The newest resistance-training guidelines are…mostly good, actually?!

What they say, and what you need to know

Exploring the positive outcomes of resistance training, from Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise (creative commons license)

A quick note before we dive in that this post does mention ob*sity, in the context of people who were not included in the research on resistance training that was referenced for the new guidelines (ugh). But otherwise, they surprisingly and encouragingly do not discuss weight, body composition, or even metabolic health.

---

Before you freak out, no, I’m not suddenly fangirling over our jeans-wearing, cold-plunging Secretary of Health and Human Services. The new guidelines I’m psyched about are coming not from the government but from the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM), which is a respected private, non-profit exercise science organization. This week, they published the first updates to their resistance training guidelines in 17 years — and it’s about damn time, because official strength training guidelines have historically been vague at best, and confusing, overwhelming, and discouraging at worst.

The new guidelines were published in the ACSM’s peer-reviewed journal Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise as a “Position Stand,” and structured as an “overview of reviews” — aka a very deep dive into more than 130 systematic reviews (and data from more than 30,000 people), which is great because we’ve had an explosion of research in this field in the past 15 years. And the best part, IMO, is that the guidelines encourage consistency and sustainability over optimization. I love this quote from Stuart Phillips, distinguished professor in McMaster University’s Department of Kinesiology and an author of the new guidelines, from the press release:

“The best resistance training program is the one you’ll actually stick with[…] Training all major muscle groups at least twice a week matters far more than chasing the idea of a ‘perfect’ or complex training plan. Whether it’s barbells, bands, or bodyweight, consistency and effort drive results.”

YES! As we’ve talked about often around here, there’s so much noise around “optimal” exercise that many of us get discouraged before we even begin. But these guidelines emphasize figuring out the approach and goals that work best for the individual, and focusing on long-term adherence.

So let’s discuss a few things we can learn from the new guidelines:

1. Resistance training really is effective. Resistance training in all forms improved muscle size, strength, power, endurance, speed, balance, gait speed, activities of daily living, and more. It basically didn’t matter what folks were doing, as long as they were doing some kind of resistance exercise: They experienced all these benefits.

2. Consistency and long-term adherence matter most. More than time under tension, more than the type of resistance you’re using (machines, free weights, bodyweight, bands), even more than training to failure. The most important thing is that you keep showing up and working hard.

3. Using a progressive overload approach can be great. Remember that progressive overload basically means starting with lower volume work, repeating the same exercises, and increasing training volume over time, whether by adding weight, reps, or sets (like in our own strength programming here at How to Move). The guidelines find that progression is not necessary to achieve beneficial outcomes (which may be a relief for those who don’t love repeating workouts). But: If you’re looking to keep growing your strength over the long term — or if you are a beginner who truly needs to start with a very low training volume — progressive overload is important.

   1. This may seem confusing, and I’m still working through it a bit myself. My understanding is basically, if you do resistance training at all, you’re better off than if you weren’t doing it. If you are very new to it (or coming back to it after a long break), it’s important to start small — more accessible ranges of motion, lighter weights, maybe fewer total reps/sets — because your body will feel better if you ease in and give it time to adjust to the new stimulus. You’ll likely start to gain strength pretty quickly, and you’ll need to increase training volume to keep improving. AND: If you’re already active and regularly resistance training, and you have that baseline of improvements over a total lack of resistance training, you’ll also need to add volume to keep progressing and experiencing more of the benefits.

   2. So: I’d still suggest taking a progressive overload approach if you can. But know that you’re still getting some great benefits of strength training even if you don’t.

4. “Close to failure” is still a good goal. Completing sets of an exercise to muscle failure — aka being completely unable to do another rep — didn’t seem to affect strength, hypertrophy, or power. The authors instead advise lifting to “near-failure,” where you feel you have 2-3 “repetitions in reserve” (aka you could do 2 or 3 more reps if you had to). This is the approach I always recommend here on HTM, so I’m very relieved that it still seems to hold water! Phew.

5. If you’re an athlete and/or training for a specific goal, certain variables do matter. For example, for strength, heavier loads are important. For muscle hypertrophy, total volume is important (and the structure of the work you’re doing is a lot less critical than the amount you’re doing across the week). If your goal is just to get all the amazing benefits of resistance training, the most important thing is — again — figuring out the approach that helps you stick with it long-term. Experimenting with these variables, if you have the time and interest, can be fun, but it isn’t necessary for most of the rewards of strength training.

6. Resistance training is safe. The research finds that exercise does not increase the risk of serious adverse events; cardiovascular complications during exercise nearly always happen during aerobic training and not resistance training; and musculoskeletal complications that occur during resistance training are nearly always caused by preexisting conditions and are resolved by changing the intensity or position of the resistance training exercise.

The bottom line, the guidelines say, is that healthy* adults should perform resistance training with “high effort” (so yes, you do need to work hard!) at least twice a week, with all major muscle groups being engaged.

*Okay, here’s where I do have questions, because the randomized trials included here were focused on “healthy” adults — defined as folks with no diseases, including, yes, “ob*sity, sarcopenia, and physical frailty.” Given that some 40% of adults have ob*sity (problematic as that categorization is generally, and problematic as it is to consider it a “disease”), and 10-20 percent of older adults have sarcopenia and/or physical frailty (not to mention the myriad other conditions that also weren’t represented in the research), that’s a large number of people left out by these guidelines. On this, the Position Stand notes, “Provided sufficient evidence, future guidelines can be developed for additional subpopulations (e.g., older adults and clinical populations).” So let’s hope those guidelines show up before too long — and that they aren’t the fatphobic and ableist nightmare we might brace ourselves for.

But honestly, I’ve seen little evidence that the guidelines should differ based on body size, or on whether you have sarcopenia or frailty. Certainly some folks may make different choices than others in terms of free weights versus bodyweight or bands, sets and reps, etc., but again: it would surprise me a lot if there were any reason that at least two sessions a week, hitting all the muscle groups, working with high effort, wouldn’t apply across the board. We’ll see! Maybe!

Still, the big shift in these guidelines — from in-the-weeds optimization to zoomed-out, otherwise inclusive reality (just start lifting!) — is an encouraging step.

The best workout continues to be the one you’ll actually do.

Here are some ideas:

xo
Anna