Power Up Your Body Composition: 6 Week Power-Based Complex Training Cuts 8% Body Fat in Female & 3% in Male Trained Football Players Without Restrictive Dieting

When plyometrics are involved, trainees usually lose more fat than on regular RT regimen.

"8% Body Fat in 6 Weeks!" It sounds like the headline of one of the hilarious articles in women's magazines, but it's the result of an experiment that was conducted by researchers from the Lamar University and the Baylor University in the US and the Hallym University in China (Miller. 2014). An experiment that revolved around a supervised 6-week training which consisted of a variety of Olympicstyle and traditional weightlifting movements and plyometrics (see Table 1) and involved 12 female and 9 male football players between the ages of 18 and 23 years.

Before we get too excited about the results, let's first take a closer look at what exactly the study participants did or didn't do. What they didn't do was dieting. There is no mention of either the overall energy intake or the intake of particular foods, food groups or macros being limited or controlled.

Want to get stronger, bigger, faster and leaner? Periodize appropriately!

30% More on the Big Three: Squat, DL, BP!

Block Periodization Done Right

Linear vs. Undulating Periodizationt

12% Body Fat in 12 Weeks W/ Periodizatoin

Detraining + Periodization - How to?

Tapering 101 - Learn How It's Done!

What was controlled, however, was the supervised power-oriented exercise regimen that included olympic-style weightlifting, traditional weightlifting, plyometrics, supplemental movements as they are done by many people in the gym and a cool down in form of proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PF).

Table 1: Power-based complex training (PCT) program - Note. RDL = Romanian deadlift; PNF = proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (Miller. 2014)

The three supervised workouts per week were arranged in a way that ensured that the overall load would change from week to week according to a linear undulating periodization scheme (week 1: 70%, 1RM; week 2: 80% 1RM; week 3; 75% 1RM; week 4: 90% 1RM; week 5: 80% 1RM; week 6: 95% 1RM - obviously a power workout ;-) and the pre and post body composition values were measured by the means of a comparatively accurate, yet compared to DEXA scans still inaccurate (spec. with respect to the absolute values) body impedance system.

Figure 1: Relative changes in body composition (left) and performance parameters (right) after 6 weeks of power-based complex training (Miller. 2014).

As the results in Figure 1 indicate both the increases in strength and body composition were significant - a bit more impressive, though, for the female participants. An observation that goes for the increases in clean, incline press, and squat performance, as well. 

"Both males and females significantly improved upper and lower body strength following the 6-week PCT program: 1) clean [males: +10.47% or +12.53 kg (from 119.70 ± 11.73 to 132.22 ± 10.88 kg, p = 0.001) and females: +19.98% or +8.94 kg (from 44.74 ± 7.34 to 53.67 ± 7.35 kg, p = 0.001)], 2) incline press [males: +8.81% or +9.85 kg (from 111.87 ± 14.36 to 121.72 ± 15.50 kg, p = 0.021) and females: +8.93% or +2.84 kg (from 31.82 ± 4.33 to 34.66 ± 5.75 kg, p = 0.002)], and 3) squat [males: +13.17% or +19.95 kg (from 151.51 ± 16.31 to 171.46 ± 21.92 kg, p = 0.002) and females: +17.44% or +11.1 kg (from 63.64 ± 7.63 to 74.74 ± 10.26 kg, p = 0.001)]. A post-training percent change in clean for females was significantly greater (19.98 vs. 10.47%, p = 0.009) than males, whereas the other post-training percent changes in incline press and squat were not significantly different between males and females." (Miller. 2014)

Impressed? Well, this is not the first study to show that women respond particularly well to any type resistance training.

Cutting W/ Combined Resistance + Specific Plyometric Exercises: 15.7% Less Fat in 7 Weeks | more

In 2009 and 2012 Prestes et al. and Lima et al. were able to show that both recreationally-trained and untrained young women significantly changed body composition following the 12- week resistance training. More specifically, the recreationally-trained women in the study by Lima et al. lost -2.39 kg of pure fat and reduced their body fat percentage by 3.82%, while they increased their total muscle mass by +3.07 kg. Similarly, a significant decrease in % BF (up to 12.73%) and fat mass (up to 9.32%) and an increase in muscle mass (up to 4.73%) were observed in the untrained women following a 12-week resistance training, which was composed of multiple sets of muscular endurance training in the study by Lima et al.

As a frequent SuppVersity reader (shame on you if you are not here every day ;-) you will also know that 10-weeks of a crossfit-based high-intensity helped the male and female participants of a study by Smith et al. (2013) shred 8% body fat - and that despite the fact that they were, unlike the ladies & gents in the study at hand, already at a mean body fat percentage of only 16% (read up on that study)!

Why didn't this work for men? If you look at the data in Figure 1 you will realize that the protocol did work, but due to the fact that most of the male football players have been participating in some forms of heavy resistance program for several years, the growth stimulus was comparatively low - a hypothesis that would be corroborated by the principles outlined in the latest position stand of the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM. 2009).

Step off the treadmill, ladies! If the previously cited evidence is still not enough to have you reconsider your cardio excesses, the results of one of the few review studies that focus specifically on young female athletes. The study by Wilmore et al. (1982) indicates that even athletic women can increase their muscle mass up to 1.5 kg (average of 0.3 kg) and decrease % BF up to -2.1% (average of -0.4%), when they drop the running and pick up the weights.

Obviously, men can benefit as well. For them Wilmore et al. report a maximal gain of 1.4 kg (average of 0.8 kg) and a -3.0 % (average of -1.7%) reduction in body weight - and that despite the fact that the majority of studies Wilmore et al. reviewed back in the late 1980s did not use what we today would call "highly intense, high volume" resistance training protocols.

Don't get me wrong, I don't say "drop the cardio altogether", but a training regimen without resistance training component is not going to yield the results both male & female trainees aspire | Comment on FB.

References:

• American College of Sports Medicine. "American College of Sports Medicine position stand. Progression models in resistance training for healthy adults." Medicine and science in sports and exercise 41.3 (2009): 687.
• de Lima, C., et al. "Linear and Daily Undulating Resistance Training Periodizations Have Differential Beneficial Effects in Young Sedentary Women." International journal of sports medicine 33.9 (2012): 723. 
• Miller, Joshua, Yunsuk Koh, and Chan-Gil Park. "Effects of Power-based Complex Training on Body Composition and Muscular Strength in Collegiate Athletes." American Journal of Sports Science and Medicine 2.5 (2014): 202-207.
• Prestes, Jonato, et al. "Comparison of linear and reverse linear periodization effects on maximal strength and body composition." The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 23.1 (2009): 266-274.
• Smith, Michael M., et al. "Crossfit-based high-intensity power training improves maximal aerobic fitness and body composition." The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 27.11 (2013): 3159-3172.
• Wilmore, Jack H. "Body composition in sport and exercise: directions for future research." Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 15.1 (1982): 21-31.

Concomitant Training: What's the Best Strength to "Cardio" Ratio to Become Big, Buffed and Strong? 3:1, 1:1 or No Cardio at All? Plus: Looking Back at the Latest Meta Review

What's the best you can do after a brutal leg workout? Cardio! At least if size and not strength is your goal...

It is one of those never ending debates: "Cardio!? To do it, or not to do it!? That's the question" - especially for those of us whose main goal is to become big and buffed ... now, you know that my take on this is simple: We are not created as "either or" animals, but have the outstanding ability to make use of both our strength and endurance (just as we can eat both meat and vegetables).

If we discard these philosophical considerations and take a more scientific stance towards the topic, the question still remains: Isn't doing cardio going to interfere with your success on the bench and vice versa? I mean you can't be a marathon running, bodybuilding powerlifter, can you? Hmm... no I don't think so, at least you would be pretty bad in each of the sports - a typical Jack of All Traits, Master of None, so to say ;-)

The "big and bulky" vs. the "sinewy and weak" effect 

Not to long ago, the question of "interference" was something only meatheads would ponder. In these days, in which even women's magazines begin to incorporate the latest scientific insights into the importance of muscle mass and strength into their "shaping" and "fitness" routines, it is yet becoming increasingly interesting for "the public" and that makes it easier for scientists to get funding and get published - sometimes (yet not in today's case) even outside of the Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research.

Only a couple of weeks ago, Jacob A. Wilson and colleagues published a detailed meta-review of the interference between strength and endurance work, in which they did confirm that the often-touted interference effect between endurance and strength training exists, and that the extend of the latter latter depends on the amount, type, frequency and intensity of aerobic activity a trainee is trying to pack into his workout routine (click here for the latest on how to combine both into one routine):

Effect sizes for combined training depending on the duration of the endurance component (Wilson. 2012)

"The mean ES for power development for strength training only was 0.91; for endurance training, it was 0.11; and for concurrent training, it was 0.55. Significant differences were found between all the 3 groups. For moderator variables, resistance training concurrently with running, but not cycling, resulted in significant decrements in both hypertrophy and strength. Correlational analysis identified significant negative relationships between frequency (−0.26 to −0.35) and duration (−0.29 to −0.75) of endurance training for hypertrophy, strength, and power." (Wilson. 2012)

I would guess that the timespan between the publication of Wilson's paper in the Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research and the study by Thomas W. Jones et al. the results of which are the topic of today's SuppVersity article probably is too short to call it a "follow up" of some sort. The intention of the researchers, i.e.

"to investigate the strength, limb girth and neuromuscular responses to a variety of concurrent strength and endurance training ratios, with incremental loads in an isolated limb model." (Jones. 2013)

would yet qualify the Jones study as a follow up that could either confute of confirm the statistically derived results Wilson and his colleagues presented in their August 2012 paper.

What did the scientists do and what did they find?

Jones et al. used a balanced, randomized, between-group study design. The participants, 24 healthy recreationally resistance-trained men (25 ± 3 yrs; 82.3 ± 10.0 kg;  179 ± 7 cm; 214.2 ± 42.3 Nm; >2y of strength training experience) were randomly assigned to one of the following experimental conditions:

True or False? "Training your legs will make
your arms grow faster" (read more)

• strength training, only (ST)

• 3:1 ratio strength & endurance training (CT3) 

• 1:1 ratio of strength & endurance training (CT1) 

• no training (CON)

All strength and endurance training was conducted in an isolated limb model and focused on the quadriceps muscle, with the exact protocols looking like this:

• strength training alone on all scheduled training sessions (ST)

• strength training on every scheduled session with every third session immediately followed by an endurance training (CT3)

• strength training immediately followed by endurance training at every scheduled session (CT1)

• no strength or endurance training (CON)

The total duration of the intervention period was 6 weeks and all trainees, except those who had been randomized to the lazy control group, worked out three times per week with ~48h of rest in-between the sessions.

"30min of leg extensions = cardio!?"

While the resistance training consisted of 5 sets of 6 repetitions (reps) at 80±5% of unilateral leg extensions (weight was increased progressively to keep the intensity), the endurance training protocol consisted of 30 min of repeated isokinetic unilateral leg extensions at 30±5% individual maximally voluntary contraction. The frequency was set at 1s per muscle action and the tempo was standardized via electronic metronome throughout the trial. This is obviously not a realistic "cardio" program, but it has the advantage of really isolating the targeted muscle group, which would not be the case if the scientists had had their participants cycle on a classic ergometer. 

Figure 1: Effects of strength only (ST), strength + "cardio" at 3:1 (CT3) and 1:1 ratio (CT1) and not training at all (CON) on maximal voluntary contraction (strength), limb girth (size) and time to exhaustion (conditioning) - focus on the colors(!) not the figures with their hilariously large standard deviations (Jones. 2013)

As a brief peak at the data in figure 1 is going to tell you (due to the huge standard deviations, you better rely on the colors instead of the figures ;-) the researchers from the Northumbria University in Newcastle upon Tyne (UK) and the North West University in Potchefstroom (SA), the scientists did, just as they had expected, a whole host of statistically significant differences:

"Following training, ST and CT3 conditions elicited greater MVC increases than CT1 and CON conditions (P ≤ 0.05). ST resulted in significantly greater increases in limb girth than both CT1 and CON conditions (P = 0.05 and 0.004 respectively). CT3 induced significantly greater limb girth adaptations than CON condition (P = 0.04). No effect of time or intervention was observed for EMG (P > 0.05)" (Jones. 2013)

What remains to be seen, though is in how far a "saner" endurance training protocol would have produced a similarly pronounced negative effect on the training induced increases in limb girth (size) and strength (MVC), while still yielding at least some of the beneficial effects on time to exhaustion (TTE).

There may be something to higher volume for legs (learn more)

If this is not your first visit to the SuppVersity you may yet remember a couple of previous posts on leg training, all of which clearly suggested that the legs need to be hammered to grow. At first the results of the study at hand seem to contradict this assumption, but if we are honest, "a little more hammering" is not exactly doing 30 min of continuous leg extensions.

The latter takes us back to the previously mentioned methodological shortcomings of this study. In as much as the 30-min of 30% MVC leg extensions may be suitable to really isolate the muscle, they have little to nothing to do with the classic endurance protocols most people are thinking about, when the hear the term "concomitant training".

We do, on the other hand, know from previous studies, such as the Psilander study, I covered in some detail in a previous blogpost that additional cycling before a leg workout can potentially boost the growth response to a subsequent workout (learn more). Whether this means of training is sustainable over time, would obviously be a different question.

---

Bottom line: Due to the specific design of the "cardio" part of the study, and the exclusive focus on the quadriceps muscles, it is difficult to say something definitive about the practically more important question whether 30min of classic low to medium intensity cardio training (e.g. on a cycle ergometer) would actually hamper your gains in such a profound fashion - regardless of whether you perform it before or after your workout.

Effect of strength vs. endurance only vs. combined training on body fat loss and changes in VO2Max, power, strength and size; data expressed rel. to avg. effect sizes for each parameter (Wilson. 2012)

If I am yet looking back at the results Wilson et al. presented in their meta-review, it would seem that low-intensity, low frequency cardio training is not the no-go the study from the study at hand would suggest it was. HIIT training, obviously a whole different animal and not necessarily something you would want to perform after a strenuous leg workout, for example does provide an anabolic stimulus of its own (learn more). HIIT vs. steady state is yet only one of the any parameters that will ultimately determine, whether or not an additional aerobic component is going to hamper your strength performance.  Another interesting observation Wilson et al. made was that the equipment the subjects used (and thus probably the effective metabolic demand) had an affect on the effectiveness of the strength training, as well.

Specifically, Wilson and his colleagues were able to show that the lack of weight support during treadmill running / jogging vs. cycling increased the detrimental effects on strength, power and size gains in the 21 studies the meta-analysis was based on. More than three cardio sessions per week, and high(er) intensity aerobic activity in general were likewise associated with practically relevant reductions in effect size.

Listen to Dr. Wilson in person! My friend Carl Lanore had him on Super Human Radio a couple of weeks ago.

On the other hand, some of these effects can be mitigated by doing cardio on separate days, so that you can still benefit from the concomittant (or endurance only) exclusive improvements in conditioning and avoid the VO2Max loss the scientists observed in the strength only groups. Skipping endurance work altogether is thus probably not the ideal method for the average physical culturist.

In the end, you will yet have to answer this question for yourself. Personally, I feel a baseline of 3x30min of various forms of "cardio" training (in the broadest sense) has always served me well.

References:

• Jones TW, Howatson G, Russell M, French DN. Performance And Neuromuscular Adaptations Following Differing Ratios Of Concurrent Strength And Endurance Training. J Strength Cond Res. 2013 Mar 21.
• Wilson JM, Marin PJ, Rhea MR, Wilson SM, Loenneke JP, Anderson JC. Concurrent training: a meta-analysis examining interference of aerobic and resistance exercises. J Strength Cond Res. 2012 Aug;26(8):2293-307.

Strength Training for Pedaling Performance in Cyclists; HIIT vs. Subcutaneous Fat; Half-Time Re-Warm Up Crucial for Footballers; Using Different Shoes to Prevent Injury & More

If you want to keep up with the latest science from exercise research labs around the world, today's installment of the SuppVersity Short News is for you!

It's time for another exercise research update. This time with the latest study from the latest issue Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports. Studies with topics that range from performance enhancement to injury prevention and are relevant for the average and extraordinary gymrat. In other words, studies for you, me, her and him ;-)

Before we get to the details, I want to thank everyone for the positive feedback on the previous research updates. It's your feedback that allows me to tailor this website to your interests, which is why I am happy about both praise and constructive criticism on Facebook.

Read more short news at the SuppVersity

Exercise Research Uptake Nov '14 1/2

Exercise Research Uptake Nov '14 2/2

Weight Loss Supplements Exposed

Exercise Supplementation Quickie

Exercise Research Uptake Jan 12, 2015

HIIT, Caffeine & Other Success Boosters

• Strength training improves performance and pedaling characteristics in elite cyclists (Habets. 2015) - The purpose of the latest study from the Lillehammer University College was to investigate the effect of 25 weeks heavy strength training in young elite cyclists.
  
  Nine cyclists performed endurance training and heavy strength training (ES) while seven cyclists performed endurance training only (E). ES, but not E, resulted in increases in isometric half squat performance, lean lower body mass, peak power output during Wingate test, peak aerobic power output (Wmax), power output at 4 mmol/L lactate concentrations, mean power output during 40-min all-out trial, and earlier occurrence of peak torque during the pedal stroke (P < 0.05).
  

  

  Figure 1: Pre- vs. post changes (%) in relevant performance markers (Habets. 2015)

  As you can see in Figure 1 the ES group achieved superior improvements in Wmax and mean power output during 40-min all-out trial compared with E (P < 0.05). The improvement in 40-min all-out performance was associated with the change toward achieving peak torque earlier in the pedal stroke (r = 0.66, P < 0.01). Neither of the groups displayed alterations in VO2max or cycling economy.
  
  In conclusion, heavy strength training leads to improved cycling performance in elite cyclists as evidenced by a superior effect size of ES training vs E training on relative improvements in power output at 4 mmol L lactacte levels and peak power output during 30-s Wingate test, Wmax, and mean power output during 40-min all-out trial.
• Controlled-frequency breath swimming improves swimming performance and running economy (Lavin. 2015) - Respiratory muscle fatigue can negatively impact athletic performance, but swimming has beneficial effects on the respiratory system and may reduce susceptibility to fatigue. Limiting breath frequency during swimming further stresses the respiratory system through hypercapnia and mechanical loading and may lead to appreciable improvements in respiratory muscle strength. The latest study from the Human Performance Laboratory at the Ball State University assessed the effects of controlled-frequency breath (CFB) swimming on pulmonary function.
  
  

  

  Figure 2: Sign. intergroup differences were observed for the total and rel. number of breaths (Lavin. 2015).

  Eighteen subjects (10 men), average (standard deviation) age 25 (+/-6) years, body mass index 24.4 (+/- 3.7) kg/m², underwent baseline testing to assess pulmonary function, running economy, aerobic capacity, and swimming performance. Subjects were then randomized to either CFB or stroke-matched (SM) condition. Subjects completed 12 training sessions, in which CFB subjects took two breaths per length and SM subjects took seven.
  
  Post-training, maximum expiratory pressure improved by 11% (15) for all 18 subjects (P < 0.05) while maximum inspiratory pressure was unchanged. Running economy improved by 6 (9)% in CFB following training (P < 0.05). Forced vital capacity increased by 4% (4) in SM (P < 0.05) and was unchanged in CFB. As the scientists point out, "[t]hese findings suggest that limiting breath frequency during swimming may improve muscular oxygen utilization during terrestrial exercise in novice swimmers" (Lavin. 2015).
• Changes in peak fat oxidation in response to different doses of endurance training (Rosenkilde. 2015) - The latest study from the University of Copenhagen probed the effects of different doses of endurance training on the capacity to oxidize fat during exercise in sedentary, overweight men and assessed the association of these variables with changes in peak fat oxidation (PFO).
  
  Young, sedentary, overweight men were randomized to either the high-dose (HIGH, 600 kcal/day, n = 17) or moderate-dose (MOD, 300 kcal/day, n = 18) endurance training groups or controls (CON, n = 15). PFO and peak oxygen uptake (VO2 peak) were measured using indirect calorimetry, body composition using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry, and protein levels of mitochondrial enzymes determined by Western blotting.
  

  

  Figure 3: Peak fat oxidation during a graded exercise test expressed as (a) absolute amount or (b) relative to fat-free mass at baseline (Pre) and at the end of a 12-week intervention (Post) in sedentary controls (CON, n = 15), a moderate-dose exercise group (MOD, n = 18), and a high-dose exercise group (HIGH, n = 17); while the high intensity exercise was more effective it was not extremely superior  (Rosenkilde. 2015).

  PFO increased in both MOD [1.2 mg/kg fat-free mass (FFM)/min, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.08:2.3, P = 0.03] and HIGH (1.8 mg/kg FFM/min, CI: 0.6:2.9, P < 0.001) compared with CON. Skeletal muscle expression of citrate synthase, β-hydroxyacyl-CoA dehydrogenase, and mitochondrial oxphos complexes II-V increased similarly in MOD and HIGH. Stepwise multiple linear regression analysis with backward elimination of individual variables correlated with changes in PFO revealed increases in cycling efficiency, FFM, and VO2 peak as the remaining associated variables.
  
  The scientists conclude that the peak fatty acid oxidation (PFO) during exercise increased with both moderate- and high-dose endurance training. In that, the increases in PFO were mainly predicted by changes in VO2 peak, FFM, and cycling efficiency, and less with skeletal muscle mitochondrial enzymes.
• Can parallel use of different running shoes decrease running-related injury risk? (Malisoux. 2015) - The aim of the latest study from the Public Research Centre for Healt in Luxembourg was to determine if runners who use concomitantly different pairs of running shoes are at a lower risk of running-related injury (RRI).
  
  Recreational runners (n = 264) participated in this 22-week prospective follow-up and reported all information about their running session characteristics, other sport participation and injuries on a dedicated Internet platform. A RRI was defined as a physical pain or complaint located at the lower limbs or lower back region, sustained during or as a result of running practice and impeding planned running activity for at least 1 day.
  

  

  Figure 4: Relative (%) reduction in hazard ratio for injury risk (Malisoux. 2015)

  One-third of the participants (n = 87) experienced at least one RRI during the observation period. The adjusted Cox regression analysis revealed that the parallel use of more than one pair of running shoes was a protective factor [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.614; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.389–0.969], while previous injury was a risk factor (HR = 1.722; 95%CI = 1.114–2.661). Additionally, increased mean session distance (km; HR = 0.795; 95%CI = 0.725–0.872) and increased weekly volume of other sports (h/week; HR = 0.848; 95%CI = 0.732–0.982) were associated with lower RRI risk.
  
  Multiple shoe use and participation in other sports are strategies potentially leading to a variation of the load applied to the musculoskeletal system. They could be advised to recreational runners to prevent RRI.
• Half-time re-warm up increases performance capacity in male elite soccer players (Edholm. 2015) - The latest study from the Örebro University investigated the acute effects of a half-time re-warm up on performance and movement patterns in soccer match play. Using a crossover design, 22 professional male players performed traditional passive rest (CON) or a low-intensity re-warm up (RW) during the half-time period of two soccer matches. Before and after the first half and before the second half, maximal sprint and jump performance were evaluated. Time–motion analysis of the first 15 min of each half was conducted.
  

  

  Figure 5: The re-warmup improved not just abstract performance variables, but also possession of the ball during the initial 15 min of both halves in game with active half-time re-warm up (RW) or a passive half-time period (CON) in total and possession of the ball in defending, neutral, and attacking zone (Edholm. 2015).

  Sprint and jump performance were reduced (P < 0.05) by 2.6% and 7.6%, respectively, during the half-time period in CON, whereas sprint performance was maintained and the decrement in jump performance (3.1%; P < 0.05) was lower after RW. No significant interaction for high-intensity running was observed, but less defensive high-intensity running was observed after RW than CON (0.14 ± 0.06 vs 0.22 ± 0.07 km; P < 0.01). Moreover, RW had more possession of the ball in the beginning of the second half. In conclusion, traditional passive half-time rest leads to impaired sprint and jump performance during the initial phase of the second half in professional soccer players whereas a re-warm up effectively attenuates such deteriorations. Less defensive high-intensity running and more ball possession were observed after RW, indicating a game advantage at the onset of the second half. 
• The effect of high-intensity training on mitochondrial fat oxidation in skeletal muscle and subcutaneous adipose tissue (Larsen. 2015) - High-intensity interval training (HIT) is known to increase mitochondrial content in a similar way as endurance training [60–90% of maximal oxygen uptake (VO2peak)]. Whether HIT increases the mitochondria's ability to oxidize lipids is currently debated.
  
  

  

  Figure 5: At identical levels of palmitoyl carnitine concentrations the lipid oxidation in the subcutaneous fat of the subjects increased significantly after HIT training - this is relevant not just during exercise, but also during dieting, because it signifies that the obese subjects are now having an easier time to access the exuberant energy stores in their subcutaneous body fat stores. The result should be that they are having an easier time losing body fat (Larsen. 2015).

  Scientists from the University of Copenhagen investigated the effect of HIT on mitochondrial fat oxidation in skeletal muscle and adipose tissue. Mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS) capacity, mitochondrial substrate sensitivity (Kmapp), and mitochondrial content were measured in skeletal muscle and adipose tissue in healthy overweight subjects before and after 6 weeks of HIT (three times per week at 298 ± 21 W).
  
  HIT significantly increased VO2peak from 2.9 ± 0.2 to 3.1 ± 0.2 L/min. No differences were seen in maximal fat oxidation in either skeletal muscle or adipose tissue. Kmapp for octanoyl carnitine or palmitoyl carnitine were similar after training in skeletal muscle and adipose tissue.
  
  Maximal OXPHOS capacity with complex I- and II-linked substrates was increased after training in skeletal muscle but not in adipose tissue.  The scientists conclude: "6 weeks of HIT increased VO2peak. Mitochondrial content and mitochondrial OXPHOS capacity were increased in skeletal muscle, but not in adipose tissue. Furthermore, mitochondrial fat oxidation was not improved in either skeletal muscle or adipose tissue" (Larsen. 2015).

Barefoot or Shod? A Question of Faith & Science: What do scientists and practicioners say?  Find out!

What's your favorite study? The one about increased fatty acid oxidation? That's not really news. While the study by Larsen et al. may be the first to measure it directly in the adipose tissue,  you as a SuppVersity reader should know that HIIT is an effective strategy to increase not just the acute, but also the chronic capacity to oxidize body fat.

My personal favorite is thus the "shoe study" - I mean, the insight that you can significantly reduce your injury risk by switching back and forth between different shoes is a practically highly relevant finding that may also put an end to the "shod or barefoot"-discussion I have addressed in previous articles | Comment on Facebook!

References:

• Edholm, P., Krustrup, P. and Randers, M. B. (2015), Half-time re-warm up increases performance capacity in male elite soccer players. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, 25: e40–e49. doi: 10.1111/sms.12236
• Habets, B. and van Cingel, R. E. H. (2015), Eccentric exercise training in chronic mid-portion Achilles tendinopathy: A systematic review on different protocols. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, 25: 3–15. doi: 10.1111/sms.12208.
• Larsen, S., Danielsen, J. H., Søndergård, S. D., Søgaard, D., Vigelsoe, A., Dybboe, R., Skaaby, S., Dela, F. and Helge, J. W. (2015), The effect of high-intensity training on mitochondrial fat oxidation in skeletal muscle and subcutaneous adipose tissue. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, 25: e59–e69. doi: 10.1111/sms.12252
• Lavin, K. M., Guenette, J. A., Smoliga, J. M. and Zavorsky, G. S. (2015), Controlled-frequency breath swimming improves swimming performance and running economy. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, 25: 16–24. doi: 10.1111/sms.12140.
• Malisoux, L., Ramesh, J., Mann, R., Seil, R., Urhausen, A. and Theisen, D. (2015), Can parallel use of different running shoes decrease running-related injury risk?. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, 25: 110–115. doi: 10.1111/sms.12154.
• Rosenkilde, M., Reichkendler, M. H., Auerbach, P., Bonne, T. C., Sjödin, A., Ploug, T. and Stallknecht, B. M. (2015), Changes in peak fat oxidation in response to different doses of endurance training. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, 25: 41–52. doi: 10.1111/sms.12151

Sprint & Strength Training - A Dynamic Duo For Synergistic Effects: Increased Fitness, Power & Endurance With HIIT + Heavy Lifting in Recreationally Active College Students

Sprinting allowed: Adding two high intensity sprinting interval sessions to a basic weight lifting template entails nothing, but benefits.

Beware, kid! You will become bulky and slow, if you lift weights." I am not quite sure if you've ever heard your high school track and field coach says something like this, but I am pretty sure that there are still coaches out there who would probably doubt the benefits of resistance training for a sprinter. Now, I am not so sure, if the reverse is true for weight lifting coaches, but if it was this would be equally counterproductive. A recent study from the Body Composition and Physical Performance Laboratory (wow, that's the place I would like to work at - at least if we go by the name ;-) at the University of Oklahoma does after all show quite conclusively that "performing concurrent sprint interval and strength training does not attenuate the strength response" and will at the same time lead to significant improvements in aerobic performance measures (Cantrell. 2014).

You can learn more about High Intensity Interval Training at the SuppVersity

Tabata kills ~15kcal/h

HIIT Economy: 30s + 2:1 Rest:Recov.

15% Increase in VO2Max w/ 4x4

Nitrate+Caffeine = HIIT success

More ain't more w/ HIIT

HIIT suboptimal for the obese?

Whether you like it or not. Classic resistance training, and even more so powerlifting, is not exactly a VO2 builder - much contrary to high intensity interval sprints, obviously. Sprints like the ones the 14 recreationally active men completed in the study at hand. The latter were based on a modified Wingate protocol, in the course of which the subjects performed 4-6 bouts of all-out 20-s sprints.

• the concurrent training group (CT) trained on Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, and Friday with half of the group strength training on Monday and Thursday, while the others performed strength training on Tuesday and Friday, the high intensity sprints were always performed on the other two days
• the strength training, only, group (ST) completed a general five-min warm-up on a cycle ergometer, before they did back squats, bench presses, leg extensions, leg curls, pull-downs, and shoulder presses in the four to six repetition range (i.e., 85 % 1RM) w/ 2 min rest intervals on two days of the week, only

Hardcore lifters would now probably expect that "hitting it hard" twice a week and "growing"  for the rest of the week would be the optimal strategy to increase athletic performance - way off the mark!
If you take a look at the data in Figure 1 it's plain to see that the "no sprinting", strength only group did not record additional strength gains.

Figure 1: Changes in performance parameters after 6 and 12 weeks (Cantrell. 2014)

Don't ask! No, the 3% difference, which is the difference between +37.8kg (ST) and +33.2kg (CT) is not significant. Unlike the differences in peak and aerobic power, which are huge... ah, I mean, "as significant as" the differences in VO2Max you can marvel in Figure 2.

Figure 2: VO2Max before, during and after the intervention (Cantrell. 2014)

Although VO2max may not be an ideal, it's still one of the best general fitness markers we have. And fitness, in turn is linear correlated with the maximal rate of fatty oxidation in healthy and type II diabetic individuals (Cataldo. 2014), associated with increased glycemic stability in type I diabetics (Singhvi. 2014) and linked to reduced obesity and diabetes risk in the general population.

A low VO2max and correspondingly messed up fitness status, on the other hand, has been linked insulin resistance and fasting hyperglycaemia (Ghouri. 2013), high blood pressure (Emaus. 2011), a loss of cerebral white matter integrity (Marks. 2011), lower blood viscosity and increased cardiovascular disease risk (Lee. 2012).

It is thus not surprising that Lee et al. write in their review of the ,ortality trends in the general population and the importance of cardiorespiratory fitnesst that the latter is "at least as important as the traditional risk factors, and is often more strongly associated with mortality." (Lee. 2010)

Identical gains on the bench, improved power and a fitness bonus - what more can you ask for? Well, I guess I know what you are probably asking for, now. Fat loss! Well, in the study at hand, the researchers didn't observe any changes in body composition.

The latter may be a results of the fact that the participants were already pretty fit (that's also likely to be the reason that their VO2 max suffered, when all the exercise they did was heavy lifting twice a week). Other studies, such as Hakkinen et al. (2003), Glowacki et al. (2004) and Mikkola et al. (2012) did observe improvements in body composition - pretty significant ones, in fact.

Figure 3: Changes in body fat (%) in the Mikkola study (Mikkola. 2012)

So, if an 11% greater increase in endurance capacity (based on time to exhaustion; not shown in any figure), 7% higher increases in peak and 10% greater increases in average power are not enough to motivate you to spend a couple of minutes sprinting along the track / on the treadmill twice a week, the fat loss results of the healthy male subjects in the previously cited study by Mikkola et al. (see Figure 3) could be the incentive you need to finally break out of your comfort = no results zone -  if you wanted to copy this regimen you'd have to add another 30min of steady state cardio before or after your HIIT sessions.

Reference:

• Cantrell, Gregory S., et al. "Maximal strength, power, and aerobic endurance adaptations to concurrent strength and sprint interval training." European journal of applied physiology (2014): 1-9.
• Cataldo, Angelo, et al. "Relationship between maximal fat oxidation and oxygen uptake: comparison between type 2 diabetes patients and healthy sedentary subjects." Journal of Biological Research-Bollettino della Società Italiana di Biologia Sperimentale 87.1 (2014).
• Emaus, Aina, et al. "Blood pressure, cardiorespiratory fitness and body mass: Results from the Tromsø Activity Study." Norsk epidemiologi 20.2 (2011).
• Ghouri, N., et al. "Lower cardiorespiratory fitness contributes to increased insulin resistance and fasting glycaemia in middle-aged South Asian compared with European men living in the UK." Diabetologia 56.10 (2013): 2238-2249. 
• Lee, Duck-chul, et al. "Review: Mortality trends in the general population: the importance of cardiorespiratory fitness." Journal of Psychopharmacology 24.4 suppl (2010): 27-35. 
• Lee, Duck-chul, et al. "Changes in fitness and fatness on the development of cardiovascular disease risk factorshypertension, metabolic syndrome, and hypercholesterolemia." Journal of the American College of Cardiology 59.7 (2012): 665-672.
• Marks, B. L., et al. "Aerobic fitness and obesity: relationship to cerebral white matter integrity in the brain of active and sedentary older adults." British journal of sports medicine 45.15 (2011): 1208-1215.
• Mikkola, J., et al. "Neuromuscular and cardiovascular adaptations during concurrent strength and endurance training in untrained men." International journal of sports medicine 33.09 (2012): 702-710.
• Singhvi, Ajay, et al. "Aerobic Fitness and Glycemic Variability in Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes." Endocrine Practice (2014): 1-18.

