Here's the study and references: https://sportrxiv.org/index.php/server/preprint/view/395/version/508
Okay, let's unpack this.
There has been, yet again, a new study – or rather, a meta analysis – regarding optimal rest periods.
In short, all rest periods result in muscle growth.
However, it appears that ACTUALLY, 1-2 minutes of rest results in the MOST muscle growth.
This is honestly comical, folks. And not because I disagree with these findings. I actually tend to agree that 1-2 minutes of rest is likely best for most people during most exercises most of the time while realizing there ARE exceptions (deadlifts, barbell squats, lifters who have horrible work capacity, etc). It also helps support my brand, which encourages brief, fast paced sessions. I believe that if you work hard and simplify your training approach, you can acquire maximal gains while training just 30-45 minutes per session. Frequency depends on your training split and ability to recover between sessions.
The comical aspect is how aggressively the mainstream fitness industry has swung on this topic over the years.
Let's review.
For a long time, lifters and researchers seemed to agree that 1-2 minutes of rest was the ideal amount of rest for muscle growth. Longer rest periods were well-suited for maximizing strength. Anyone who has trained for a few years and exercised a little common sense may have come to this as a reasonable conclusion.
That is: relatively short rest, but enough rest to catch your breath, may be pretty good for muscle growth; but longer rest periods would be needed for maximum strength and performance efforts.
Then, there came a brief period of time where the recommended ideal rest period for all things muscle growth was 30-90 seconds. Overlapping the former belief, but on the shorter side. This one stuck for a bit, but ultimately, the age old 1-2 minutes of rest made it's way back into meathead folklore as the way to train and gain.
And then, just a few years ago, a couple studies came out showing that maybe 3-5 minutes of rest resulted in better progress than 1-2 minute rest periods.
Everyone got behind this latest study that was shoved down our throats. It became an obvious sign of negligence if you rested any less than 3 minutes between sets, and you would be cyber bullied as punishment. It became such gospel that, debates began to float around about what you should do while resting 3-5 minutes between all of your sets. What should have been obvious is that if you're resting so long that you're getting bored between sets, or, 3-5 minutes seems like a long time – you're resting longer than you need to be resting. Don't over-complicate things with dogma. When you feel ready for your next set, begin your next set. Your brain and other patrons of the gym will be grateful.
Now, it comes back around that 1-2 minutes between sets is actually a bit better...again.
So what do we make of all this noise?
Here's my take.
Studies constantly come and go, contradict history before agreeing with history. There are many other variables that could effect what the ideal rest period between sets might be for you versus someone else. Just like there are many variables that effect which exercises will be most productive for different people.
Don't get bogged down in the latest and greatest research. It will likely change. And those changes are sometimes good, sometimes bad. I'd encourage you to observe the research, while ultimately finding what works best and is most sustainable for you, your goals, and ignore the ebbs and flows of an industry that seems desperate to make such a simple pastime confusing — exercise.
It's just exercise, my friends.
The formula has always been simple:
Be consistent, work relatively hard, minimize injuries, eat sensibly, find a form of exercise that's enjoyable, and repeat physical activity for a lifetime. That's my bro-science.
Komentar