Sex Differences in Strength During Development: Implications for Inclusivity and Fairness in Sport.

OBJECTIVES: Males, on average, are bigger and stronger than females. Hormonal differences during puberty are one reason given for this performance advantage. However, not all evidence supports that thesis. Our aim was to further this discussion by measuring early life changes between sexes (when hormones would be similar) in components of muscle function. METHODS: Fifty-one children (29 boys, 22 girls) completed this study. Forearm muscle size and strength were assessed three times with each time point being separated by approximately a year (2021-2023). RESULTS: There was no sex*time interaction for handgrip strength (p = 0.637). There was, however, a time (p < 0.001) and sex (p < 0.001) effect. Strength increased each year and boys were stronger than girls (difference of 1.5 [95% 0.7, 2.3] kg). There was no sex*time interaction for ulnar muscle thickness (p = 0.714) but there was a time (p < 0.001) effect. Muscle size increased each year but there was no evidence of a sex effect (p = 0.12; difference of 0.81 [95% -0.21, 1.8] mm). A strong positive within-participant correlation between muscle size and strength (r = 0.803 95% CI: [0.72, 0.86], p < 0.0001) was found across time. CONCLUSION: Muscle size and strength increased together but this increase did not differ based on sex and boys were stronger than girls. Future work is needed to determine the reason for this difference in maximal strength. Any effect was seemingly present at the initial measurement (at the age of 4 years), since muscle size and strength did not change differently between boys and girls over time.

Unilateral high-load resistance training induced a similar cross-education of strength between the dominant and non-dominant arm.

It was previously hypothesized that the cross-education of strength is asymmetrical, where a greater transfer of strength is observed from the dominant to the non-dominant limb. The purpose of this study was to examine if the magnitude of cross-education of strength differed between dominant and non-dominant limbs following unilateral high-load resistance training. One hundred and twenty-two participants were randomized to one of the three groups: 1) training on the dominant arm (D-Only), 2) training on the non-dominant arm (ND-Only) and 3) a time-matched non-exercise control (Control). The training groups completed 6 weeks (18 sessions) of unilateral elbow flexion exercise. Each training session started with one-repetition maximum (1RM) training (≤ five attempts), followed by four sets of high-load exercise (i.e. 8-12RM). Strength changes of the untrained arm were compared between groups. Changes in the strength of the untrained arm were greater in D-Only (1.5 kg) and ND-Only (1.3 kg) compared to Control (-0.2 kg), without differences between D-Only and ND-Only. Unilateral resistance training increased strength in the opposite untrained arm, and the magnitude of this effect was similar regardless of which arm was trained. However, there is still considerable uncertainty on this topic and additional research is warranted to confirm the current findings.

Progression of total training volume in resistance training studies and its application to skeletal muscle growth.

Progressive overload describes the gradual increase of stress placed on the body during exercise training, and is often quantified (i.e. in resistance training studies) through increases in total training volume (i.e. sets × repetitions × load) from the first to final week of the exercise training intervention. Within the literature, it has become increasingly common for authors to discuss skeletal muscle growth adaptations in the context of increases in total training volume (i.e. the magnitude progression in total training volume). The present manuscript discusses a physiological rationale for progressive overload and then explains why, in our opinion, quantifying the progression of total training volume within research investigations tells very little about muscle growth adaptations to resistance training. Our opinion is based on the following research findings: (1) a noncausal connection between increases in total training volume (i.e. progressively overloading the resistance exercise stimulus) and increases in skeletal muscle size; (2) similar changes in total training volume may not always produce similar increases in muscle size; and (3) the ability to exercise more and consequently amass larger increases in total training volume may not inherently produce more skeletal muscle growth. The methodology of quantifying changes in total training volume may therefore provide a means through which researchers can mathematically determine the total amount of external 'work' performed within a resistance training study. It may not, however, always explain muscle growth adaptations.

Individuals Can be Taught to Sense the Degree of Vascular Occlusion: Implications for Practical Blood Flow Restriction.

ABSTRACT: Song, JS, Hammert, WB, Kataoka, R, Yamada, Y, Kang, A, and Loenneke, JP. Individuals can be taught to sense the degree of vascular occlusion: Implications for practical blood flow restriction. J Strength Cond Res 38(8): 1413-1418, 2024-It is currently unknown if individuals can be conditioned to a relative arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) and replicate that pressure at a later time point. The purpose of this study was to determine whether individuals can be taught to sense a certain relative pressure (i.e., target pressure) by comparing a conditioning method with a time-matched non-conditioning control. Fifty-eight subjects completed 2 visits in a randomized order: (a) conditioning condition and (b) time-matched control condition. The conditioning involved 11 series of inflations to 40% AOP for 12 seconds followed by cuff deflation for 22 seconds. The pressure estimations were taken at 5 and 30 minutes after each condition. Data are presented as mean differences (95% credible interval). The absolute error at 5 minutes was greater for the control compared with conditioning condition (7.1 [2.0-12.1] mm Hg). However, this difference in absolute error between conditioning and control was reduced at 30 minutes (2.9 [-1.3 to 7.1] mm Hg). The mean difference and 95% limits of agreement for the control were 8.2 (-42.4 to 58.5) mm Hg at 5 minutes and 0.02 (-43.5 to 43.5) at 30 minutes. The agreements for the conditioning were -6.2 (-32.4 to 20.0) mm Hg at 5 minutes and -11.2 (-36.6 to 14.3) mm Hg at 30 minutes. The results suggest that the individuals can be taught to sense the target pressure, but this effect only lasts a short amount of time. Future work is necessary to refine the conditioning method to extend the duration of this conditioning effect.

Cross-Education of Muscular Endurance: A Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: It is well established that performing unilateral resistance training can increase muscle strength not only in the trained limb but also in the contralateral untrained limb, which is widely known as the cross-education of strength. However, less attention has been paid to the question of whether performing unilateral resistance training can induce cross-education of muscular endurance, despite its significant role in both athletic performance and activities of daily living. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this scoping review were to provide an overview of the existing literature on cross-education of muscular endurance, as well as discuss its potential underlying mechanisms and offer considerations for future research. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted on the effects of unilateral resistance training on changes in muscular endurance in the contralateral untrained limb. This scoping review was conducted in PubMed, SPORTDiscus, and Scopus. RESULTS: A total of 2000 articles were screened and 21 articles met the inclusion criteria. Among the 21 included studies, eight studies examined the cross-education of endurance via absolute (n = 6) or relative (n = 2) muscular endurance test, while five studies did not clearly indicate whether they examined absolute or relative muscular endurance. The remaining eight studies examined different types of muscular endurance measurements (e.g., time to task failure, total work, and fatigue index). CONCLUSION: The current body of the literature does not provide sufficient evidence to draw clear conclusions on whether the cross-education of muscular endurance is present. The cross-education of muscular endurance (if it exists) may be potentially driven by neural adaptations (via bilateral access and/or cross-activation models that lead to cross-education of strength) and increased tolerance to exercise-induced discomfort. However, the limited number of available randomized controlled trials and the lack of understanding of underlying mechanisms provide a rationale for future research.

Is there evidence for the asymmetrical transfer of strength to an untrained limb?

PURPOSE: The literature predominantly addresses cross-education of strength in the dominant limb rather than the non-dominant limb, guided by the hypothesis of an asymmetrical transfer of strength from unilateral training protocols. The purpose of the study was to review the literature and determine how much evidence was available to support this claim. A meta-analysis was performed to estimate the magnitude of this hypothesized asymmetrical transfer of strength. METHODS: A literature search of all possible records was implemented using Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Scopus from February 2022 to May 2022. Comparison of randomized controlled trials was computed. The change scores and standard deviations of those change scores were extracted for each group. Only three studies met the criteria, from which a total of five effect sizes were extracted and further analyzed. RESULTS: The overall effect of resistance training of the dominant limb on strength transfer to the non-dominant limb relative to the effects of resistance training the non-dominant limb on strength transfer to the dominant (non-training) limb was 0.46 (SE 0.42). The analysis from this study resulted in minimal support for the asymmetry hypothesis. Given the small number of studies available, we provide the effect but note that the estimate is unlikely to be stable. CONCLUSION: Although it is repeatedly stated that there is an asymmetrical transfer of strength, our results find little support for that claim. This is not to say that it does not exist, but additional research implementing a control group and a direct comparison between limbs is needed to better understand this question.

Tracking handgrip strength in Kendo athletes from university to middle and older adulthood.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the current handgrip strength (HGS) of Kendo athletes with their HGS when they were in university (up to 50 years). METHODS: Eighty male graduates who were Kendo club members during their university days performed anthropometric and HGS measurements, and these HGS were compared with those measured during their university days (mean age of 19.5 years old). RESULTS: There was no evidence of a statistical difference in HGS between the current measurement and the measurement taken during university [-0.64 (-1.9, 0.67) kg, p = .336]. There was, however, evidence that the difference in HGS depended upon the current age of the individual (t = -6.43, p < .001). When probing the interaction, there were statistical differences between the ages of 24.6 and 38.2 years and between the ages of 47.4 and 69.9 years. Strength increased across time in the younger participants and decreased for those who were older. Between the ages of 38.9 and 46.1 years, there was no evidence of a statistical difference indicating a maintenance of strength. CONCLUSION: The HGS of Kendo club graduates, which they acquired during their formative years, continued to increase even after they graduated from university and entered their 30s. However, their HGS decreased from age 50, even though they practiced Kendo.

Blood flow restriction augments exercise-induced pressure pain thresholds over repetition and effort matched conditions.

We sought to determine the effects of blood flow restriction (BFR) on exercise-induced hypoalgesia, specifically using low-load (LL) resistance exercise (30% 1RM) protocols that accounted for each individual's local muscular endurance capabilities. Forty-four participants completed four conditions: (1) 70% of maximal BFR repetitions with blood flow restriction (LL+BFR exercise); (2) 70% maximal BFR repetitions without LL+BFR (LL exercise); (3) 70% maximal free flow repetitions (LL+EFFORT exercise); (4) time-matched, non-exercise control (CON). Pressure pain threshold (PPT) was measured before and after exercise. Ischaemic pain threshold and tolerance was assessed only at post. The change in upper body PPT was greater for LL+BFR exercise compared to LL exercise [difference of 0.15 (0.35) kg/cm2], LL+EFFORT exercise [difference of 0.23 (0.45) kg/cm2], and the CON condition. The change in lower body PPT was greater for LL+BFR exercise compared to LL exercise [difference of 0.40 (0.55) kg/cm2], LL+EFFORT exercise [difference of 0.36 (0.62) kg/cm2], and the CON condition. Ischaemic pain thresholds and tolerances did not change. Submaximal exercise with BFR resulted in systemic increases in PPT but had no influence on ischaemic pain sensitivity. This effect is likely unique to BFR as we did not see changes in the effort matched free flow condition.

Blood flow restriction pressure for narrow cuffs (5 cm) cannot be estimated with precision.

Blood flow restriction pressures are set relative to the lowest pressure needed to occlude blood flow with that specific cuff. Due to pressure limitations of some devices, it is often not possible to occlude blood flow in all subjects and apply a known relative pressure in the lower body with a 5 cm wide cuff.Objective. To use a device capable of generating high pressures (up to 907 mmHg) to create and validate an estimation equation for the 5 cm cuff in the lower body using a 12 cm cuff.Approach. 170 participants had their arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) with a 5 cm and 12 cm cuff and their thigh circumference measured in their right leg. The sample was randomly allocated to a prediction group (66%) and validation group (33%). Thigh circumference and 12 cm AOP were used as predictors. A Bland-Altman plot was constructed to assess agreement between measured and predicted values.Main results. The mean difference (95% confidence interval) between the observed (336.8 mmHg) and the predicted (343.9 mmHg) 5 cm AOP was 7.1 (-11.9, 26.1) mmHg. The 95% limits of agreement were -133.6 to 147.8 mmHg. There was a negative relationship between the difference and the average of predicted and measured 5 cm AOP (B= -0.317,p= 0.000043).Significance. Although this was the first study to quantify AOP over 600 mmHg with a 5 cm cuff, our equation is not valid across all levels of pressure. If possible, larger cuff widths should be employed in the lower body.

Blood flow restriction augments the cross-education effect of isometric handgrip training.

INTRODUCTION: The application of blood flow restriction (BFR) to low-intensity exercise may be able to increase strength not only in the trained limb but also in the homologous untrained limb. Whether this effect is repeatable and how that change compares to that observed with higher intensity exercise is unknown. PURPOSE: Examine whether low-intensity training with BFR enhances the cross-education of strength compared to exercise without BFR and maximal efforts. METHODS: A total of 179 participants completed the 6-week study, with 135 individuals performing isometric handgrip training over 18 sessions. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four groups: 1) low-intensity (4 × 2 min of 30% MVC; LI, n = 47), 2) low-intensity with blood flow restriction (LI + 50% arterial occlusion pressure; LI-BFR, n = 41), 3) maximal effort (4 × 5 s of 100% MVC; MAX, n = 47), and 4) non-exercise control (CON, n = 44). RESULTS: LI-BFR was the only group that observed a cross-education in strength (CON: 0.64 SD 2.9 kg, LI: 0.95 SD 3.6 kg, BFR-LI: 2.7 SD 3.3 kg, MAX: 0.80 SD 3.1 kg). In the trained hand, MAX observed the greatest change in strength (4.8 SD 3.3 kg) followed by LI-BFR (2.8 SD 4.0 kg). LI was not different from CON. Muscle thickness did not change in the untrained arm, but ulna muscle thickness was increased within the trained arm of the LI-BFR group (0.06 SD 0.11 cm). CONCLUSION: Incorporating BFR into low-intensity isometric training led to a cross-education effect on strength that was greater than all other groups (including high-intensity training).

The Impact of Different Ischemic Preconditioning Pressures on Pain Sensitivity and Resistance Exercise Performance.

ABSTRACT: Kataoka, R, Song, JS, Yamada, Y, Hammert, WB, Seffrin, A, Spitz, RW, Wong, V, Kang, A, and Loenneke, JP. The impact of different ischemic preconditioning pressures on pain sensitivity and resistance exercise performance. J Strength Cond Res 38(5): 864-872, 2024-To determine (a) the impact of ischemic preconditioning pressures (applied as a % of arterial occlusion pressure [AOP]) on pressure pain threshold (PPT) and resistance exercise performance and (b) whether changes in performance could be explained by changes in PPT. Subjects ( n = 39) completed 4 protocols in a randomized order: (a) ischemic preconditioning (IPC) at 110% AOP (IPC 110%), (b) IPC at 150% AOP (IPC 150%), (c) IPC at 10% AOP (Sham), and (d) time-matched control (CON). Each protocol included 4 cycles of 5 minutes of occlusion followed by 5 minutes of reperfusion. Pressure pain threshold was taken before and after. Discomfort ratings were given at the end of each cycle. Every visit finished with 2 sets of 75-second maximal isokinetic unilateral elbow flexion or extension. Overall, IPC 110% and IPC 150% resulted in similar increases in PPT relative to CON [110%: difference of 0.36 (0.18, 0.54) kg·m -2 ; 150%: difference of 0.377 (0.15, 0.59) kg·m -2 ] and Sham. Both resulted in greater discomfort than Sham and CON, with IPC 150% inducing greater discomfort than IPC 110% (BF 10 : 14.74). There were no differences between the conditions for total work (BF 10 : 0.23), peak torque (BF 10 : 0.035), or average power (BF 10 : 0.159). We did not find evidence that PPT mediated performance. We did not detect changes in performance with 2 different relative pressures greater than AOP. Our mean applied pressures were lower than those used previously. There might be a minimal level of pressure (e.g., >150% of AOP) that is required to induce ergogenic effects of ischemic preconditioning.

The Plateau in Muscle Growth with Resistance Training: An Exploration of Possible Mechanisms.

It is hypothesized that there is likely a finite ability for muscular adaptation. While it is difficult to distinguish between a true plateau following a long-term training period and short-term stalling in muscle growth, a plateau in muscle growth has been attributed to reaching a genetic potential, with limited discussion on what might physiologically contribute to this muscle growth plateau. The present paper explores potential physiological factors that may drive the decline in muscle growth after prolonged resistance training. Overall, with chronic training, the anabolic signaling pathways may become more refractory to loading. While measures of anabolic markers may have some predictive capabilities regarding muscle growth adaptation, they do not always demonstrate a clear connection. Catabolic processes may also constrain the ability to achieve further muscle growth, which is influenced by energy balance. Although speculative, muscle cells may also possess cell scaling mechanisms that sense and regulate their own size, along with molecular brakes that hinder growth rate over time. When considering muscle growth over the lifespan, there comes a point when the anabolic response is attenuated by aging, regardless of whether or not individuals approach their muscle growth potential. Our goal is that the current review opens avenues for future experimental studies to further elucidate potential mechanisms to explain why muscle growth may plateau.

Skeletal muscle mass in competitive physique-based athletes (bodybuilding, 212 bodybuilding, bikini, and physique divisions): A case series.

OBJECTIVES: (1) To examine the muscle thickness of various muscle groups of the body to estimate the absolute and relative skeletal muscle mass (SM) in competitive physique-based athletes (Bodybuilding, 212 Bodybuilding, Bikini, and Physique divisions) and (2) to compare values across various divisions of competition and to resistance trained and non-resistance trained individuals. METHODS: Eight competitive physique-based athletes (2 M and 6 F), two recreationally resistance trained (1 M and 1 F) and two non-resistance trained (1 M and 1 F) participants had muscle thickness measured by ultrasound at nine sites on the anterior and posterior aspects of the body. SM was estimated from an ultrasound-derived prediction equation and SM index was used to adjust for the influence of standing height (i.e., divided by height squared). RESULTS: SM values ranged from 19.6 to 60.4 kg in the eight competitive physique-based athletes and 16.1 to 32.6 kg in the four recreationally resistance trained and non-resistance trained participants. SM index ranged from 7.2 to 17.9 kg/m2 in the eight competitive physique-based athletes and 5.8 to 9.3 kg/m2 in the four recreationally resistance trained and non-resistance trained participants. CONCLUSION: Overall, varying magnitudes of SM and SM index were present across competitors and their respective divisions of bodybuilding. The Men's Open Bodybuilder in the present study had greater values of total SM and SM index compared to previously published values in the literature. Our data provides insight into the extent of SM present in this population and further extends the discussion regarding SM accumulation in humans.

Handgrip strength of young athletes differs based on the type of sport played and age.

OBJECTIVE: Handgrip strength may differ depending on the type of sport played during the developmental period. Youth sports in which athletes hold equipment in their hands may be the most effective for improving handgrip strength. This study aimed to examine the age at which differences in handgrip strength appear by comparing sports that involve gripping (kendo) with those that do not involve gripping (soccer) in young athletes. METHODS: Two hundred and twenty-two male athletes (115 kendo and 107 soccer) between 6 and 15 years old participated in this study. Handgrip strength was measured using a dynamometer, and the average value of both hands was used for analysis. Sports experience was determined when they started practicing each sport. Handgrip strength was compared between sports. Statistical moderation was used to determine if the relationship between sport and handgrip strength depended upon the age of the athlete. RESULTS: Kendo athletes had significantly higher handgrip strength than soccer athletes (4.77 kg [95% CI: 2.34, 7.19]) in the overall sample. We found that the relationship between sport and handgrip strength depended upon the age of the child (sport*age t = -3.6, p = .004). Using the Johnson-Neyman procedure, we found statistically significant differences between sports from 8.48 years and older. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the type of sport played, that is, whether or not an athlete plays with sports equipment in their hands, may influence the development of handgrip strength during the period of growth, and these sports may contribute to a higher level of handgrip strength in adulthood.

One-Year Handgrip Strength Change in Kindergarteners Depends upon Physical Activity Status.

Free play in kindergarten can be roughly divided into fine and gross motor activities, but the effects of these activities on improving handgrip strength are unknown. Therefore, we aimed to compare one-year changes in handgrip strength and forearm flexor muscle size in children separated by preferred play in a kindergarten. One hundred and eleven children were recruited from a local kindergarten. They underwent handgrip strength and forearm muscle thickness measurements, and 95 (49 boys and 46 girls) underwent a second measurement one year after the first measurement. Class teachers assessed the physical activity of everyone in their class after the second measurement. Using three evaluation scores by the class teachers, we divided children into three groups based on the children's preference to play in kindergarten (fine movement vs. gross motor movement). Handgrip strength did not change differently between groups across one year. However, children who liked active playing outside (i.e., gross motor activity) were stronger than others. Furthermore, children who like playing outside observed greater changes than the other groups in the ulna (right hand) and radius muscle thickness (left hand), suggesting that changes in forearm muscle size might be incongruent with changes in handgrip strength among the three activity groups.

Can we improve exercise-induced hypoalgesia with exercise training? An overview and suggestions for future studies.

Exercise-induced hypoalgesia refers to a reduction in pain sensitivity following a single bout of exercise, which has been shown to be diminished or impaired with aging and chronic pain. Exercise training (repeated bouts of exercise over time) is often recommended as a non-pharmacological treatment for chronic pain and age-related functional declines. However, whether exercise training can augment the exercise-induced hypoalgesia has not been well studied. The purpose of this paper is to 1) provide an overview of the existing literature investigating the effect of exercise training on the magnitude of exercise-induced hypoalgesia, and 2) discuss potential underlying mechanisms as well as considerations for future research. Given the paucity of randomized controlled trials in this area, the effects of exercise training on exercise-induced hypoalgesia are still unclear. Several potential mechanisms have been proposed to explain the impaired exercise-induced hypoalgesia in chronic pain and older individuals (e.g., endogenous opioid, cardiovascular, and immune system). Exercise training appears to induce physiological changes in those systems, however, further investigations are necessary to test whether this will lead to improved exercise-induced hypoalgesia. Future research should consider including a time- and age-matched non-training group and utilizing the same exercise protocol for testing exercise-induced hypoalgesia across intervention groups.

Improved interference control after exercise with blood flow restriction and cooling is associated with but not mediated by increased lactate.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effects of recumbent sprint interval exercise with and without blood flow restriction and body cooling on interference control and whether the changes in interference control can be explained by the changes in blood lactate. METHODS: 85 participants (22 SD 3 years old) completed 1 familiarization visit and then 5 experimental visits in a randomized order: exercise only (Ex), exercise with blood flow restriction (ExB), exercise with cooling (ExC), and exercise with blood flow restriction and cooling (ExBC), and non-exercise control (Con). Measurements of blood lactate and the Stroop Color Word Test were performed before and after exercise. Each bout began with a 15-minute low-moderate intensity warm-up, followed by five 20-second "all out" sprints separated by 40 s of active recovery. Bayes Factors (BF10) quantified evidence for or against the null hypothesis. Within-subject mediation analysis quantified the indirect effect of changes in blood lactate (mediator) on the change in interference control (each exercise condition vs. Con). RESULTS: Bayesian pairwise comparisons found that only ExC [σ: -0.37 (-0.59, -0.15)] and ExBC [σ: -0.3 (-0.53, -0.09)] produced changes in incongruent reaction time different from that of Con. There was also evidence that all exercise conditions increased blood lactate (BF10 = 8.65e+29 - 1.9e+32) and improved congruent reaction time (BF10 = 4.01 - 15.371) compared to that of Con. There was no evidence to show that changes in lactate mediated the change in incongruent reaction time. CONCLUSIONS: Both exercise with body cooling and when body cooling was combined with blood flow restriction presented favorable changes in incongruent reaction time (a marker of interference control), which might not be explained by the changes in systemic blood lactate concentration.

Longitudinal changes of grip strength and forearm muscle thickness in young children.

Background: Grip strength is a marker of future health conditions and is mainly generated by the extrinsic flexor muscles of the fingers. Therefore, whether or not there is a relationship between grip strength and forearm muscle size is vital in considering strategies for grip strength development during growth. Thus, this study aimed to examine the association between changes in grip strength and forearm muscle thickness in young children. Methods: Two hundred eighteen young children (104 boys and 114 girls) performed maximum voluntary grip strength and ultrasound-measured muscle thickness measurements in the right hand. Two muscle thicknesses were measured as the perpendicular distance between the adipose tissue-muscle interface and muscle-bone interface of the radius (MT-radius) and ulna (MT-ulna). All participants completed the first measurement and underwent a second measurement one year after the first one. Results: There were significant (P < 0.001) within-subject correlations between MT-ulna and grip strength [r = 0.50 (0.40, 0.60)] and MT-radius and grip strength [r = 0.59 (0.49, 0.67)]. There was no significant between-subject correlation between MT-ulna and grip strength [r = 0.07 (-0.05, 0.20)], but there was a statistically significant (P < 0.001) between-subject relationship between MT-radius and grip strength [r = 0.27 (0.14, 0.39)]. Conclusion: Although we cannot infer causation from the present study, our findings suggest that as muscle size increases within a child, so does muscle strength. Our between-subject analysis, however, suggests that those who observed the greatest change in muscle size did not necessarily get the strongest.

Unilateral high-load resistance training influences strength changes in the contralateral arm undergoing low-load training.

OBJECTIVES: Within-subject training models have become common within the exercise literature. However, it is currently unknown if training one arm with a high load would impact muscle size and strength of the opposing arm training with a low load. DESIGN: Parallel group. METHODS: 116 participants were randomized to one of three groups that completed 6-weeks (18 sessions) of elbow flexion exercise. Group 1 trained their dominant arm only, beginning with a one-repetition maximum test (≤5 attempts), followed by four sets of exercise using a weight equivalent to 8-12 repetition maximum. Group 2 completed the same training as Group 1 in their dominant arm, while the non-dominant arm completed four sets of low-load exercise (30-40 repetition maximum). Group 3 trained their non-dominant arm only, performing the same low-load exercise as Group 2. Participants were compared for changes in muscle thickness and elbow flexion one-repetition maximum. RESULTS: The greatest changes in non-dominant strength were present in Groups 1 (Δ 1.5 kg; untrained arm) and 2 (Δ1.1 kg; low-load arm with high load on opposite arm), compared to Group 3 (Δ 0.3 kg; low-load only). Only the arms being directly trained observed changes in muscle thickness (≈Δ 0.25 cm depending on site). CONCLUSIONS: Within-subject training models are potentially problematic when investigating changes in strength (though not muscle growth). This is based on the finding that the untrained limb of Group 1 saw similar changes in strength as the non-dominant limb of Group 2 which were both greater than the low-load training limb of Group 3.