More Conflicting Evidence on Leucine Metabolite: HMB Makes Volleyballers Stronger.

The leucine metabolite HMB, i.e. β-Hydroxy-β-Methylbutyric acid, is unquestionable the comeback kid of the supplement industry. "It works!", "It's useless!", ... every now and then a new study supports one side of the debate. A group of international scientists does now present a study, which would support the use of the expensive, yet readily available amino acid.

Portal et al. (Portal. 2011) investigated the effect of 3g HMB/day "on body composition, muscle strength, anaerobic and aerobic capacity, anabolic/catabolic hormones and inflammatory mediators in elite, national team level adolescent volleyball players (13.5–18 years, 14 males, 14 females, Tanner stage 4–5) during the first 7 weeks of the training season". The results were unequivocal, yet not overtly impressive:

HMB led to a significant greater increase in FFM by skinfold thickness (56.4 ± 10.2 to 56.3 ± 8.6 vs. 59.3 ±  11.3 to 61.6 ± 11.3 kg in the control and HMB group, respectively, p < 0.001). HMB led to a significant greater increase in both dominant and non-dominant knee flexion isokinetic force/FFM, measured at fast (180°/sec) and slow (60°/sec) angle speeds, but had no significant effect on knee extension and elbow flexion and extension. HMB led to a significant greater increase in peak and mean anaerobic power determined by the Wingate anaerobic test (peak power: 15.5 ± 1.6 to 16.2 ± 1.2 vs. 15.4 ± 1.6 to 17.2 ± 1.2 watts/FFM, mean power: 10.6 ± 0.9 to 10.8 ± 1.1 vs. 10.7 ± 0.8 to 11.8 ± 1.0 watts/FFM in control and HMB group, respectively, p < 0.01), with no effect on fatigue index.

With no measurable effect on aerobic fitness, anabolic hormone levels or inflammatory mediators, the use of HMB appears to be advisable only in power and strength athletes.

If you are a bodybuilder on a high protein diet, I would however doubt that you would see any benefits from additional HMB. A diet rich in quality protein (high BCAA and particularly leucine content) should provide you with adequate amounts of leucine to keep endogenous HMB levels elevated.

Power Up With Bands: Inexpensive "Rubber Gear" Doubles Explosiveness of Professional Athletes and Will Have Similar Effects on the Bench Press of Regular Gymrats

Is "bench from the trench" all bro-science and you better bench with bands - additional bands, of course?

It's been a while since we've had a "simple" workout study here. With all the hypoxia or hyberbaric oxygen training shenanigan, it really seems as if there wouldn't be any simple and practicable ways to improve your training outcomes. Luckily, not all researchers focus on elite athletes who train in high-tech facilities with all sorts of performance enhancing gear.

David García-López, Sonsoles Hernández-Sánchez, Esperanza Martín, Pedro J. Marín, Fernando Zarzosa and Azael J. Herrero belong to this group of "low tech researchers" and their gear is a simple elastic band.

You're kiddin' me, right? Elastic bands?

I know rubber is not exactly what many of the bros consider "gear", but if you look at the astonishing results the researchers from the Laboratory of Physiology at the European University Miguel de Cervantes observed in their study, you may realize that "coolness" is a miserable guide, when it comes to exercise selection - in bros, pros, and noobs, by the way!

Figure 1: Acute changes in velocity and acceleration, when bench press is performed with / without additional bands; data expressed relative to inter-group means (García-López. 2014)

You want to know how I know that? Well, many of the bros are noobs when it comes to their actual training performance. So, if we are dealing with a study with 8 rugby players and 8 recreationally-trained subjects, we covered them all: Athletes, bros + noobs. And if the said study assigned the participants to two different experimental conditions in a cross-over design with

• regular training
• training with additional bands

says that the addition of elastic bands "significantly increased the range of concentric movement in which the barbell is accelerated and that this increase was significantly in higher in the "pros" (35%) compared to the "noobs" (13%), this tells you that using exercise bands may be especially beneficial for advanced trainees - exactly those people who usually laugh, when someone only mentions the green, red and blue bands.

Ain't got enough for today? Try this SuppVersity highly suggested read ➲ "Bicarbonate For Strength Athletes: 25g of Baking Soda Up Your Squat (+27%) and Bench Press (+6%) Within 60 Minutes" | read more

Bottom line: If we take into consideration that one of the major downfalls of the regular bench press is that it involves a certain amount of momentum, even if it is performed with picture perfect form. It is certain that adding a pair of elastic bands to your gym-tools will increase the time under tension. It is likely that this will help to increase your overall power and it is not impossible that it is going to to support your gains.

To make definitive statements about any of these "likely" and "possible" consequences of the regular use of additional bands during the bench press, we would yet need a 6-12 week trial the Spanish scientists would first have to finance - and let's be honest: Do you think the elastic band industry has the funds to do that ;-)

References:

• García-López, D. et al. "Free-weight augmentation with elastic bands improves bench-press kinematics in professional rugby players". Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. Jan 2014 [publish ahead of print]