trainlog

Unsuccessful with Your Exercise Regime? Here's Scientifically-Backed Advice

In the realm of exercise, a one - size - fits - all strategy is a fallacy. Two individuals undertaking identical workout routines can yield starkly different outcomes. For instance, one person may toil in the gym for months with minimal progress, while their training partner experiences incremental strength gains in each session.

Exercise research has coined a term for those who do not achieve the anticipated results from a particular exercise type: non - responders. Repeated studies have shown that among participants following the same exercise program, some exhibit substantial improvement, while others show no improvement whatsoever.

This can be a source of frustration for those who invest effort but do not see the desired results. However, by delving into the research in this area, we can ensure that everyone reaps the benefits of exercise.

Individual Variability in Exercise Response: A Case Study

A study involving 121 adults participating in a 24 - week walking program, exercising five times a week, exemplifies the wide variation in individual responses. Prior to the study's commencement, participants were randomly divided into three groups:

Low - amount, low - intensity group: This group walked for an average of 31 minutes per session at a moderate intensity as per exercise guidelines. Henceforth, this will be referred to as the low group.

High - amount, low - intensity group: Walking at the same intensity as the low group, but for approximately double the time per session (an average of 58 minutes). This will be denoted as the medium group.

High - amount, high - intensity group: These participants walked for about 40 minutes per session at a vigorous intensity, and will be called the high group.

Cardio fitness was measured multiple times during the study. After six months, the results were as follows:

In the low group, 62% of participants enhanced their fitness.

The medium group saw 82% of participants improve their fitness.

In the high group, 100% of participants achieved fitness improvements.

Upon closer inspection, even within each group, there was a broad spectrum of fitness changes. Graphs depicting each person's fitness change post - program completion revealed that some individuals improved significantly, some marginally, and others experienced a decline.

In the low group, the range of responses spanned from an 8% decrease to a 30% improvement in fitness.

The medium group had a range from a 10% loss to a 43% improvement in fitness.

In the high group, the least responsive participant improved by only 7%, while the top responder had a remarkable 118% improvement.

Notably, within each group, participants were following the same exercise program, yet their results diverged significantly. This study focused on endurance - type exercise for cardiovascular fitness, but similar variations have been observed in other exercise studies, including interval training and strength training.

For example, in a strength training study, a 12 - week program led to strength changes ranging from no improvement in one individual to a 250% increase in another. There were also substantial differences in muscle growth, with one person experiencing a 2% decrease in muscle size, while the most responsive person had a 59% increase.

This phenomenon is not limited to exercise; it is also evident in nutrition science. People following the same diet can experience vastly different amounts of weight loss, and in some cases, even weight gain.

Reasons for Variation

The factors contributing to these differences are complex. While elements such as sleep, stress, nutrition, and incidental physical activity can influence an individual's response to an exercise program, researchers attempt to control these variables. For instance, by having participants adhere to a standardized diet or wear activity trackers outside the lab. However, complete control is unfeasible.

Genetic factors also play a crucial role, with research indicating that approximately 50% of the response to cardio exercise is attributed to genetic differences.

Lessons Learned from Research

Consistency in Exercise is Paramount

The most effective exercise program is often the one that can be adhered to regularly. In the walking study, researchers only reported fitness improvements for those who attended at least 90% of the exercise sessions over six months.

Not everyone in the study managed to reach this attendance rate. When those who attended at least 70% of the sessions were included, the percentage of people with improved fitness decreased by about 4% in the low and medium groups and by about 12% in the high group.

Although 70% attendance is relatively consistent (equating to an average of 3.5 sessions per week for six months), more consistency is better. Those who attended 4.5 sessions per week (90% of total sessions) were more likely to improve. Thus, consistency is likely the most critical factor in reaping the benefits of exercise. It is advisable to engage in some form of exercise every week. If consistency is a challenge, focus on setting small, achievable goals and establishing sustainable exercise habits before worrying about the finer details of the exercise program.

Establish a Holistic Healthy Lifestyle

Adequate sleep, proper hydration, a nutritious diet, regular movement throughout the day, and effective stress management are essential. Without having these aspects under control, it is difficult to determine whether it is the exercise program itself that one is not responding to, or if other lifestyle factors are hindering progress.

If One Approach Fails, Explore Alternatives

If you have healthy lifestyle habits and have been consistent with your exercise for several months with disappointing results, consider the following:

Adjust Intensity or Duration: In the walking study, some participants did not improve their fitness after six months of consistent, moderate - intensity exercise. However, all those exercising at a higher intensity did improve. Even with moderate intensity, those who increased the volume (doubling the session time) were more likely to see improvements.

Increase Session Frequency: In another study, when people cycled for 60 minutes 1 - 2 times per week for six weeks, not everyone improved their fitness. However, those who performed the same cycling workouts 4 - 5 times per week all showed positive responses. Participants who initially did not improve repeated the program, adding two more sessions per week, and all of them subsequently improved.

