Why the study?
This scientific statement updates the 2007 American Heart Association statement following accumulating evidence on the safety and efficacy of resistance training, and addresses low adherence among US adults.
Does resistance training improve cardiovascular health and risk factors in adults with and without cardiovascular disease?
Does resistance training improve cardiovascular health and risk factors in adults with and without cardiovascular disease?
This updated AHA scientific statement emphasizes that resistance training is a safe and effective strategy for improving cardiovascular health and managing risk factors in both healthy individuals and those with cardiovascular disease.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports integration of resistance training into exercise prescriptions for adults with and without CVD; extends evidence base for updated AHA guidelines.
Resistance training not only can improve or maintain muscle mass and strength, but also has favorable physiological and clinical effects on cardiovascular disease and risk factors. This scientific statement is an update of the previous (2007) American Heart Association scientific statement regarding resistance training and cardiovascular disease. Since 2007, accumulating evidence suggests resistance training is a safe and effective approach for improving cardiovascular health in adults with and without cardiovascular disease. This scientific statement summarizes the benefits of resistance training alone or in combination with aerobic training for improving traditional and nontraditional cardiovascular disease risk factors. We also address the utility of resistance training for promoting cardiovascular health in varied healthy and clinical populations. Because less than one-third of US adults report participating in the recommended 2 days per week of resistance training activities, this scientific statement provides practical strategies for the promotion and prescription of resistance training.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Paluch et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: