Search

Purpose: It is believed spot reduction, the exercise-induced localized loss of subcutaneous fat, does not occur as a result of an exercise program; however, evidence as a whole has been inconsistent. To reexamine this concept, we compared subcutaneous fat measurements before and after resistance training among 104 subjects (45 men, 59 women)., Methods: Subjects participated in 12 wk of supervised resistance training of their nondominant arm. Magnetic resonance imaging and skinfold calipers examined subcutaneous fat in the nondominant (trained) and dominant (untrained) arms before and after resistance training. Repeated-measures ANCOVA tested for subcutaneous fat differences within and between arms before, after, and from before to after resistance training by gender and measurement technique, with BMI and age as covariates. Simple linear regression compared subcutaneous fat changes before and after resistance training as assessed by MRI and skinfold., Results: Subcutaneous fat, measured by skinfold, decreased in the trained arm and not the untrained arm in the men (P < 0.01); it was similar in the total sample and in the women (P > 0.05). MRI determinations of subcutaneous fat changes were not different between arms in the total sample and by gender (P > 0.05)., Conclusion: Subcutaneous fat changes resulting from resistance training varied by gender and assessment technique. Skinfold findings indicate that spot reduction occurred in men but not in women. In contrast, MRI found a generalized subcutaneous fat loss independent of gender, supporting the notion that spot reduction does not occur as a result of resistance training. MRI, sensitive to changes along the entire upper arm, detected greater variation in resistance training responses, preventing significant differences between trained and untrained arms. Variation in upper-arm resistance training response was not evident from a single skinfold measurement at the belly of the muscle.

Purpose: The purposes of this study were 1) derive allometric scaling models of isometric biceps muscle strength using pretraining body mass (BM) and muscle cross-sectional area (CSA) as scaling variables in adult males, 2) test model appropriateness using regression diagnostics, and 3) cross-validate the models before and after 12 wk of resistance training., Methods: A subset of FAMuSS (Functional SNP Associated with Muscle Size and Strength) study data (N=136) were randomly split into two groups (A and B). Allometric scaling models using pretraining BM and CSA were derived and tested for group A. The scaling exponents determined from these models were then applied to and tested on group B pretraining data. Finally, these scaling exponents were applied to and tested on group A and B posttraining data., Results: BM and CSA models produced scaling exponents of 0.64 and 0.71, respectively. Regression diagnostics determined both models to be appropriate. Cross-validation of the models to group B showed that the BM model, but not the CSA model, was appropriate. Removal of the largest six subjects (CSA>30 cm) from group B resulted in an appropriate fit for the CSA model. Application of the models to group A posttraining data showed that both models were appropriate, but only the body mass model was successful for group B., Conclusion: These data suggest that the application of scaling exponents of 0.64 and 0.71, using BM and CSA, respectively, are appropriate for scaling isometric biceps strength in adult males. However, the scaling exponent using CSA may not be appropriate for individuals with biceps CSA>30 cm. Finally, 12 wk of resistance training does not alter the relationship between BM, CSA, and muscular strength as assessed by allometric scaling.

Overweight and obesity result in musculoskeletal impairments that limit exercise capacity. We examined if the muscle strength and size response to resistance training (RT) differed among 687 young (mean +/- SEM, 24.2 +/- 0.2 years) overweight and obese (OW) compared to normal weight (NW) adults as denoted by the body mass index (BMI). Subjects were 449 NW (22.0 +/- 0.1 kg.m(-2), 23.4 +/- 0.3 years) and 238 OW (29.2 +/- 0.2 kg.m(-2), 25.6 +/- 0.4 years) men (n = 285) and women (n = 402) who underwent 12 weeks (2 d.wk(-1)) of RT of the nondominant arm. Maximum voluntary contraction (MVC) and 1 repetition maximum (1RM) assessed peak elbow flexor strength. Magnetic resonance imaging measured the biceps muscle cross sectional area (CSA). Multiple dependent variable analysis of covariance tested if muscle strength and size differed among BMI groups pre-, post-, and pre-to-post-RT. Overweight and obese had greater MVC, 1RM, and CSA than NW pre- and post-RT (p < 0.001). Maximum voluntary contraction and 1RM gains were not different between BMI groups pre- to post-RT (p >or= 0.05). When adjusted for baseline values, NW had greater relative MVC (21.2 +/- 1.0 vs. 17.4 +/- 1.4%) and 1RM (54.3 +/- 1.5 vs. 49.0 +/- 2.0%) increases than OW (p < 0.05). Normal weight also had greater allometric MVC (0.48 +/- 0.02 kg.kg(-0.67) vs. 0.40 +/- 0.03 kg.kg(-0.67)) and 1RM (0.25 +/- 0.00 vs. 0.22 +/- 0.01 kg.kg(-0.67)) gains than OW (p < 0.05). CSA gains were greater among OW than NW (3.6 +/- 0.2 vs. 3.2 +/- 0.1 cm(2)) (p < 0.001); however, relative CSA increases were not different between BMI groups (19.4 +/- 0.5 vs. 18.4 +/- 0.7%) (p >or= 0.05). Despite similar relative muscle size increases, relative and allometic strength gains were less among OW than NW. These findings indicate the short-term relative and allometric muscle strength response to RT may be attenuated among adults who are overweight and obese.

