Ebook Resistance Training for Health

Increasing physical activity and participation in an aerobic endurance exercise program have been shown to decrease the risk of chronic diseases (e.g., coronary heart disease [CHD], stroke, osteoporosis, diabetes, obesity/weight control), which have become the leading causes of morbidity and mortality in the United States. The American Heart Association (AHA) has identified physical inactivity as a primary risk factor for the development of CHD along with cigarette smoking, high blood pressure, and elevated levels of cholesterol. As an intervention, the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM), the AHA, and the Surgeon General’s Report on Physical Activity and Health all have established guidelines for aerobic exercise programs designed to positively affect health status. These recommendations are based on a preponderance of evidence establishing the effect of exercise on disease prevention (see Figure 14.1).

The effects of resistive type exercise (strength training) on health status have been largely overlooked. Traditionally, strength training has been seen as a means of improving muscular strength and endurance (muscle mass) and power, but not as a means for improving health. There is increasing evidence that strength training plays a significant role in many health factors (see Figure 14.1). The ACSM (1990, 1995), AHA (1995), and the Surgeon General’s Report on Physical Activity and Health (1996) all have recognized the importance of strength training as an important component of health. These organizations have recommended performing 1 set of 8–12 repetitions of 8–10 exercises 2–3 times per week for persons under 50 years of age and the same regimen using 10–15 epetitions for persons over 50 years of age.

The research and rationale for this exercise prescription have been reviewed (ACSM, 1990; Pollock et al., 1994; Feigenbaum & Pollock, 1997). Although greater intensity (fewer repetitions and greater weight) with multiple sets can elicit greater improvements in strength and power, it may not be appropriate for older nonathletic participants. A regimen of 8–12 or 10–15 repetitions appears to be an adequate balance for developing both muscular strength and endurance. The research suggests that 80–90% of the strength gains can be elicited using this regimen compared to the high volume types of programs. Thus, because time is an important factor for program compliance, the above recommended guidelines seem appropriate. Although more research is necessary to confirm the best combination of intensity (repetitions, weight, sets) for older or more fragile participants, it appears that the 10–15 repetition guideline may create less joint stress and injury than the 8–12 repetition program.

Download Ebook Resistance Training for Health