. These physiological and functional changes were truly incredible.
What is clear is that the preservation of fat-free mass (muscle) as one ages is a critical factor and directly affects muscle strength in the older person.
Exercise and resistance training specifically, is able to provide the neuromuscular system the appropriate physiological stimulus to reverse and modify a portion of the muscle weakness often and simply put down to old age.
Re-read that sentence because this is huge! So off you go and start lifting.
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.
In “Cycling and bone health” we learnt that road cycling is not good for your bones with research showing that bone mineral density (BMD) is compromised over the long-term. This is not good news for those that want to get their training, exercise or racing fix solely from road cycling. One of the questions that I often get asked is, are there any differences between professional road cyclists and the rest of us and do any differences exist between all other cycling disciplines (track vs. road for example) in relation to skeletal health?
Interestingly, elite professional road cyclists have been shown to suffer the same detrimental changes to certain bones of the skeletal system (6). In 1996 the European Spine Journal published a study by Sabo and colleagues (1) that measured BMD of the lumbar spine in internationally top-ranked high-performance athletes of different disciplines – weight lifters, boxers, and endurance-cyclists. The measurements were carried out by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, and the results compared with the measurements of 21 age-matched male controls. The BMD of the high-performance weight lifters and boxers were significantly greater (range +17% to +24%) than that in the control group. In stark contrast, the BMD of the lumbar spine in all endurance cyclists was significantly lower than that in the controls (range -8% to -10%).
In a study conducted by Lombardi and co-workers (2012) the effects of bone and energy metabolism parameters in professional cyclists during the 2011 Giro d’Italia 3-week stage race were investigated. In this cycling race, bone metabolism was pushed towards resorption. This is the process by which osteoclasts break down bone and release the minerals, resulting in a transfer of calcium from bone fluid to the blood. What is fascinating about these findings is that it supports the evidence of a strict involvement of bone in the regulation of the energy metabolism (2).
Unlike the reduction in BMD seen in road cyclists, mountain bikers or track cyclists are not afflicted with the same issues. To the contrary, both these cycling disciplines demonstrate no evidence of any detrimental osteogenic changes to skeletal health. Mountain bikers were found in a 2002 paper published in Bone journal to have significantly higher BMD than road cyclists (3). McVeigh and colleagues in 2014 had their findings published in the European Journal of Sports Science. What they found was that Mountain biking – owing to the rougher terrain involved – probably imposes a greater osteogenic stimulus compared to road cycling due to the higher amounts of bone strain largely attributable to greater ground surface-induced loads. The greater resorptive activity seen in road cycling suggests inadequate loading to support bone maintenance with bone loading, muscle size and strength of Mountain biking being superior to Road cycling (4).
Track sprint cycling
Wilks and others (2009) compared bone measures of sprint- and distance-trained cyclists competing at World Masters Track Championships, along with sedentary controls in their study published in the journal, Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise. Greater lower leg bone strength was found in the sprinters and to a lesser degree the endurance riders compared with sedentary controls (5).
In conclusion, then, based on a review of the evidence that is available there is now a pressing need for road cyclists at any level or age to supplement their training with some weight-bearing exercise so that bone health is maintained. However, whilst there are many different weight-bearing exercise options available to fulfil these needs I think that the scientific evidence is strongest for the inclusion of adjunctive gym-based, weight training as it seems to provide the most effective stimulus to improve skeletal health. Moreover, there is good evidence to suggest that endurance cycling performance can be improved with the inclusion of this type of exercise too. I will discuss the interesting research supporting this, in particular for the older cyclist, in a future article.
Click “Cycling and bone health” (part 1) to read the first installment of this 2-part discussion of bone health in cyclists.
References
1. SaboD, et al. Bone quality in the lumbar spine in high-performance athletes. European Spine Journal, 1996; 5 (4): 258–263.
2. LombardiG, Lanteri P, Graziani R, Colombini A, Banfi G, et al. (2012) Bone and Energy Metabolism Parameters in Professional Cyclists during the Giro d’Italia 3-Weeks Stage Race. PLoS ONE 7(7): e42077.
3. WarnerSE, et al. Bone mineral density of competitive male mountain and road cyclists. Bone, Jan 2002; 30 (1): 281-286.
4. JoanneA. Mcveigh, Rebecca Meiring, Alessandra Cimato, Lisa K. Micklesfield & Tanja Oosthuyse (2014): Radial bone size and strength indices in male road cyclists, mountain bikers and controls, European Journal of Sport Science, DOI: 10.1080/17461391.2014.933881.
5. WilksDC, et al. Forearm and tibial bone measures of distance- and sprint-trained master cyclists. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, Mar 2009; 41 (3): 566-573.
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) and quality of life or programs to enhance cycling or 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 or FGS 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 FGS. Please leave this site immediately if you, the reader, find any of these conditions not acceptable.
