Easy Doesn’t Work: A Panel Review of a Study of ‘Resistance’ Training
When asked about why they are doing something they are doing, training programs, diets, support of a particular policy, people will often say, “they did a study!” Which usually means a study was done, interpreted by a journalist with limited skepticism because he likes the results already for his story, thrust into media as scientific gospel, and picked up as a snippet on social media as dogma. The laymen accepts this simply because he is a laymen. He doesn’t even know what questions to ask. Thankfully we know some folks who do know what to ask, what data to look at, and what actually occurs in a study.
This panel review assembles some of the big guns (and brains) of the Starting Strength Coaches Association to discuss a media popularized study which is titled “Neither load nor systemic hormones determine resistance training-mediated hypertrophy or strength gains in resistance-trained young men.” The panel members shed light on the processes and methods employed to get this result and then ask pertinent questions thereto.
One of the problems is the researchers compared a high repetition, low weight group (A) to a higher repetition, lower weight group(B). At the end of the study the results were that there was no difference in strength gains between groups. Here’s the thing, group B did 3 times as much work to get the same result as group A. If you consider time a valuable commodity or at least one you cannot replace, this should bother you. There are many more problems with this paper the panel discusses in detail and with eloquence in the video below. We are grateful for their time and expertise.