The primary purpose of this study was to identify the impact of whole-body resistance training (RT) at different load intensities on adipokines, adhesion molecules, and extracellular heat shock proteins in postmenopausal women. As secondary purpose, we analyzed the impact of RT at different load intensities on body fat, muscular strength, and physical performance. Forty participants were randomized into lower-load intensity RT (LIRT, n = 20, 30–35 repetition maximum in the first set of each exercise) or higher-load intensity RT (HIRT, n = 20, 8–12 repetition maximum in the first set of each exercise). Adipokines (adiponectin and leptin), adhesion molecules (MCP-1 and ICAM-1), extracellular heat shock proteins (HO-1 and eHSP60), body fat, muscular strength (1RM), and physical performance [400-meter walking test (400-M) and 6-minute walking test (6MWT)] were analyzed at baseline and after 12-weeks RT. There was a significant time-by-group interaction for eHSP60 (P = 0.049) and 400-M (P = 0.003), indicating superiority of HIRT (d = 0.47 and 0.55). However, both groups similarly improved adiponectin, ICAM-1, HO-1, body fat, 1RM, and 6MWT (P < 0.05). Our study suggests that load intensity does not seem to determine the RT effect on several obesity-related pro-inflammatory and chemotactic compounds, body fat, 1RM, and 6MWT in postmenopausal women, although a greater improvement has been revealed for eHSP60 and 400-M in HIRT. Novelty: Higher-load intensity resistance training improves eHSP60 and 400-M in postmenopausal women. Resistance training improves the inflammatory profile, body fat, muscle strength, and 6MWT, regardless of load intensity.

Carneiro, MAS, de Oliveira Júnior, GN, de Sousa, JFR, Murta, EFC, Orsatti, CL, Michelin, MA, Cyrino, ES, and Orsatti, FL. Effects of resistance training at different loads on inflammatory biomarkers, muscle mass, muscular strength, and physical performance in postmenopausal women. J Strength Cond Res 36(6): 1582–1590, 2022—It has been suggested that the effect of resistance training (RT) on circulating proinflammatory biomarkers may be dependent on muscle mass gain. A few recent studies have suggested that lower-load RT (LLRT; loads <50% of 1 repetition maximum [1RM] and repetition performed until, or close to, voluntary concentric failure) may be superior to higher-load RT (HLRT; loads >70% of 1RM) in increasing muscle mass. Hence, this study aimed to test whether LLRT is superior to HLRT for increasing muscle mass (total fat-free mass [TFFM] and leg fat-free mass [LFFM]) and improving circulating inflammatory biomarkers (interleukin [IL]-6, IL1-ra, tumor necrosis factor [TNF]-α, and extracellular heat shock protein [eHSP]70) in postmenopausal women (PW) (primary outcome). The secondary outcome was to compare the changes in muscular strength and physical performance (4-meter walking test [4-M], timed-up-and-go [TUG] test, and sit-to-stand [STS] test) between the LLRT and HLRT. The PW were randomized into 2 groups: LLRT (n = 14; loads necessary to perform 30–35 repetitions) and HLRT (n = 15; loads necessary to perform 8–12 repetitions). The greater magnitude of increase in LFFM (p = 0.033) was observed in LLRT when compared with HLRT. Moreover, there was a trend for a greater increase in TFFM in LLRT over HLRT (p = 0.070). However, there were similar improvements in TNF-α and muscular strength (p < 0.001). Furthermore, there was no significant difference between the RT schemes on IL-6, IL-1ra, and eHSP70 levels. Thus, although performing LLRT until, or close to, voluntary concentric failure seems to provide a greater stimulus for an increase in muscle mass than HLRT, it does not seem to affect the responses in circulating inflammatory biomarkers, muscular strength, and physical performance in PW.

No abstract

No abstract

Franco, CMC, Carneiro, MAS, de Sousa, JFR, Gomes, GK, and Orsatti, FL. Influence of high- and low-frequency resistance training on lean body mass and muscle strength gains in untrained men. J Strength Cond Res 35(8): 2089–2094, 2021—The aim of this study was to investigate whether high-frequency resistance training (HFRT) performs better in lean body mass (LBM) and muscle strength gains when compared with low-frequency resistance training (LFRT). Eighteen untrained males (height: 1.76 ± 0.05 m, body mass: 78.3 ± 13.5 kg, and age: 22.1 ± 2.2 years) were randomly allocated into HFRT (n = 9) and LFRT (n = 9). Muscle strength {1 repetition maximum (RM) (bench press [BP] and unilateral leg extension [LE])} and LBM (DXA) were assessed at before and after 8 weeks of training. Both groups performed 7 whole-body resistance exercises, standardized to 10 sets per week, 8–12 maximal repetitions, and 90–120 seconds of rest in a 5-day resistance training routine. The LFRT performed a split-body routine, training each specific muscle group once a week. The HFRT performed a total-body routine, training all muscle groups every session and progressed from a training frequency of once per week to a training frequency of 5 times per week. Lean body mass increased without differences between groups (HFRT = 1.0 kg vs. LFRT = 1.5 kg; p = 0.377). Similarly, 1RM increased without differences between groups (right LE, HFRT = 21.2 kg vs. LFRT = 19.7 kg, p = 0.782; BP, HFRT = 7.1 kg vs. LFRT = 4.5 kg, p = 0.293). These findings suggest that in young untrained men, progressing from a training frequency of once per week to a training frequency of 5 times per week with equated volume produces similar gains in LBM and muscle strength as a constant training frequency of once per week, over an 8-week training period.