Purpose: To examine associations among the angiotensin I-converting enzyme (ACE) insertion (I)/deletion (D) polymorphism and the response to a 12-wk (2 d.wk) unilateral, upper-arm resistance training (RT) program in the trained (T, nondominant) and untrained (UT, dominant) arms., Methods: Subjects were 631 (mean+/-SEM, 24.2+/-0.2 yr) white (80%) men (42%) and women (58%). The ACE ID genotype was in Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium with frequencies of 23.1, 46.1, and 30.8% for ACE II, ID, and DD, respectively (chi=1.688, P=0.430). Maximum voluntary contraction (MVC) and one-repetition maximum (1RM) assessed peak elbow flexor muscle strength. Magnetic resonance imaging measured biceps muscle cross-sectional area (CSA). Multiple variable and repeated-measures ANCOVA tested whether muscle strength and size differed at baseline and pre- to post-RT among T and UT and ACE ID genotype., Results: Baseline muscle strength and size were greater in UT than T (P<0.001) and did not differ among ACE ID genotype in either arm (P >or= 0.05). In T, MVC increases were greater for ACE II/ID (22%) than DD (17%) (P<0.05), whereas 1RM (51%) and CSA (19%) gains were not different among ACE ID genotype pre- to post-RT (P >or= 0.05). In UT, MVC increased among ACE II/ID (7%) (P<0.001) but was similar among ACE DD (2%) pre- to post-RT (P >or= 0.05). In UT, 1RM (11%) and CSA (2%) increases were greater for ACE DD/ID than ACE II (1RM, 7%; CSA, -0.1%) (P<0.05). ACE ID genotype explained approximately 1% of the MVC response to RT in T and approximately 2% of MVC, 2% of 1RM, and 4% of CSA response in UT (P<0.05)., Conclusion: ACE ID genotype is associated with the contralateral effects of unilateral RT, perhaps more so than with the muscle strength and size adaptations that result from RT.

Purpose: This study assessed variability in muscle size and strength changes in a large cohort of men and women after a unilateral resistance training program in the elbow flexors. A secondary purpose was to assess sex differences in size and strength changes after training., Methods: Five hundred eighty-five subjects (342 women, 243 men) were tested at one of eight study centers. Isometric (MVC) and dynamic strength (one-repetition maximum (1RM)) of the elbow flexor muscles of each arm and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the biceps brachii (to determine cross-sectional area (CSA)) were assessed before and after 12 wk of progressive dynamic resistance training of the nondominant arm., Results: Size changes ranged from -2 to +59% (-0.4 to +13.6 cm), 1RM strength gains ranged from 0 to +250% (0 to +10.2 kg), and MVC changes ranged from -32 to +149% (-15.9 to +52.6 kg). Coefficients of variation were 0.48 and 0.51 for changes in CSA (P = 0.44), 1.07 and 0.89 for changes in MVC (P < 0.01), and 0.55 and 0.59 for changes in CSA (P < 0.01) in men and women, respectively. Men experienced 2.5% greater gains for CSA (P < 0.01) compared with women. Despite greater absolute gains in men, relative increases in strength measures were greater in women versus men (P < 0.05)., Conclusion: Men and women exhibit wide ranges of response to resistance training, with some subjects showing little to no gain, and others showing profound changes, increasing size by over 10 cm and doubling their strength. Men had only a slight advantage in relative size gains compared with women, whereas women outpaced men considerably in relative gains in strength.