Having clear exercise guidelines is incredibly helpful. Most people struggle with training because they are just so unsure of what to do. The fact that society has led people to believe that they don’t have to exercise (as if it isn’t a fundamental need), means that people can be very unsure of what to do for exercise. While nutrition is confusing, at least you have (hopefully) been consuming food your whole life, so you at least know how to ensure some basic food requirements are met. However, if you haven’t exercised in years (or indeed ever), it can be very difficult to even know where to start.

So, the place we generally start when discussing exercise program design is with the general exercise guidelines that are given out by various health organisations. These guidelines certainly aren’t perfect, and they aren’t the optimal way to organise your training if you have very specific goals. However, they do serve as a really helpful rough starting point for creating a fairly well-balanced training program. 

If you haven’t already, then reading our articles on why exercise is so important, what the goals of exercise are, and the different types of exercise we have available to us, then it would be incredibly helpful to go back and read them now. If you need more tailored and personalised advice on how to structure your own training, then we may be able to help you via online coaching.

Exercise Guidelines

Whenever you stumble into a conversation about exercise guidelines and how to design a program, quite often you can be left quite confused. People have extremely divergent thoughts about what is required to see improvements in health, performance and body composition. From the bodybuilder who says you have to be resistance training for 2 hours 5-6 days a week, to the endurance athlete running for 40 hours a week, to the individual who feels guilty when they don’t get their three 1-hour sessions done that week. The exercise guidelines are not meant to accomplish every single goal, they are simply to provide some guidance on what an effective dose for general health and fitness goals looks like. 

The most up to date exercise guidelines for health suggest that adults aim for the following: 

  • 150-300 minutes of moderate intensity1 aerobic exercise per week (half that for vigorous exercise2). 
  • At least 2 resistance training sessions per week, strengthening all major muscle groups. 
  • Beyond formal exercise – move more, sit less (no specific recommendation). 

1 Moderate intensity would be rated as a 4-6 out of 10, with 10 being your absolute maximum effort. You should be able to talk, but not sing. 

2 Vigorous intensity would be rated as a 7-8+ out of 10. You should not be able to say more than a couple of words in between heavy breathing. 

general exercise guidelines

Now, of course, if you have ambitions to be as muscular as humanly possible, or to be as fit as you possibly can be, you will need to do more than that. But these serve as good baseline starting points.

The thing you should also remember is that just because you do more than the recommended resistance training or cardio training, it doesn’t exempt you from the other type of training. Just because you do 6 resistance sessions per week, doesn’t mean you can ignore your cardiovascular targets. Just because you run 600 minutes per week, doesn’t mean you can ignore any resistance training. For sure, there can be times when you focus on one more than the other, but you can’t ignore either forever and expect good outcomes.

We can consider these guidelines to be the rough, minimum effective dose of exercise that leads to robust health and fitness improvements in the general population. They are a good starting point, and if the vast majority of the population did this, we would see profound improvements in population health outcomes. 

So we have our minimum effective dose, the next thing we need to know is whether there is an upper limit! We would also ideally like to know whether there is a point of diminishing returns, where doing more leads to a drop off in the return on investment.

Unfortunately, because exercise can be so diverse, humans can be so diverse and because it is something that is trainable (meaning you can get better at it over time), it is very difficult to have very clear markers for these points. Clearly, the upper limit of cardiovascular training for someone who has been an avid runner for their whole life is going to be different than for someone who has been sedentary for the last 15 years. Similarly, the upper limit for resistance training is going to be different for a powerlifter compared to a bodybuilder compared to your average person in the streets. 

It is also difficult to define the upper limit, because it is not just exercise we have to consider. We have to consider whether you are adapted to the exercise and are eating enough calories to support that level of activity, along with sleeping enough to recover from that level of exercise. Most people find that they reach an upper limit with exercise because they generally aren’t eating to fuel that level of activity, they aren’t sleeping enough and generally their stress management practices aren’t dialled in either. So they reach an acute upper limit with their ability to recover from exercise as a result of a lack of focus on the things they need to do outside of training to allow them to train. 

Consider the issue of “RED-S”, which stands for “Relative Energy Deficiency in Sport”, a condition where athletes don’t consume enough calories for their training needs. It can lead to various health issues including impaired performance, increased injury risk, menstrual irregularities, bone loss, and psychological problems. It affects athletes of all genders and sports, and can actually happen in the general public too.

Similarly, excessive exercise without adequate rest and recovery can lead to “overtraining syndrome”, which is characterised by persistent fatigue, decreased performance, mood disturbances, and increased risk of injury. Overtraining can weaken the immune system, increase inflammation, and contribute to chronic stress, which may have negative implications for overall health and longevity.

However, even if someone were to eat enough, sleep enough and manage their stress, there does still seem to be upper limits for exercise which when pushed past, can lead to issues. 

Excessive exercise volume or intensity can raise the risk of musculoskeletal injuries, such as stress fractures, tendonitis, and muscle strains. Injuries can lead to temporary or permanent limitations in physical activity, negatively impacting overall health and quality of life.

While moderate amounts of exercise are beneficial for cardiovascular health, excessive endurance exercise, such as ultra-endurance events or prolonged high-intensity training, may increase the risk of adverse cardiovascular events, including arrhythmias, myocardial damage, and even atherosclerosis. Some studies suggest that extreme endurance athletes may have higher levels of coronary artery calcification, a marker of cardiovascular risk (however, this may actually be protective against cardiovascular disease). 

Intense or prolonged exercise can temporarily suppress immune function, leaving individuals more susceptible to infections and illnesses. Over time, chronic immune suppression associated with excessive exercise may have negative implications for overall health and longevity.

Excessive exercise can also contribute to psychological stress, especially if individuals feel pressured to meet performance goals or maintain a certain level of fitness. Chronic stress can negatively impact mental health, immune function, and overall well-being, potentially even affecting longevity.

Spending excessive time exercising may detract from other important aspects of life, such as social relationships, leisure activities, and relaxation. Neglecting these areas of life in pursuit of exercise goals may have negative consequences for mental health and overall happiness, which are important factors in longevity. Practically speaking, after about 10 hours of exercise per week, most people will likely run into issues. Usually, these are just practical issues, such as interference with work or family, lots of time commuting, having to shower frequently and that sort of stuff.

Ultimately, it is very difficult to determine where the upper limit is for exercise, however, realistically, most of you are unlikely to ever hit it anyway. It is much better to just start at a more moderate place, and then adjust our program based on objective and subjective recovery, rather than sticking to some theoretical limits. You may find your exercise tolerance is quite high or quite low, but either way, by starting at a moderate level, we can more easily adjust as needed. 

exercise dose, lower and upper limits

However, what is more important to understand than where the upper limit is, is where the point of diminishing returns is. We know what the minimum effective dose is, and as we have established, it is difficult to determine exactly where the upper limit for exercise is (unless we are discussing it on an individual case-by-case basis, in which case, we can be more accurate). But what would be great to know is whether there is a level of exercise where for each extra unit of work that you do, you start getting less return on investment than the previous units of work. This way we can allocate our work accordingly. If we know we only have so much exercise recovery capacity each week, we want to ensure we are “spending” that recovery capacity wisely.

You see, you certainly can do more volume of work than is needed to achieve your goals (i.e. you aren’t actually getting more benefit and you are really only taxing your recovery). While we are definitely biased towards getting people to exercise more, we do understand that most people have other things going on in their life that prevents them from either being able to or wanting to exercise more than is needed. Most people want to do somewhere between the minimum effective dose and the point of diminishing returns. This way you ensure you at least cover your bases, and you are training enough so that you are progressing along very nicely towards your goals without having to get into the realm of work that someone who is trying to be an athlete would have to do. 

Unfortunately, this is also context specific, and it is heavily dependent on your individual recovery capacities and specific goals. There is also a difference between someone who is predominantly pushing for progress in a specific area using a specific training modality (i.e. resistance training) and someone who is trying to progress everything at once. It is easier to describe the point of diminishing returns for each modality individually, and it can be assumed that when someone is combining multiple modalities, the point of diminishing returns for each modality individually is likely lowered (due to the body only having so much recovery capacity).

With resistance training, especially in the context of trying to build some muscle while also generally getting stronger, roughly 20-25 sets per major body part per week seems to be the upper limit where the return on investment really drops off dramatically (assuming the sets are being taken sufficiently close to failure). 6-10 sets per major body part per week can be seen as a lower limit where you do get a lot of bang for your buck in terms of progress. Lower than that seems to be able to still produce some progress, and can be effectively used to maintain strength and muscle, but for most people, somewhere in the range of 6-25 sets per body part per week seems to be the range most people should be working within. However, this doesn’t mean you need to do the top end of this range to see results, and it certainly doesn’t mean you need to do this for every body part at the same time. 

