Super appreciate this deep dive! And glad they aren’t recommending something crazy or convoluted. I have a nuts and bolts question about hitting all major muscle groups: Does that just mean every strength workout should include some upper body and some lower body? Or is there more to it?
And if yes, then why do some people do like, “legs day” and “arms day?” Is there any benefit to that for specific training goals or is it just a time management thing?
This is a great question. (Which also reminds me of something I should have probably covered in here, which is — guidelines are only helpful if they help you, not if they make you feel anxious or bad about the great stuff you’re already doing!)
But to answer it: I think the idea is to hit major muscle groups at least twice a week if you can. That doesn’t have to be in the same workout, but if you are only doing two strength workouts per week, it would be ideal to try to make them both full-body workouts.
I do like doing a split-training upper/lower body approach sometimes (i.e. one workout is upper, another is lower) because it feels like I can really fatigue the muscles and push them hard (high effort!). And then I get some extra rest because my next workout doesn’t involve the same muscle group. The upper/lower split tends to support goals like strength and hypertrophy because you can really amp up the training volume and loads.
According to the guidelines, though, it may make the most sense to do upper/lower if you can squeeze each workout in twice within one week (so two uppers, two lowers). This can be hard to put into practice for some of our schedules! So yeah. IF you feel like trying to follow the guidelines, and you can fit in four strength workouts per week, an upper/lower split can be great. If not, you may want to do full-body for each session.
That said! Looking at something like the 30-day challenge structure, I’d say that the core+conditioning workout also tends to be full-body, so in that sense even if your two “true” strength workouts are upper and lower, if you’re also incorporating that full-body workout you’re pretty much covered.
Yes it does! I sort of innately prefer a full body workout - I've tried the split approach and find I feel sort of unfinished! (Plus with my back issues, I need to do glutes like...all the time, it seems?) So I'm personally delighted to have the guidelines confirm what I'm doing lol, but I've also been curious about the purpose/intention of those split-training workouts. Thanks!
The consistency-over-optimization framing is exactly what women in perimenopause need to hear. This is the population most likely to get overwhelmed by conflicting advice, bail on a program that feels too complicated, and then conclude strength training “isn’t for them.” Twice a week, all major muscle groups, high effort —that’s a message they can actually act on. (For anyone wondering: all major muscle groups means legs, glutes, back, chest, shoulders, and core. A squat, a hinge, a push, a pull, and something for the core covers it.) The one thing I’d add: in perimenopause, the cost of not training is higher than for younger women. Muscle loss accelerates when estrogen drops. Consistency stops being a preference.
This is such a needed shift.
Most women I see aren’t under-training… they’re under-fueled and overdoing cardio.
Once you add enough protein and real resistance training, everything changes—energy, recovery, even how the body handles carbs.
Also important: muscle loss accelerates fast when the body is already under stress (illness, hormones, low intake).
The answer usually isn’t more effort.
It’s better support.
Great overview, I appreciate it!
Yes! Thank you for this breakdown. All very reassuring.
Super appreciate this deep dive! And glad they aren’t recommending something crazy or convoluted. I have a nuts and bolts question about hitting all major muscle groups: Does that just mean every strength workout should include some upper body and some lower body? Or is there more to it?
And if yes, then why do some people do like, “legs day” and “arms day?” Is there any benefit to that for specific training goals or is it just a time management thing?
This is a great question. (Which also reminds me of something I should have probably covered in here, which is — guidelines are only helpful if they help you, not if they make you feel anxious or bad about the great stuff you’re already doing!)
But to answer it: I think the idea is to hit major muscle groups at least twice a week if you can. That doesn’t have to be in the same workout, but if you are only doing two strength workouts per week, it would be ideal to try to make them both full-body workouts.
I do like doing a split-training upper/lower body approach sometimes (i.e. one workout is upper, another is lower) because it feels like I can really fatigue the muscles and push them hard (high effort!). And then I get some extra rest because my next workout doesn’t involve the same muscle group. The upper/lower split tends to support goals like strength and hypertrophy because you can really amp up the training volume and loads.
According to the guidelines, though, it may make the most sense to do upper/lower if you can squeeze each workout in twice within one week (so two uppers, two lowers). This can be hard to put into practice for some of our schedules! So yeah. IF you feel like trying to follow the guidelines, and you can fit in four strength workouts per week, an upper/lower split can be great. If not, you may want to do full-body for each session.
That said! Looking at something like the 30-day challenge structure, I’d say that the core+conditioning workout also tends to be full-body, so in that sense even if your two “true” strength workouts are upper and lower, if you’re also incorporating that full-body workout you’re pretty much covered.
This was so long! Does it make sense I hope?
Yes it does! I sort of innately prefer a full body workout - I've tried the split approach and find I feel sort of unfinished! (Plus with my back issues, I need to do glutes like...all the time, it seems?) So I'm personally delighted to have the guidelines confirm what I'm doing lol, but I've also been curious about the purpose/intention of those split-training workouts. Thanks!
The consistency-over-optimization framing is exactly what women in perimenopause need to hear. This is the population most likely to get overwhelmed by conflicting advice, bail on a program that feels too complicated, and then conclude strength training “isn’t for them.” Twice a week, all major muscle groups, high effort —that’s a message they can actually act on. (For anyone wondering: all major muscle groups means legs, glutes, back, chest, shoulders, and core. A squat, a hinge, a push, a pull, and something for the core covers it.) The one thing I’d add: in perimenopause, the cost of not training is higher than for younger women. Muscle loss accelerates when estrogen drops. Consistency stops being a preference.