Tag Archives: weight loss

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

12 Reasons Why Older Adults Need To Do Resistance Training Exercise: Part 1

3 Comments
Share this:

What are they:

  1. Increases longevity and improves quality of life
  2. Helps manage hypertension and decreases heart disease
  3. Enhances sleep quality and quantity
  4. Prevents/treats type 2 diabetes & decreases inflammation
  5. Prevents cognitive decline & neurodegenerative disease
  6. Improves mental health 
  7. Enhances skeletal health
  8. Maintains or increases lean body mass (muscle)
  9. Increases strength, power, speed and physical function
  10. Reduces body fat and help maintain body fat loss
  11. Improves endurance performance 
  12. Reduces injury risk

Resistance or weight training is a critical component of training programs of most elite athletes irrespective of the sport. The benefits of resistance training – to increase maximal muscle strength and neuromuscular power – has long been recognised by most strength and conditioning experts, coaches and sport scientists as key to sporting performance. Logic would dictate therefore that if elite athletes are doing concurrent training to improve sport specific performance, masters athletes may also reap huge benefits too. There is now compelling evidence to suggest that resistance training can potentially augment athleticism of masters athletes well beyond that achieved by confining training to sports specific training. Furthermore, these significant benefits are not just limited to sprint, speed or power orientated sports but endurance performance may also be enhanced.

However, before I address the athletic performance benefits of resistance training for older athletes and functional enhancement such exercise has in older non-athletes (these will be outlined in part 2), I want to discuss the significant and sometimes life-changing health benefits that have been well documented in research conducted over the last 20 years. There is a great deal of data now to support the use of resistance training to help treat and manage a number of chronic diseases that become more prevalent as we get older. The following outlines 6 key reasons why resistance training exercise should be included in all programs of older athletes and exercise programs of older non-athletes.

strength training for over 50
Resistance Training Reduces The Risk Of Death

Reduce the risk of death. Evidence continues to accumulate to show that skeletal muscle strength is strongly predictive of longevity. Maximum muscle force in men aged 20-80 is independently and inversely associated with all-cause mortality. Over the age of 60 years, all cause and cancer-associated mortality is twice as likely in individuals with low compared to high skeletal muscle strength. Older adults over 15 years who reported twice/weekly strength training had 46% lower odds of all-cause mortality than those who did not. Resistance training when performed regularly is one of the best methods to increase skeletal muscle strength (see links 1, 2, 3, 4). A recent assessment of the research that has been conducted in older adults showed that resistance training substantially improved health-related quality of life. In other words, resistance training and getting stronger has a direct impact on our perception of how meaningful, manageable and comprehensible life is, and as such, significantly greater promotion of this type of activity is warranted (see here).

strength training for over 50
Resistance Training And Cardiovascular Health

Helps manage hypertension and decrease heart disease. High blood pressure can still affect masters athletes and resistance training when performed in conjunction with aerobic or endurance training has been shown to have a positive effect and reduce blood pressure. However, data to support resistance training as a stand alone practice is mixed with some studies suggesting improvement in systolic and diastolic blood pressure versus other research that has shown such exercise can increase arterial stiffness. Evidence tends to point to concurrent exercise (resistance training combined with aerobic exercise) as being the most effective for reducing the risk of heart disease (see links 1, 2, 3, 4).

strength training for over 50
Resistance Training Facilitates Better Sleep

Improves sleep quality and quantity. Problems with sleep are common with advancing years and occur in over half of adults age 65 and older. It has been estimated that insomnia affects about a third of the older population. The evidence to date suggests that poor sleep hygiene directly impacts and worsens many aspects of health including such things as mental health, obesity, heart disease, cognition, memory, executive function, metabolic disturbance and falls to name just a few.