There likely is a total body limit, as there is systemic fatigue across the whole body, however, this is hard to define. Somewhere in the range of 60-120 sets per week total kind of makes sense as the rough range we should be working within, however, this isn’t a very hard rule. We generally suggest people start at the lower end, and then adjust upwards in a few select areas, while assessing recovery capacity and results. 

For cardio, it can be a little bit trickier. In general, anaerobic work is more fatiguing, so you can do drastically less of this compared to aerobic work. We generally recommend that most people only really allocate 10% of their cardio training volume to anaerobic work, and the bulk of cardio training volume should be aerobic work. So, using this allocation of training time, 150-300 minutes of cardio per week seems to be the sweet spot for most people, and 500-600 minutes of cardio per week seems to be the upper limit where the return on investment drops off (although there may still be benefits to be had from doing more beyond this, especially if it is lower intensity cardio). 

association between increased activity and mortality rate
Image taken from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10121111/ referencing https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9378548/. It shows the hazard ratio for all cause mortality (top graph) and cardiovascular disease mortality (bottom image) as a function of the dose of vigorous physical activity (VPA) and moderate physical activity (MPA). As you can hopefully see, you can do too much vigorous physical activity, but there really does seem to be more benefits to be had by adding in more moderate physical activity. 

For informal exercise, this is also difficult to be accurate with, as we don’t generally have good data for this. However, if we use the proxy of daily step count, it would appear that after about 15,000-20,000 steps per day, there is a point of significant diminishing returns. This level of activity generally transitions this light recovery promoting activity into something that can actually significantly hamper recovery. Most people also find that getting this level of daily steps is just a significant time investment, unless it is required for their job. 

daily steps and health
Image taken from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36216933/ which shows the hazard ratios for various diseases as a function of average daily step count. As you can hopefully see, there is a potential further benefit to be had from higher daily step counts, however, there seems to be a clear enough trend that 8,000 steps per day is associated with the majority of benefit and above ~15,000 steps per day, for some conditions there does seem to be a potential trend towards reversal of the benefits.

So, the following seems to be roughly the exercise guideline parameters we are working within:

Resistance exercise: 

  • Lower limit 6-10 sets per body part per week, generally divided into at least 2 workouts
  • Upper limit 20-25 sets per body part per week
  • Somewhere in the range of 60-120 sets per week total is seems to work well for most.

Cardio exercise:

  • Lower limit 150 minutes per week, of 90% aerobic cardio and 10% anaerobic cardio 
  • Upper limit 500-600 minutes per week, of 90% aerobic cardio and 10% anaerobic cardio
  • Somewhere in the range of 150-500 minutes per week seems to work well for most.

Informal exercise:

  • Lower limit 5,000 steps per day
  • Upper limit 15,000-20,000 steps per day
  • Somewhere in the range of 8,000-12,000 steps per day seems to work well for most.

Exercise TypeLower LimitUpper Limit
Resistance Exercise6-10 sets per body part per week (divided into at least 2 workouts)20-25 sets per body part per week (divided into at least 2 workouts)
Cardio Exercise150 minutes per week (90% aerobic, 10% anaerobic)500-600 minutes per week (90% aerobic, 10% anaerobic) (although more may still provide further benefit)
Informal Exercise5,000 steps per day15,000-20,000 steps per day

So, somewhere in between these parameters lies the rough exercise guidelines for most people. These certainly aren’t perfect for everyone and every goal, and depending on how you mix and match the modalities, the specifics will change, however, these are a good starting point for guiding us. 

As you will remember from our article on the types of exercise, there is another type of exercise that hasn’t been mentioned here, which is organised sport/group training. This is difficult to create guidelines around, because it is actually an incredibly broad category. There is a big difference between doing something like rugby and doing yoga. However, doing this type of exercise can contribute significantly to your general activity levels, and potentially have effects that are similar to resistance training or cardio training. As such, if you intend to include this type of exercise, you will have to adjust the recommendations accordingly.

For example, if you are doing an intense grappling sport like wrestling, you may already be significantly taxing your muscles and cardiovascular system. As such, if you also want to include resistance training, you may need an even lower volume of work to see benefits, and you may also only be able to recover from a lower volume of resistance training. So the exercise guidelines for each type of exercise aren’t entirely additive, and you do have to take into account the entirety of your exercise habits.

Clear Goals

Now, to actually use the exercise guidelines, you have to have clear goals. It makes sense for most people to at least do the bare minimum (150-300 minutes of moderate intensity aerobic exercise per week (half that for vigorous exercise), at least 2 resistance training sessions per week that strengthens all major muscle groups, and to move more and sit less (10,000 steps per day is a good goal here)). However, how you allocate your efforts after this is going to be dictated by your goals.

While we spend a lot of time discussing effective goal setting with our coaching clients, this is beyond the scope of this article. However, I do believe it is really important to cover some points related to goals here, as it will actually help you to better understand how you can potentially adjust the exercise guidelines to better accomplish your goals.

I do want to note that you can’t ride two horses with one ass. What I mean by this is that while you can certainly develop multiple attributes at once, generally speaking, you are much better off working towards a single goal and doing the minimum effective dose for the other goals you may have. You can sometimes get away with working towards 2 goals at once, if those goals are synergistic (e.g. getting stronger while also getting bigger), however, what most people try to do is work towards 2 antagonistic goals at once (e.g. build muscle while losing fat), and this tends to just lead to poor results. 

For most people, this will be easy enough to do with 2-4 resistance training sessions per week, combined with 2-4 cardio sessions per week, and supplemented with generally good activity levels (NEAT/steps). Deciding what they should prioritise or how they can adjust the guidelines can be tricky though.

If you want/need to push muscle building more, then do more resistance training. If you want/need to push cardiovascular fitness more, then do more cardio.

If you do other stuff that generally strengthens the body in less formalised ways than resistance training (i.e. you do something like pilates), then you may only need one resistance training session per week.

If you do sports, then you may not need to do as much cardio (although you could still benefit), as most sports have a larger cardiovascular component than a strength component. So in this case, your sports will potentially cover some of your cardio needs, so would potentially prioritise resistance training. However, if you really want to maximise your sporting performance, it probably makes sense to do more cardio. Your sports may also have significant muscle stimulating properties, and as such, you may not need to prioritise more resistance training. You will have to use your best judgement here.

If you would like a tailored training program, you should consider getting coaching. This can be really valuable in teaching you how to organise your training for your goals, and a good coach will always strive to create a tailored program for you, while also teaching you how to modify it specifically for your needs.

Exercise Guidelines Overview

The general exercise guidelines are as follows:

  • 150-300 minutes of moderate intensity aerobic exercise per week (half that for vigorous exercise). 
  • At least 2 resistance training sessions per week, strengthening all major muscle groups. 
  • Beyond formal exercise – move more, sit less (no specific recommendation). 

These are good rough starting points, and can be thought of as the minimum exercise goal.

However, we can actually get a bit more specific with our recommendations. As such, the following guideline parameters seem to make sense for most people.

Exercise TypeLower LimitUpper Limit
Resistance Exercise6-10 sets per body part per week (divided into at least 2 workouts)20-25 sets per body part per week (divided into at least 2 workouts)
Cardio Exercise150 minutes per week (90% aerobic, 10% anaerobic)500-600 minutes per week (90% aerobic, 10% anaerobic) (although more may still provide further benefit)
Informal Exercise5,000 steps per day15,000-20,000 steps per day

Staying somewhere between the lower limit and the upper limit will put you in a good place. However, depending on your specific goals, you may wish to do more or less of one of these exercise types.

If you would like more help with your training (or nutrition), we do also have online coaching spaces available. You can further build your knowledge on all things exercise by interacting with our free content. We recommend reading our foundational nutrition article, along with our foundational articles on sleep and stress management, if you really want to learn more about how to optimise your lifestyle. If you want even more free information on exercise, you can follow us on InstagramYouTube or listen to the podcast, where we discuss all the little intricacies of exercise. If you want to stay up to date with our latest content, we recommend subscribing to our newsletter. Finally, if you want to learn how to coach nutrition, then consider our Nutrition Coach Certification course. If you don’t understand something, or you just need clarification, you can always reach out to us on Instagram or via email.

References and Further Reading

Bull FC, Al-Ansari SS, Biddle S, et al. World Health Organization 2020 guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behaviour. Br J Sports Med. 2020;54(24):1451-1462. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2020-102955 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33239350/

Piercy KL, Troiano RP, Ballard RM, et al. The Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans. JAMA. 2018;320(19):2020-2028. doi:10.1001/jama.2018.14854 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30418471/

O’Donovan G, Blazevich AJ, Boreham C, et al. The ABC of Physical Activity for Health: a consensus statement from the British Association of Sport and Exercise Sciences. J Sports Sci. 2010;28(6):573-591. doi:10.1080/02640411003671212 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20401789/

Haskell WL, Lee IM, Pate RR, et al. Physical activity and public health: updated recommendation for adults from the American College of Sports Medicine and the American Heart Association. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2007;39(8):1423-1434. doi:10.1249/mss.0b013e3180616b27 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17762377/

Du Y, Liu B, Sun Y, Snetselaar LG, Wallace RB, Bao W. Trends in Adherence to the Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans for Aerobic Activity and Time Spent on Sedentary Behavior Among US Adults, 2007 to 2016. JAMA Netw Open. 2019;2(7):e197597. Published 2019 Jul 3. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.7597 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31348504/

Ding D, Mutrie N, Bauman A, Pratt M, Hallal PRC, Powell KE. Physical activity guidelines 2020: comprehensive and inclusive recommendations to activate populations. Lancet. 2020;396(10265):1780-1782. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)32229-7 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33248019/

DiPietro L, Al-Ansari SS, Biddle SJH, et al. Advancing the global physical activity agenda: recommendations for future research by the 2020 WHO physical activity and sedentary behavior guidelines development group. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2020;17(1):143. Published 2020 Nov 26. doi:10.1186/s12966-020-01042-2 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33239105/

Burtscher J, Burtscher M. Run for your life: tweaking the weekly physical activity volume for longevity. Br J Sports Med. 2020;54(13):759-760. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2019-101350 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31630092/

Marin-Couture E, Pérusse L, Tremblay A. The fit-active profile to better reflect the benefits of a lifelong vigorous physical activity participation: mini-review of literature and population data. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2021;46(7):763-770. doi:10.1139/apnm-2020-1109 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33667123/

O’Keefe JH, O’Keefe EL, Lavie CJ. The Goldilocks Zone for Exercise: Not Too Little, Not Too Much. Mo Med. 2018;115(2):98-105. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6139866/

O’Keefe JH, O’Keefe EL, Eckert R, Lavie CJ. Training Strategies to Optimize Cardiovascular Durability and Life Expectancy. Mo Med. 2023;120(2):155-162. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10121111/

Lee DH, Rezende LFM, Joh HK, et al. Long-Term Leisure-Time Physical Activity Intensity and All-Cause and Cause-Specific Mortality: A Prospective Cohort of US Adults. Circulation. 2022;146(7):523-534. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.121.058162 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9378548/

Master H, Annis J, Huang S, et al. Association of step counts over time with the risk of chronic disease in the All of Us Research Program [published correction appears in Nat Med. 2023 Dec;29(12):3270]. Nat Med. 2022;28(11):2301-2308. doi:10.1038/s41591-022-02012-w https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36216933/

Choi BC, Pak AW, Choi JC, Choi EC. Daily step goal of 10,000 steps: a literature review. Clin Invest Med. 2007;30(3):E146-E151. doi:10.25011/cim.v30i3.1083 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17716553/

Tudor-Locke C, Bassett DR Jr. How many steps/day are enough? Preliminary pedometer indices for public health. Sports Med. 2004;34(1):1-8. doi:10.2165/00007256-200434010-00001 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14715035/

Paluch AE, Bajpai S, Bassett DR, et al. Daily steps and all-cause mortality: a meta-analysis of 15 international cohorts. Lancet Public Health. 2022;7(3):e219-e228. doi:10.1016/S2468-2667(21)00302-9 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35247352/

Hall KS, Hyde ET, Bassett DR, et al. Systematic review of the prospective association of daily step counts with risk of mortality, cardiovascular disease, and dysglycemia. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2020;17(1):78. Published 2020 Jun 20. doi:10.1186/s12966-020-00978-9 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7305604/

Yuenyongchaiwat K. Effects of 10,000 steps a day on physical and mental health in overweight participants in a community setting: a preliminary study. Braz J Phys Ther. 2016;20(4):367-373. doi:10.1590/bjpt-rbf.2014.0160 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27556393/

Ahmadi MN, Rezende LFM, Ferrari G, Del Pozo Cruz B, Lee IM, Stamatakis E. Do the associations of daily steps with mortality and incident cardiovascular disease differ by sedentary time levels? A device-based cohort study. Br J Sports Med. 2024;58(5):261-268. Published 2024 Mar 8. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2023-107221 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38442950/

Castres I, Tourny C, Lemaitre F, Coquart J. Impact of a walking program of 10,000 steps per day and dietary counseling on health-related quality of life, energy expenditure and anthropometric parameters in obese subjects. J Endocrinol Invest. 2017;40(2):135-141. doi:10.1007/s40618-016-0530-9 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27600387/

Morgan AL, Tobar DA, Snyder L. Walking toward a new me: the impact of prescribed walking 10,000 steps/day on physical and psychological well-being. J Phys Act Health. 2010;7(3):299-307. doi:10.1123/jpah.7.3.299 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20551485/

Krzysztofik M, Wilk M, Wojdała G, Gołaś A. Maximizing Muscle Hypertrophy: A Systematic Review of Advanced Resistance Training Techniques and Methods. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019;16(24):4897. Published 2019 Dec 4. doi:10.3390/ijerph16244897 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6950543/

Chen HT, Chung YC, Chen YJ, Ho SY, Wu HJ. Effects of Different Types of Exercise on Body Composition, Muscle Strength, and IGF-1 in the Elderly with Sarcopenic Obesity. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2017;65(4):827-832. doi:10.1111/jgs.14722 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28205203/

van Baak MA, Pramono A, Battista F, et al. Effect of different types of regular exercise on physical fitness in adults with overweight or obesity: Systematic review and meta-analyses. Obes Rev. 2021;22 Suppl 4(Suppl 4):e13239. doi:10.1111/obr.13239 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33939229/

Plotkin DL, Roberts MD, Haun CT, Schoenfeld BJ. Muscle Fiber Type Transitions with Exercise Training: Shifting Perspectives. Sports (Basel). 2021;9(9):127. Published 2021 Sep 10. doi:10.3390/sports9090127 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8473039/

Schoenfeld BJ, Grgic J, Van Every DW, Plotkin DL. Loading Recommendations for Muscle Strength, Hypertrophy, and Local Endurance: A Re-Examination of the Repetition Continuum. Sports (Basel). 2021;9(2):32. Published 2021 Feb 22. doi:10.3390/sports9020032 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7927075/

Ralston GW, Kilgore L, Wyatt FB, Buchan D, Baker JS. Weekly Training Frequency Effects on Strength Gain: A Meta-Analysis. Sports Med Open. 2018;4(1):36. Published 2018 Aug 3. doi:10.1186/s40798-018-0149-9 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30076500/

Behm DG, Young JD, Whitten JHD, et al. Effectiveness of Traditional Strength vs. Power Training on Muscle Strength, Power and Speed with Youth: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Front Physiol. 2017;8:423. Published 2017 Jun 30. doi:10.3389/fphys.2017.00423 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5491841/

Maestroni L, Read P, Bishop C, et al. The Benefits of Strength Training on Musculoskeletal System Health: Practical Applications for Interdisciplinary Care. Sports Med. 2020;50(8):1431-1450. doi:10.1007/s40279-020-01309-5 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32564299/

Folland JP, Williams AG. The adaptations to strength training : morphological and neurological contributions to increased strength. Sports Med. 2007;37(2):145-168. doi:10.2165/00007256-200737020-00004 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17241104/

Iversen VM, Norum M, Schoenfeld BJ, Fimland MS. No Time to Lift? Designing Time-Efficient Training Programs for Strength and Hypertrophy: A Narrative Review. Sports Med. 2021;51(10):2079-2095. doi:10.1007/s40279-021-01490-1 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8449772/

Calatayud J, Vinstrup J, Jakobsen MD, et al. Importance of mind-muscle connection during progressive resistance training. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2016;116(3):527-533. doi:10.1007/s00421-015-3305-7 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26700744/

Colquhoun RJ, Gai CM, Aguilar D, et al. Training Volume, Not Frequency, Indicative of Maximal Strength Adaptations to Resistance Training. J Strength Cond Res. 2018;32(5):1207-1213. doi:10.1519/JSC.0000000000002414 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29324578/

Thomas MH, Burns SP. Increasing Lean Mass and Strength: A Comparison of High Frequency Strength Training to Lower Frequency Strength Training. Int J Exerc Sci. 2016;9(2):159-167. Published 2016 Apr 1. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4836564/

Schumann M, Feuerbacher JF, Sünkeler M, et al. Compatibility of Concurrent Aerobic and Strength Training for Skeletal Muscle Size and Function: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Sports Med. 2022;52(3):601-612. doi:10.1007/s40279-021-01587-7 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34757594/

de Santana DA, Castro A, Cavaglieri CR. Strength Training Volume to Increase Muscle Mass Responsiveness in Older Individuals: Weekly Sets Based Approach. Front Physiol. 2021;12:759677. Published 2021 Sep 30. doi:10.3389/fphys.2021.759677 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8514686/

Balshaw TG, Maden-Wilkinson TM, Massey GJ, Folland JP. The Human Muscle Size and Strength Relationship: Effects of Architecture, Muscle Force, and Measurement Location. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2021;53(10):2140-2151. doi:10.1249/MSS.0000000000002691 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33935234/

Bernárdez-Vázquez R, Raya-González J, Castillo D, Beato M. Resistance Training Variables for Optimization of Muscle Hypertrophy: An Umbrella Review. Front Sports Act Living. 2022;4:949021. Published 2022 Jul 4. doi:10.3389/fspor.2022.949021 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9302196/

Heidel KA, Novak ZJ, Dankel SJ. Machines and free weight exercises: a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing changes in muscle size, strength, and power. J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2022;62(8):1061-1070. doi:10.23736/S0022-4707.21.12929-9 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34609100/

Ralston GW, Kilgore L, Wyatt FB, Baker JS. The Effect of Weekly Set Volume on Strength Gain: A Meta-Analysis. Sports Med. 2017;47(12):2585-2601. doi:10.1007/s40279-017-0762-7 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28755103/

Suchomel TJ, Nimphius S, Bellon CR, Hornsby WG, Stone MH. Training for Muscular Strength: Methods for Monitoring and Adjusting Training Intensity. Sports Med. 2021;51(10):2051-2066. doi:10.1007/s40279-021-01488-9 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34101157/

Androulakis-Korakakis P, Michalopoulos N, Fisher JP, et al. The Minimum Effective Training Dose Required for 1RM Strength in Powerlifters. Front Sports Act Living. 2021;3:713655. Published 2021 Aug 30. doi:10.3389/fspor.2021.713655 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34527944/

Schoenfeld BJ. The mechanisms of muscle hypertrophy and their application to resistance training. J Strength Cond Res. 2010;24(10):2857-2872. doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181e840f3 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20847704/

Baz-Valle E, Balsalobre-Fernández C, Alix-Fages C, Santos-Concejero J. A Systematic Review of The Effects of Different Resistance Training Volumes on Muscle Hypertrophy. J Hum Kinet. 2022;81:199-210. Published 2022 Feb 10. doi:10.2478/hukin-2022-0017 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8884877/

Beattie K, Kenny IC, Lyons M, Carson BP. The effect of strength training on performance in endurance athletes. Sports Med. 2014;44(6):845-865. doi:10.1007/s40279-014-0157-y https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24532151/

Hottenrott K, Ludyga S, Schulze S. Effects of high intensity training and continuous endurance training on aerobic capacity and body composition in recreationally active runners. J Sports Sci Med. 2012;11(3):483-488. Published 2012 Sep 1. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3737930/

Jamka M, Mądry E, Krzyżanowska-Jankowska P, et al. The effect of endurance and endurance-strength training on body composition and cardiometabolic markers in abdominally obese women: a randomised trial. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):12339. Published 2021 Jun 11. doi:10.1038/s41598-021-90526-7 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34117276/

Doma K, Deakin GB, Schumann M, Bentley DJ. Training Considerations for Optimising Endurance Development: An Alternate Concurrent Training Perspective. Sports Med. 2019;49(5):669-682. doi:10.1007/s40279-019-01072-2 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30847824/

Düking P, Zinner C, Trabelsi K, et al. Monitoring and adapting endurance training on the basis of heart rate variability monitored by wearable technologies: A systematic review with meta-analysis. J Sci Med Sport. 2021;24(11):1180-1192. doi:10.1016/j.jsams.2021.04.012 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34489178/

Milanović Z, Sporiš G, Weston M. Effectiveness of High-Intensity Interval Training (HIT) and Continuous Endurance Training for VO2max Improvements: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Controlled Trials. Sports Med. 2015;45(10):1469-1481. doi:10.1007/s40279-015-0365-0 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26243014/

Herzig D, Asatryan B, Brugger N, Eser P, Wilhelm M. The Association Between Endurance Training and Heart Rate Variability: The Confounding Role of Heart Rate. Front Physiol. 2018;9:756. Published 2018 Jun 19. doi:10.3389/fphys.2018.00756 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29971016/

Laursen PB, Shing CM, Peake JM, Coombes JS, Jenkins DG. Interval training program optimization in highly trained endurance cyclists. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2002;34(11):1801-1807. doi:10.1097/00005768-200211000-00017 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12439086/

Cadore EL, Pinto RS, Bottaro M, Izquierdo M. Strength and endurance training prescription in healthy and frail elderly. Aging Dis. 2014;5(3):183-195. Published 2014 Jun 1. doi:10.14336/AD.2014.0500183 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4037310/

Baquet G, van Praagh E, Berthoin S. Endurance training and aerobic fitness in young people. Sports Med. 2003;33(15):1127-1143. doi:10.2165/00007256-200333150-00004 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14719981/

Vesterinen V, Nummela A, Heikura I, et al. Individual Endurance Training Prescription with Heart Rate Variability. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2016;48(7):1347-1354. doi:10.1249/MSS.0000000000000910 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26909534/

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;26(8):2293-2307. doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e31823a3e2d https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22002517/

Tanaka H, Swensen T. Impact of resistance training on endurance performance. A new form of cross-training?. Sports Med. 1998;25(3):191-200. doi:10.2165/00007256-199825030-00005 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9554029/

Foster C, Farland CV, Guidotti F, et al. The Effects of High Intensity Interval Training vs Steady State Training on Aerobic and Anaerobic Capacity. J Sports Sci Med. 2015;14(4):747-755. Published 2015 Nov 24. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4657417/

Stöggl TL, Sperlich B. The training intensity distribution among well-trained and elite endurance athletes. Front Physiol. 2015;6:295. Published 2015 Oct 27. doi:10.3389/fphys.2015.00295 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4621419/

Gaesser GA, Angadi SS. High-intensity interval training for health and fitness: can less be more?. J Appl Physiol (1985). 2011;111(6):1540-1541. doi:10.1152/japplphysiol.01237.2011 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21979806/

Methenitis S. A Brief Review on Concurrent Training: From Laboratory to the Field. Sports (Basel). 2018;6(4):127. Published 2018 Oct 24. doi:10.3390/sports6040127 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6315763/

Berryman N, Mujika I, Bosquet L. Concurrent Training for Sports Performance: The 2 Sides of the Medal. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2019;14(3):279-285. doi:10.1123/ijspp.2018-0103 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29809072/

Baar K. Using molecular biology to maximize concurrent training. Sports Med. 2014;44 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):S117-S125. doi:10.1007/s40279-014-0252-0 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25355186/

Sousa AC, Neiva HP, Gil MH, et al. Concurrent Training and Detraining: The Influence of Different Aerobic Intensities. J Strength Cond Res. 2020;34(9):2565-2574. doi:10.1519/JSC.0000000000002874 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30946274/

Gäbler M, Prieske O, Hortobágyi T, Granacher U. The Effects of Concurrent Strength and Endurance Training on Physical Fitness and Athletic Performance in Youth: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Front Physiol. 2018;9:1057. Published 2018 Aug 7. doi:10.3389/fphys.2018.01057 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30131714/

Leveritt M, Abernethy PJ, Barry BK, Logan PA. Concurrent strength and endurance training. A review. Sports Med. 1999;28(6):413-427. doi:10.2165/00007256-199928060-00004 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10623984/

Huiberts RO, Wüst RCI, van der Zwaard S. Concurrent Strength and Endurance Training: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on the Impact of Sex and Training Status. Sports Med. 2024;54(2):485-503. doi:10.1007/s40279-023-01943-9 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37847373/

Scribbans TD, Vecsey S, Hankinson PB, Foster WS, Gurd BJ. The Effect of Training Intensity on VO2max in Young Healthy Adults: A Meta-Regression and Meta-Analysis. Int J Exerc Sci. 2016;9(2):230-247. Published 2016 Apr 1. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4836566/

Gim MN, Choi JH. The effects of weekly exercise time on VO2max and resting metabolic rate in normal adults. J Phys Ther Sci. 2016;28(4):1359-1363. doi:10.1589/jpts.28.1359 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4868243/

Gormley SE, Swain DP, High R, et al. Effect of intensity of aerobic training on VO2max. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2008;40(7):1336-1343. doi:10.1249/MSS.0b013e31816c4839 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18580415/

Paddy Farrell

Hey, I'm Paddy!

I am a coach who loves to help people master their health and fitness. I am a personal trainer, strength and conditioning coach, and I have a degree in Biochemistry and Biomolecular Science. I have been coaching people for over 10 years now.

When I grew up, you couldn't find great health and fitness information, and you still can't really. So my content aims to solve that!

I enjoy training in the gym, doing martial arts and hiking in the mountains (around Europe, mainly). I am also an avid reader of history, politics and science. When I am not in the mountains, exercising or reading, you will likely find me in a museum.