You are viewing 1 of your 1 free articles. For unlimited access take a risk-free trial
How effective is strength training for promoting fat loss and what type of strength protocol can deliver the best results? SPB looks at some new research
Body composition is critically important in determining athletic performance. All other things being equal, an athlete carrying less superfluous weight (ie body fat) will always outperform a heavier and ‘fatter’ athlete simply because there’s less weight to move around, resulting in an improved power-to-weight ratio. This in turns means that an athlete who sheds some excess body fat will improve their power-to-weight ratio - without needing to increase aerobic power, with all the extra training demands that would entail.
The conventional thinking about fat loss and training is that steady-state moderate-intensity aerobic exercise is the best route to reducing body fat. There are two reasons for this; firstly, the amount of energy (calories) expended per hour during aerobic type activity such as running, swimming, cycling, rowing etc is relatively high – typically ranging from 600-1,000kcals per hour depending on athlete fitness and level of exertion(1). And since moderate aerobic activity can be continued for a significant period of time (up to two hours or more), the total calorie burn can be very significant. A second reason is that as long as there’s ample oxygen available to working muscles - ie the athlete is not working at or near their maximum oxygen uptake limit (VO2max) - fat oxidation can contribute a major proportion of this energy demand(2).
While the importance of aerobic training for maintaining or reducing levels of body fat has been confirmed in numerous peer-reviewed studies (have you ever seen a fat ultra-marathon runner?), athletes frequently but anecdotally report that when resistance training is added to an existing aerobic program, further and significant fat losses are observed, which are greater than those occurring simply by adding in extra aerobic training. In other words, resistance training itself seems to provide an additional mechanism for fat loss. It turns out that these anecdotal observations are indeed well founded and supported by good evidence.
Firstly, we now know beyond doubt that resistance training alone can improve body composition by increasing lean muscle mass and reducing body fat. For example, a large systematic review study published in 2021 reviewed a large number of previous studies and concluded that all forms of resistance training, but particularly forms where resistance exercise were completed in rapid succession (eg circuit type training) significantly reduced fat mass(3).
However, this still doesn’t answer the question of whether adding in resistance training to an existing aerobic training program can play an additional fat-burning role compared to aerobic training alone. A 2018 review study looked at data from 12 trials involving 555 younger subjects who undertook either concurrent aerobic plus added resistance exercise, or aerobic exercise alone in order to lose body fat and improve key measures of health(4). Importantly, the exercise volumes were matched. It found the following:
· Compared with aerobic exercise alone, aerobic + resistance exercise resulted in greater reductions in fat mass.
· Aerobic + resistance exercise resulted in greater increases in lean body mass (muscle) compared to aerobic only.
In addition, we now have a mechanistic explanation that can explain how this effect occurs. A 2021 study carried out by researchers from the Kentucky College of Medicine and College of Health Sciences studied the phenomenon whereby muscle cells undergoing mechanical loading (ie strenuous resistance exercise) release small particles called extracellular vesicles from the muscle cells(5). Without delving too much into the technicalities, the researchers discovered that not only were these vesicles released following resistance training, but also that they contained a signalling molecule called ‘muscle-specific miR-1’.
Once circulating in the bloodstream, these vesicles and their cargo of miR-1 were preferentially taken up by fat cells, and once inside the fat cells, the miR-1 stimulated the fat cells to released stored fat and then upregulate fat burning. In short, these vesicles acted like biological messengers to help switch on fat burning in fat cells - regardless of any other type(s) of exercise that take place.
The accumulated evidence that adding in some strength training to an aerobic training program provides an additional and significant fat burning effect is strong, But what type of strength training is likely to produce the best results for athletes seeking to shed a few pounds? To date, the research on this topic has been quite limited, but a new study by a team of Canadian scientists has provided some valuable clues(6).
Published in the Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, this study looked at the effects of both low-load and high-load resistance training on post-exercise exercise metabolism over the next few hours – specifically the extra oxygen consumed during the recovery period (due to the temporary increase in metabolic rate that is induced by vigorous exercise) and also the rate of fat oxidation following resistance exercise. In this study, the researchers compared the effects of a low-load, high volume resistance session to a high-load, low volume session, both of which performed to volitional fatigue.
To do this, 11 recreationally active resistance-trained male subjects completed two resistance exercise trials (plus a no-exercise control trial) on three separate occasions in a random order:
· Resistance training performed at 30% of 1 repetition maximum (1RM; 30% 1RM) to volitional exhaustion.
· Resistance training performed at 90% 1RM (90% 1RM) to volitional exhaustion.
· No-exercise (the control condition).
Each resistance session consisted of 3 x sets each of back squats, bench presses, straight-leg deadlifts, military presses, and bent-over rows to volitional fatigue. These were completed sequentially with 90 seconds of rest between sets and exercises. Although the levels of fatigue generated were similar in the 30% and 90% 1-RM trials, more reps were completed in the low-load session and more total work completed compared to the high-load trial. Following each resistance session, the researchers measured the participants’ oxygen consumption levels and fat burning rates, both at one hour post exercise and then again after two hours.
The first key finding was that both the 30% (low-load) and 90% (high-load) 1-RM protocols resulted in elevated oxygen consumption levels one hour post exercise. This indicated a raised metabolism and therefore an increased calorie burn following both types of resistance training. However, this increased calorie-burn effect was more pronounced when performing low-load sessions compared to high load sessions. After two hours however, only the low-load (30% 1-RM) sessions resulted in raised oxygen consumption and therefore increased calorie burn.
When it came to post-exercise fat burning, the same pattern was observed; after one hour, fat oxidation rates were elevated in both the 30% and 90% loading protocols by around 155% (ie two and a half times higher than pre exercise!). After two hours following exercise however, fat burning only remained elevated (by around 70%) in the 30% 1-RM loading protocol. Meanwhile, the rate of fat burning in the 90% protocol was no different to the control condition (ie not elevated at all).
What can we deduce from these findings? The two take home messages for athletes looking to shed excess pounds (or keep them off) is that a) adding some resistance training to an aerobic training program DOES provide additional fat burning/weight management benefits over and above simply adding the same volume of additional aerobic training. However, in order to maximize this effect, it is better to train using a relatively low loading but with more repetitions per set.
There is a caveat to this recommendation however; while both protocols produced the same resultant fatigue at the end of each set, using a low-load protocol to voluntary fatigue will result in a greater total work demand than using high-load training. Athletes who are already undertaking a high volume of endurance training (with not much energy left in the tank for additional training activities) might find the additional workload of high-rep strength training too demanding on energy reserves.
In this case, the best solution is to make allowances by slightly reducing aerobic training volumes when undertaking low-load strength training. Another option is to use high-load training (80-90% of 1-RM) instead. Although post-exercise fat and calorie burning will not match that of low-load training to fatigue, the good news is that studies comparing of high-load with low-load resistance training have demonstrated no differences in post-exercise metabolism when total volume and workload is matched(7). In plain English, using higher loading with less rep and a lower total workload than low-load training to fatigue will be less demanding in terms of total workload, but will still deliver meaningful benefits!
1. Brian J Sharkey ‘Physiology of Fitness’ 3rd edition, Human Kinetics Publishing 1990, p48 (fig 3.3)
2. J Basic Clin Physiol Pharmacol. 2021 Oct 25;33(6):673-681
3. Biology (Basel). 2021 Apr 28;10(5):377
4. Br J Sports Med. 2018 Feb;52(3):161-166
5. FASEB J. 2021 Jun;35(6):e21644
6. J Strength Cond Res. 2024 May 22. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000004814. Online ahead of print
7. PLoS One. 2010; 5(8): e12033
Today you have the chance to join a group of athletes, and sports coaches/trainers who all have something special in common...
They use the latest research to improve performance for themselves and their clients - both athletes and sports teams - with help from global specialists in the fields of sports science, sports medicine and sports psychology.
They do this by reading Sports Performance Bulletin, an easy-to-digest but serious-minded journal dedicated to high performance sports. SPB offers a wealth of information and insight into the latest research, in an easily-accessible and understood format, along with a wealth of practical recommendations.
*includes 3 coaching manuals
Get Inspired
All the latest techniques and approaches
Sports Performance Bulletin helps dedicated endurance athletes improve their performance. Sense-checking the latest sports science research, and sourcing evidence and case studies to support findings, Sports Performance Bulletin turns proven insights into easily digestible practical advice. Supporting athletes, coaches and professionals who wish to ensure their guidance and programmes are kept right up to date and based on credible science.