Try Different Training Types: A study had participants complete a three - week endurance cycling program and a three - week interval training program in random order. It was found that some individuals who did not improve with one program did so with the other. For strength training, different set and rep protocols may be effective for different individuals. For example, if increasing muscle mass is the goal and the traditional four sets of 8 - 12 reps has not worked, the body may respond better to heavier weights with fewer reps or lighter weights with more reps.

Treat Training as a Scientific Experiment

Exercise offers a multitude of essential benefits, including improved body composition, reduced disease risk, enhanced performance, brain function, and mood. Even if the specific results expected are not immediately apparent, consistent exercise will lead to some form of health and fitness improvement.

For example, in a study where participants completed a one - year cardio program (45 minutes, three days per week), four different types of cardio fitness were measured at the end. There was significant individual variability in responses, and some participants did not improve in all four aspects. However, every participant showed improvement in at least one aspect of their fitness.

It is possible that the wrong measure of results is being focused on, or progress is not being tracked closely enough. To determine if a program is effective, it is crucial to keep track of what is being done and how progress is unfolding.

Create a list of the exercise benefits that are important to you and monitor each one:

Health - related: Track resting heart rate, blood pressure, or blood sugar.

Body composition: Monitor body fat percentage or body measurements.

Fitness and performance: Keep tabs on the time to cover a certain distance, the weight lifted for each exercise, or the number of push - ups or pull - ups.

Subtle benefits: Use a simple 1 - 10 scale to assess mood, stress reduction, focus, pain incidence, or energy levels.

Record this information in a notebook, spreadsheet, or using your phone. Follow a specific program for a few weeks or months, evaluate your response, and make adjustments as needed. You may be pleasantly surprised by the numerous ways exercise can enhance your body and life.

Avoid Comparing Yourself to Others

It should be clear that just because a friend achieved great results with a particular program does not mean you will too. Focus on your own progress rather than comparing it to others.

Conclusion

If the desired results are not forthcoming, perseverance is key. If continued efforts do not yield results, try a different approach. Remember, the scientific evidence is clear: everyone responds to exercise. Consistent engagement will lead to meaningful benefits.

References

Pickering, Craig, and John Kiely. “Do Non - Responders to Exercise Exist—and if so, What Should We Do About Them?.” Sports Medicine 49, no. 1 (2019):1 - 7.

Ross, Robert, Louise de Lannoy, and Paula J. Stotz. “Separate Effects of Intensity and Amount of Exercise on Interindividual Cardiorespiratory Fitness Response.” Mayo Clinic, Proceedings 90, no. 11, (2015): 1506 - 1514.

Gurd, Brendon J., Matthew D. Giles, Jacob T. Bonafiglia, James P. Raleigh, John C. Boyd, Jasmin K. Ma, Jason GE Zelt, and Trisha D. Scribbans. “Incidence of nonresponse and individual patterns of response following sprint interval training.” Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism 41, no. 3 (2016): 229 - 234.

Hubal, Monica J., Heather Gordish - Dressman, Paul D. Thompson, Thomas B. Price, Eric P. Hoffman, Theodore J. Angelopoulos, Paul M. Gordon, et al. “Variability in muscle size and strength gain after unilateral resistance training.” Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise 37, no. 6 (2005): 964 - 972.

Gardner, Christopher D., John F. Trepanowski, Liana C. Del Gobbo, Michelle E. Hauser, Joseph Rigdon, John PA Ioannidis, Manisha Desai, and Abby C. King. “Effect of Low - Fat vs Low - Carbohydrate Diet on 12 - Month Weight Loss in Overweight Adults and the Association With Genotype Pattern or Insulin Secretion: The DIETFITS Randomized Clinical Trial.” Jama, 319, no. 7 (2018): 667 - 679.

Ross, Robert, Bret H. Goodpaster, Lauren G. Koch, Mark A. Sarzynski, Wendy M. Kohrt, Neil M. Johannsen, James S. Skinner, et al. “Precision exercise medicine: understanding exercise response variability.” British Journal of Sports Medicine 53, no. 18 (2019): 1141 - 1153.

Montero, David, and Carsten Lundby. “Refuting the myth of non - response to exercise training: ‘non - responders’ do respond to higher dose of training.” The Journal of Physiology 595, no. 11 (2017): 3377 - 3387.

Bonafiglia, Jacob T., Mario P. Rotundo, Jonathan P. Whittall, Trisha D. Scribbans, Ryan B. Graham, and Brendon J. Gurd. “Inter - Individual Variability in the Adaptive Responses to Endurance and Sprint Interval Training: a Randomized Crossover Study.” PloS one 11, no. 12, (2016).

Beaven, C. Martyn, Christian J. Cook, and Nicholas D. Gill. “Significant Strength Gains Observed in Rugby Players After Specific Resistance Exercise Protocols Based on Individual Salivary Testosterone Responses.” The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 22, no. 2 (2008): 419 - 425.

Scharhag - Rosenberger, Friederike, Susanne Walitzek, Wilfried Kindermann, and Tim Meyer. “Differences in adaptations to 1 year of aerobic endurance training: individual patterns of nonresponse.” Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports 22, no. 1 (2012): 113 - 118.