Another opinion on strength training in women?

[MS]

This board is so slow....so let's discuss this intriguing piece of research:

Effect of strength training on resting metabolic rate and physical activity: age and
gender comparisons


JEFFREY T. LEMMER; FREDERICK M. IVEY; ALICE S. RYAN; GREG F. MARTEL; DIANE E. HURLBUT; JEFFREY E. METTER; JAMES L. FOZARD; JEROME L. FLEG; BEN F. HURLEY
MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE 2001;33:532-541

Purpose:
The purpose of this study was to compare age and gender effects of strength training on resting metabolic rate , energy expenditure of physical activity, and body composition.

Methods:
Resting metabolic rate and energy expenditure of physical activity were measured before and after 24 wk of strength training in 10 young men (20-30 yr), 9 young women (20-30 yr), 11 older men (65-75 yr), and 10 older women (65-75 yr). Results: When all subjects were pooled together, absolute resting metabolic rate significantly increased by 7%. Furthermore, strength training increased absolute resting metabolic rate by 7% in both young and older subjects, with no significant interaction between the two age groups. In contrast, there was a significant gender × time interaction for absolute resting metabolic rate with men increasing resting metabolic rate by 9%, whereas women showed no significant increase. When resting metabolic rate was adjusted for fat-free mass with all subjects pooled together, there was still a significant increase in resting metabolic rate with strength training. Additionally, there was still a gender effect and no significant age effect, with only the men still showing a significant elevation in resting metabolic rate. Moreover, energy expenditure of physical activity and total energy expenditure did not change in response to strength training for any group.
Conclusions:
In conclusion, changes in absolute and relative resting metabolic rate in response to strength training are influenced by gender but not age. In contrast to what has been suggested previously, changes in body composition in response to strength training are not due to changes in physical activity outside of training.

 

[MR. BMJ]

I am kind of brain dead right now after hitting the gym...i'll have to reread it in a few hours.

However, I have to ask...Did you check out this journal because of my post on the diet board, or are we just on the same page? Come on....tell the truth

BMJ

 

[SteelWeaver]

I don't understand the last sentence: "changes in body composition in response to strength training are not due to changes in physical activity outside of training." Surely if the changes are due to strength training then it's obvious that they're not due to something else? Am I brain-dead too?

Is this article saying women are wasting their time by weight training?

 

[SteelWeaver]

Well, I am now convinced that if there is a god, he is most certainly a ******** MAN!!!!! Why did we get the short end of the stick for EVERYTHING physical (except maybe boobs, which are very nice )

So the famed metabolic boost that we're supposed to get that carries on burning cals all through the day, just went up in a puff of research?

 

[MS]

Hmm???? I don't see the relevance of a high fat diet in male cyclists to this topic. This is the first in a series of research topics that I plan on drip feeding to this forum. I'm sick of hearing some of the pro-weight lifting rhetoric on the other boards that's based on male elite athletes and may have little or less relevance to women. The stuff I'll be presenting will address the issues of women BBs/fitness enthusiasts directly rather than making inferences and assumptions based on animal/male studies and much of it is still controversial which is why I thought an open discussion might be fun.

As a hint at where I'm heading with this piece of research, I will point out that there are other studies that show that aerobic activity (either moderate or high) increases BMR and EPOC in women much more than in men. One could ultimately conclude that women are better off sticking with aerobic exercise rather than weight lifting if fat loss is thier goal!! Maybe THAT will help get the discussion going. I got this idea when I was rereading some of the "30+30" cardio thread that was recently bumped..................

Here's a few more teasers:

Effect of gender on lipid kinetics during endurance exercise of moderate intensity in untrained subjects.

We evaluated lipid metabolism during 90 min of moderate-intensity (50% VO(2) peak) cycle ergometer exercise in five men and five women who were matched on adiposity and aerobic fitness. Substrate oxidation and lipid kinetics were measured. The total increase in glycerol and free fatty acid rate of appearance in plasma during exercise was ~65% greater in women than in men. Total fatty acid oxidation was similar in men and women, but the relative contribution of plasma FFA to total fatty acid oxidation was higher in women than in men. We conclude that lipolysis of adipose tissue triglycerides during moderate-intensity exercise is greater in women than in men, who are matched on adiposity and fitness. The increase in plasma fatty acid availability leads to a greater rate of plasma free fatty acid tissue uptake and oxidation in women than in men



Postexercise energy expenditure and substrate oxidation in young women resulting from exercise bouts of different intensity.

OBJECTIVE: The effects of low and high intensity exercise, of similar energy output, on exercise and post-exercise energy expenditure and substrate oxidation were studied in eight active, eumenorrheic females (aged 22 to 31).

METHODS: Continuous indirect calorimetry was performed during cycle ergometry exercise and for 3 hours following each of the following three protocols administered in random order:

1) low intensity exercise (500 calories burned at 50% VO2 max),
2) 2) high intensity exercise (500 calories burned at 75% VO2 max), and
3) 3) control condition of quiet sitting for 1 hour, rather than exercise.
Excess postexercise oxygen consumption energy expenditure and total fat and carbohydrate oxidation for the entire exercise/control plus 3-hour recovery period were determined by indirect calorimetry.

RESULTS: Mean excess postexercise oxygen consumption for the 3-hour post-exercise period for high intensity exercise group (41 kcals) was significantly greater than excess postexercise oxygen consumption for low intensity exercise (22 kcals). Oxygen consumption following high intensity exercise, but not low intensity exercise remained elevated at the end of the 3-hour post-exercise period. Total carbohydrate oxidation (exercise plus postexercise period) was significantly higher for high intensity group compared to low intensity group. Total fat oxidation was lower for high intensity compared to low intensity, but this difference did not reach statistical significance .
At the end of the 3-hour recovery period, the rate of fat oxidation was higher following high intansity exercise groupcompared to low intensity.

CONCLUSION: These data indicate that the recovery period should also be considered when determining the impact of different exercise intensities on total energy expenditure and fat and carbohydrate utilization in women.



The effects of exercise intensity on body composition, weight loss, and dietary composition in women.

OBJECTIVE: There is controversy over whether exercise and/or exercise intensity has an effect on total caloric intake or diet composition. The purpose of this study was to test the effect of exercise intensity without dietary manipulation on body composition and/or weight loss and to determine whether exercise intensity affected total caloric intake or diet composition in normal weight young women.

METHODS: Fifteen women aged 18 to 34 years with a maximal oxygen consumption average or below on the Palo Alto norms served as subjects. Subjects were randomly assigned to:

1) low heart rate intensity exercise group which exercised 40 to 45 minutes approximately four times weekly at a mean heart rate of 132 beats per minute (bpm);
2) 2) high heart rate intensity group which exercised 40 to 45 minutes approximately four times weekly at a mean HR of 163 bpm.
All subjects were given a maximal exercise test prior to and during weeks eight, 12 and 16. The first 4 weeks served as a control period, followed by approximately 11 weeks of exercise. Each subject recorded her dietary intake for 1 complete week, including a weekend, during weeks 2, 6, 10 and 14 of the study.

RESULTS: VO2 max increased with high intensity but did not change in low intensity. Percent fat decreased with high intensity but was unchanged with low intensity . The weekly intake of total kcal, carbohydrate, protein and fat did change significantly for either group. The weekly intake of saturated fat declined significantly with high intensity; their weekly intake of cholesterol also decreased between months 2 to 3 . No other differences in dietary intake between groups were found.

CONCLUSION: High heart rate intensity exercise training without dietary manipulation resulted in a decrease in body fat, but not weight change, as well as a decrease in the intake of saturated fat and cholesterol in normal weight young women. These changes were not observed after low heart rate intensity training.


Effects of endurance and resistance training on total daily energy expenditure in young women: a controlled randomized trial.

There exists considerable controversy regarding the impact of different modes of exercise training on total daily energy expenditure. To examine this question, young, nonobese women were randomly assigned to a supervised 6-month program of endurance training, resistance training, or control condition. Total daily energy expenditure was measured before and 10 d after a 6-month exercise program was completed with doubly labeled water. Body composition was determined from dual energy x-ray absorptiometry, maximum aerobic capacity from a treadmill test to exhaustion, and muscular strength from one-repetition maximum tests. Results showed that body composition did not change in endurance-trained women, but maximum aerobic capacity increased by 18%. Resistance-trained women increased muscular strength and fat-free mass (1.3 kg). Total daily energy expenditure did not significantly change when measured subsequent to the endurance or resistance training programs. Absolute resting metabolic rate increased in resistance-trained women but not when adjusted for fat-free mass. No change in physical activity energy expenditure was found in any of the groups. These results suggest that endurance and resistance training does not chronically alter total daily energy expenditure in free-living young women. THUS, THE ENERGY-ENHANCING BENEFITS OF EXERCISE TRAINING ARE PRIMARILY DERIVED FROM THE DIRECT ENERGY COST OF EXERCISE AND NOT FROM A CHRONIC ELEVATION IN DAILY ENERGY EXPENDITURE IN YOUNG, NONOBESE WOMEN.

well, that's for starters!

 

[makedah]

Wow, that's interesting stuff. Thanks for posting it.

[Note to self: higher intensity...]

So does this suggest that women's metabolic rate is just genetic? I'm sure that starvation or getting old can change it, but other than that, are we stuck with the metabolism that we are born with?

Or is it that, compared to men, most women can't put on ENOUGH muscle (at least in 6 months/24 weeks) to change their metabolic rate? (The part of the study you first posted didn't seem to correlate amount of lean muscle mass gained to rise in metabolic rate, so this might be a big leap from what was actually studied.)

 

[MR. BMJ]

No, I wasn't talking about the subject matter of my post, but rather the journal you used. You posted 2 entries today from "Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise". I posted one from the same journal today as well and thought maybe you read it. Sometimes I feel like I am wasting my time posting anything scientific...lol.

At any rate,

I will add to you post with another study on WOMEN

I believe that I posted this in the past but don't know if it were here on the Women's Board.

Schmidt, et al. "Effects of Long Versus Short bout exercise on fitness and weight loss in overweight females." Journal of the American College of Nutrition. 2001; vol 20 (5).

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The Specific aim of this study was to determine if three 10-min bouts of exercise per day (3X10) and two 15 min bouts per day (2X15) were as effective as one 30 min bout per day (1X30) for improving VO2 max and weight loss.

METHODS: Overweight, female college students (body mass index 28 kg/m2) were recruited and assessed at baseline and post-treatment for aerobic fitness (Astrand maximal cycle test), weight, skinfold, thickness (7-site), and circumference measures (4-site). Following measurements of resting energy expenditure (REE), subjects were asked to follow a self-monitored calorie restricted diet (80% of REE) for the 12 week duration of the study and were assigned (non-random) to one of four treatment groups: 1) a nonexercising control group (control, n=8), 2) a 30-min continuous exercise group (1X30, n=12), 3) a 30-min accumulated exercise group (2X15, n=10), and 4) a second 30-min accumulated exercise group (3X10, n=8). The exercising subjects participated in aerobic exercise training at 75% of heart rate reserve three to five days per week with all exercise monitored.

RESULTS: VO2 max increased significantly while weight, body mass index, sum of skinfolds, and sum of circumferences decreased significantly from baseline to post-treatment in the 1X30, 2X15, and 3X10 groups but did not in the control group. A tertiary finding was that exercise participated did not differ among the exercising groups with regard to the average number of days per week.

CONCLUSIONS: These results support the hypothesis that exercise accumulated in several short bouts has similar effects as one continuous bout with regard to aerobic fitness and weight loss during caloric restriction in overweight, young women.
********************

Too bad the abstract doesn't list comparisons of fat loss. Also, it would have been nice to see results dealing with women that were not obese as well.

BMJ

 

[makedah]

A tertiary finding was that exercise participated did not differ among the exercising groups with regard to the average number of days per week.

I don't understand this sentence. It seems that the word "in" is missing after "participated," but the meaning of it is still unclear to me.

 

[SteelWeaver]

To summarise:

1) The only way for women to increase their metabolic rate is to increase their percentage of muscle mass.
2) Women's caloric expenditure is from the direct cost of the activity, not from a metabolic rate increase caused by exercise
3) More calories are burned in the recovery period following high-intensity aerobic training than from low-mod intensity.
4) It doesn't matter how long you do cardio for, it's the accumulated amount of time you spend doing it that will determine the number of calories burned. (this would appear to correlate with #2 above)

Anyway, this is what I understand from all the above - please correct me if I misunderstood.

If I'm correct in my understanding, then I have to say it rather sucks that we don't get any metabolic rate increases as side-benefits of all our hard work, but that it's very cool that we're all on the right track by hitting the weights hard.

As for #3, it's wonderful, but doesn't get us around the fact that on a calorically restricted diet, performing high-intensity exercise is well-nigh impossible.

Nice stuff MS and Mr BMJ - let's see some more.

 

[MS]

Well, maybe I'll throw some more fuel on the fire. Spatts, my comment about rhetoric from the male boards was aimed at the assumption that just because weight training increases a males RMR that the same is true of women; or that the hormonal response to a low carb/high fat keto diet is the same for women; or that intense weight training is superioir to cardio in boosting testosterone in women just because this is true in men (and the list goes on and on). For instance, here's a couple of articles that show quite clearly that, unlike males, weight training in women does not boost test levels nearly as well as a good bout of cardio:

Hormone responses to resistance vs. endurance exercise in premenopausal females.

Sixteen, cross-trained, premenopausal women participated in an endurance, resistance, and control session to compare hormone responses. The resistance session included 3 sets of eight exercises at 10 RM intensity. The endurance session consisted of a 40-min cycling protocol at 75% of maximal heart rate. During the control session, subjects rested for 35 min. Serum DHEA, estradiol, testosterone, growth hormone, IGF-I, cortisol, and plasma lactate concentrations were measured pre-exercise, post-exercise, and 30 min into recovery. Differences in intensity variables existed between the three sessions. Endurance exercise elicited increases in growth hormone, estradiol, and testosterone compared to the control session, and growth hormone increased after the resistance compared to the control session. The exercise protocols used in this study indicate that an acute bout of exercise can stimulate the endocrine system in premenopausal females. In addition, these results indicate that differences exist between these two exercise protocols when compared to a control session.



Endogenous anabolic hormone responses to endurance versus resistance exercise and training in women.

Research in exercise endocrinology has flourished over the past few decades. In general, research examining short- and long-term hormone responses to endurance exercise preceded studies on resistance exercise, and research on women lagged behind research on men. Sufficient data are now available to allow a comparison of endogenous anabolic hormone responses to endurance versus resistance exercise and training in women. Circulating levels of testosterone, dehydroepiandrosterone, dehydroepiandrosterone sulphate, estradiol, growth hormone and cortisol have been shown to increase in response to an acute bout of endurance exercise in women. However, only growth hormone, estradiol and cortisol have been reported to increase following resistance exercise. Hormone changes following training, either endurance or resistance, have been variable, probably because of differences in experimental design and major differences in the length, intensity and volume of training programmes. With the notable exception of growth hormone, the anabolic hormones reviewed here appear to decline with endurance training. Resistance training has little effect on resting hormone levels, except insulin-like growth factor-I, which has been shown to increase following a training programme. These hormone changes potentially have both metabolic and hypertrophic implications, and future research needs to focus on the biological significance of these adaptations.


And then there's the literature in males that shows that single set (HIT style) training is as effective as multiple set training in increasing hypertrophy and strength. This is yet another area of sports physiology where women may be different:


Single- vs. multiple-set strength training in women.

The aim of this study was to compare the effects of single-set and multiple-set strength training in women. Twenty-seven women (aged 20-40 years) with basic experience in strength training were randomly allocated to either a single-set group, a 3-set group , or a nontraining control group . Both training groups underwent a whole-body strengthening program, exercising 2 days a week for 6 weeks. Exercises included bilateral leg extension, bilateral leg curl, abdominal crunch, seated hip adduction/abduction, seated bench press, and lateral pull-down. The single-set group's program consisted of only 1 set of 6-9 repetitions until failure, whereas the multiple-set group trained with 3 sets of 6-9 repetitions until failure (rest interval between sets, 2 minutes). Two times before and 3 days after termination of the training program, subjects were tested for their 1 repetition maximum strength on the bilateral leg extension and the seated bench press machine. Both training groups made significant strength improvements in leg extension (multiple-set group, 15%; single-set group, 6%). However, in the seated bench press only the 3-set group showed a significant increase in maximal strength (10%). Calculation of effect sizes and percentage gains revealed higher strength gains in the multiple-set group. No significant differences were found in the control group. These findings suggest superior strength gains occurred following 3-set strength training compared with single-set strength training in women with basic experience in resistance training.



Then there's the stuff that shows that, as women, we are truly in trouble metabolically no matter how much time we spend 'in the fat-burning zone'!

Gender differences in fat metabolism.

Women generally have a higher percentage of body fat than men. Also, women store more fat in the gluteal-femoral region, whereas men store more fat in the visceral (abdominal) depot. This review focuses on differences in regional fatty acid storage, mobilization and oxidation that may contribute to gender-related differences in body fat distribution. …………………… These data correspond to in-vitro adipose tissue biopsy data, which indicate a more pronounced difference in catecholamine mediated lipolysis between upper body and lower body fat depots in women than in men. Secondly, free fatty acid release by the upper body subcutaneous fat depots is higher in men than in women, indicating a higher resistance to the antilipolytic effect of meal ingestion in the upper body fat depots in men. Thirdly, there are indications that basal fat oxidation (adjusted for fat free mass) is lower in females as compared to males, thereby contributing to a higher fat storage in women. Finally, postprandial fat storage may be higher in subcutaneous adipose tissue in women than in men, whereas storage in visceral adipose tissue has been hypothesized to be higher in men. …………………..FURTHERMORE, THERE IS ABUNDANT EVIDENCE THAT THE PROPORTION OF ENERGY DERIVED FROM FAT DURING EXERCISE IS HIGHER IN WOMEN THAN IN MEN. WITH RESPECT TO TOTAL BODY FAT, THIS FINDING SEEMS COUNTERINTUITIVE, AS PERCENTAGE BODY FAT IS INCREASED IN WOMEN (Mwaaaahaaaaaahaaaaahaaaaaaaaahaaaaaaa).