Key result
A low-load (30% 1RM) resistance training session produced significantly higher energy expenditure during exercise compared to a high-load (80% 1RM) session to momentary failure.
Why the study?
The study was conducted to evaluate energy expenditure, energy system contributions, and autonomic control during and after acute low-load versus high-load resistance training protocols to momentary failure in young adults.
Does low-load resistance training to failure increase energy expenditure during exercise compared to high-load resistance training in healthy young men?
RCT (n=11)
Randomized, counterbalanced, crossover design
No
Does low-load resistance training to failure increase energy expenditure during exercise compared to high-load resistance training in healthy young men?
p-value: p=0.0243
Low-load RT to failure may elevate acute EE; leaves open translation to cardiometabolic outcomes or training prescriptions.
The objective of the present study was to verify the energy expenditure (EE), energy system contributions and autonomic control during and after an acute low-load or high-load resistance training (RT) protocol to momentary failure (MF) in young adults. Eleven young men (22 ± 3 yrs, 71.8 ± 7.7 kg; 1.75 ± 0.06 m) underwent a randomized crossover design of three knee extension acute protocols: a low-load RT [30% of their maximal strength (1RM); RT30] or a high-load RT (80% of 1RM; RT80) protocol, with all sets being performed to MF; or a control session (Control) without exercise. Participants were measured for EE, energy system contributions, and cardiac autonomic control before, during, and after each exercise session. Exercise EE was significantly higher for RT30 as compared to RT80. Furthermore, post measurements of blood lactate levels and the anaerobic lactic system contribution were significantly greater for RT30 as compared to RT80. In addition, parasympathetic restoration was lower for RT30 as compared to RT80. In conclusion, a low-load (30% 1RM) RT session produced higher EE during exercise than a high-load (80% 1RM) RT session to MF, and may be a good option for fitness professionals, exercise physiologists, and practitioners when choosing the optimal RT protocol that provides more EE, especially for those who want or need to lose weight.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Brunelli et al. (2019) conducted an RCT in Healthy young men with a non-active lifestyle (n=11). Low-load resistance training (30% 1RM) vs. High-load resistance training (80% 1RM) was evaluated on Energy expenditure during exercise (p=0.0243). A low-load (30% 1RM) resistance training session produced significantly higher energy expenditure during exercise compared to a high-load (80% 1RM) session to momentary failure.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: