March 6, 2003

BIRMINGHAM, AL — A new form of strength training in which weights are lifted in a slow, deliberate manner, is less effective for burning calories than traditional resistance training, according to a study conducted by researchers at the University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) Department of Human Studies. The study is featured in the current issue of the Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research.

In the new resistance training technique, known as “super slow,” 10 seconds are taken to raise a weight and five seconds to lower the weight. It has been credited for increasing muscle mass. One claim, however, is that it burns more energy, and thus, more calories than traditional resistance training.

“We have found that aerobic and traditional resistance training may be more beneficial for burning calories and for cardiovascular fitness,” says UAB researcher Gary Hunter, Ph.D., co-author of the study.

UAB researchers conducted a small study to determine the effects of the new technique and the traditional resistance training on energy expenditure. Seven males at the average age of 24.3 years ± 3.8 years participated in the study. All had used traditional resistance training for at least one year.

Subjects were randomly assigned to perform either a traditional strength-training program or the slower program. After three days of rest, the subjects switched. The 30-minute exercise program included the leg extension, bench press, bicep curl, leg curl, French curl, bent row, reverse curl, military press, upright row and squats.

The slow program consisted of one set of eight repetitions with 10 seconds for lifting and five seconds for lowering weight. The traditional program involved two sets of eight repetitions with no time constraints for raising and lowering weight.

Researchers found that the energy expended during the slower training was low at about 107 calories burned, dramatically less than the 155 calories burned in a traditional program of identical duration. In addition, blood lactate and heart rate responses to the slower program support the premise that its exercise stimulus is insufficient to produce optimal increases in aerobic or strength fitness.

“These results suggest that this training may not be optimal for either increasing energy expenditure or improving cardiovascular responses to training,” according to the article. “For example, more than 30 workouts would have to be undertaken to burn the equivalent of one pound of fat tissue,” Hunter said. Conversely, it would take only 22 traditional resistance training workouts for 30 minutes to burn a pound of fat tissue.

“Both aerobic and traditional resistance training may be more beneficial than this type of training for increasing energy expenditure and cardiovascular fitness.”

Co-authors of the study were Scott Snyder, Ph.D., associate professor in UAB Department of Human Studies, and UAB graduate student Darryl Seelhorst.