Overall quality of life is thus dramatically reduced. Other factors associated with ageing, such as disease, changes in environment, or concurrent age-related processes also may contribute to problems of sleep. Sleep disturbance and long sleep duration, but not short sleep duration, have been shown to be associated with increases in markers of systemic inflammation. Research has shown that both sleep quality and quantity is improved with increased levels of exercise. Resistance training alone appears to positively impact sleep quality but more data is required to confirm that sleep quantity is equally improved (see links 1, 2, 3).

strength training for over 50
Diabetes Rates Continue To Increase

Prevent/treat type 2 diabetes & decrease inflammation. Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is one of the fastest growing non-communicable diseases worldwide and occurs much more frequently in those that are overweight and obese. However, impaired blood glucose metabolism, one of the hallmarks of T2DM, is an increasingly common problem in those that are not overweight and have relatively normal BMI.  A poor and overindulgent diet – high in things like sugar, trans-fats, processed foods, junk foods and that are low in fish (omega-3 fatty acids), vegetables, fruit, fibre and high quality protein – combined with long-term sedentarism has been postulated as playing a leading causative role. Such a combination causes the development of chronic positive energy balance whereby excess energy disposal and adipose storage triggers a significant oxidative pro-inflammatory response referred to as metabolic inflammation.

In obesity, expanding adipose tissue attracts immune cells creating an inflammatory environment within this fatty acid storage organ. Skeletal muscle is the predominant site of insulin-mediated glucose uptake and insulin resistance is considered the primary defect that is evident years before the development of T2DM. Resistance training has consistently been shown to improve the ability of the skeletal muscles to take up and metabolise blood glucose (sugar) and is therefore an important strategy in managing T2DM. Finally, there is now scientific data to show that disorders that arise and are linked to inflammation (e.g. Insulin resistance, obesity, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, cancer, chronic kidney disease, osteoarthritis, Alzheimer’s disease and many more), can be improved or mitigated with resistance training and exercise (see links 1, 2, 3, 4, 5).

strength training for over 50 female
Resistance Training Enhances Brain Health

Prevent cognitive decline & neurodegenerative disease Recent research has shown that long-term resistance training in older women promotes executive function, memory, reduced cortical white matter atrophy and increased peak muscle power. Such findings are very exciting as they suggest that exercise and resistance training can modify brain neuroplasticity and help improve brain function. The current thinking is that resistance and physical exercise represents a promising nonpharmaceutical intervention to prevent age-related cognitive decline and neurodegenerative diseases such as dementia and Alzheimers. There is some evidence that the mechanisms behind these alterations may be related to increased levels of Brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and IGF-1. BDNF-induced neuroplasticity is speculated to be facilitated by physical exercise but conclusive evidence supporting this mechanism of action has not yet been established (see links 1, 2, 3, 4).

strength training for over 50 female
Mental Health Is Significantly Improved with Resistance Training

Improved mental health. There is substantial evidence to demonstrate that resistance training and exercise more generally has a very dramatic and potent effect on improving mental health and treating those that suffer from mental health disorders. For example, research has shown that high-intensity resistance training is more effective than low-intensity resistance training or standard care by a GP in the treatment of depression in older patients. Resistance exercise has also be shown to reduce anxiety, slow the progression of white matter lesions in older women, improve symptomatology and disease severity in severe mental illness and essentially improve overall quality of life and general mental health (see links 1, 2, 3).

To finish up I cannot emphasise enough just how important resistance training exercise is for all older adults including masters athletes. The reasons mentioned above are only some of the many that support resistance training exercise as an essential ingredient of a healthy lifestyle and confirm current recommendations for people to partake in a minimum of 2 resistance training sessions per week.

To read part 2 of “12 reasons why older adults need to do resistance training exercise” which discusses the performance-enhancing benefits for older athletes and the incredible functional improvements that can be achieved in older non-athletes, see here.

For local Townsville residents interested in FitGreyStrong’s Exercise Physiology services or exercise programs designed to achieve the above-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?

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

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.
© FitGreyStrong
Share this:
Weight/Fat loss, Strength

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

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:

  1. Overestimating the energy expenditure of an activity therefore stifling weight loss with erroneous values assigned to a cardio session.
  2. 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).
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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.
  6. 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.
is strength training better than cardio for 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.

is strength training better than cardio for weight loss
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.

is strength training better than cardio for weight loss
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.
© FitGreyStrong
Share this: