Jackson Fyfe, PhD

Exercise is about more than just fitness or aesthetics.

It’s what it means for our ability to stay independent for longer.

Here’s the cardiorespiratory fitness (VO2peak) needed for common daily activities.

Once our fitness drops below these thresholds, we can no longer “afford” the metabolic cost of tasks needed to remain independent.

One of the many reasons to stay active for as long as possible.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38215969/

Does it matter if you do your strength training all at once, or spread across the day?

New data suggests either way can deliver meaningful results.

The study involved 45 young men with previous resistance training experience, who performed Smith Machine squats three days per week in a “traditional” or “fragmented” manner:

1⃣ Traditional: one continuous session (3 sets of 20 squats), three times per week

2⃣ Fragmented: three short bouts of 1 set of 20 squats (approx. one minute each), spread throughout the day, three days per week

There was also a control condition that continued their usual exercise habits.

Over eight weeks, both the “traditional” or “fragmented” groups showed greater improvements than the control group in the following outcomes (after adjusting for baseline values):

🏋️‍♂️ Maximum strength (1-RM squat): +41 kg for traditional, +33 kg for fragmented

⚡️ Isometric squat force: +48 kgf for traditional, +40 kgf for fragmented

🫁 Relative muscular endurance: +10 reps for traditional, +6 reps for fragmented

These changes were greater than the control group, and while the changes were numerically higher in the traditional group, the differences were not statistically significant (which, by the way, does not actually confirm they were equally effective).

As for enjoyment, the fragmented group reported higher enjoyment than the traditional group based on the Physical Activity Enjoyment Scale (PACES).

Together this supports the idea that meaningful strength improvements are possible even when training is spread across several shorter bouts rather than completed in one continuous session.

The big question is whether this “fragmented” approach is actually practical for people. My view is for some it might be, but for others it might not. For example, in this study the gym was located on the ground floor of the participants’ student accomodation, meaning it was probably quite easy for them to drop in and out multiple times per day.

But for me that’s kinda the point - because it shows there are often more ways to achieve a goal (in this case strength) than many people think.

Ultimately, if using a fragmented approach helps more people get started, and do something even when a continuous approach is less feasible - that’s a win.

-----

📊 Data from:

Zhai, R. et al. (2026). Fragmented versus traditional resistance training: A randomized controlled trial on muscular strength, endurance, and enjoyment in recreationally trained young adults. Journal of Exercise Science & Fitness, 24, 200521.

As an exercise scientist, you’ll probably be surprised to hear I think we focus too much on the long-term benefits of exercise.

Not because improving your fitness, strength, muscle mass, or reducing your risk of chronic disease isn’t important - but because these benefits alone might not provide enough incentive for people to act on what they already know is good for them.

When you think about it, many of the benefits usually associated with exercise can take months, years, or decades to achieve, and some can be hard to appreciate personally (what does a 20% reduction in the risk of X chronic disease actually mean?).

And when the short-term costs of exercise (time, effort, fatigue) are so immediate and obvious, it’s easy to see why the distant and often abstract benefits struggle to compete.

Which is why I think we should pay more attention to what exercise can do for us today - and this great new review by James Fisher PhD helps us do exactly that.

It summarised the many benefits of just a single resistance training session, including:

🙂 Mood and anxiety: Reduced feelings of anxiety, sometimes within minutes of finishing.

🧠 Brain function: Improvements in certain aspects of cognitive performance.

🩸 Blood glucose: Increased glucose uptake by muscles and changes in glucose regulation that can persist into the following day.

🩺 Blood pressure: Temporary reductions in resting blood pressure during recovery.

What’s striking is the sheer range of responses triggered by just a single workout - which is of course well before any large changes in strength or muscle mass may be evident.

Some of these may be more noticeable (like changes in mood) but others occur behind the scences (such as blood pressure or glucose impacts).

But the important thing is they might just provide you with another reason to take action today. And the more reasons you have to value exercise might just keep you coming back for the longer-term benefits anyway.

-----

📸 Insights and image from:

Fisher JP. Beyond the pump: a narrative review of the acute molecular, metabolic, and neuropsychological responses to a bout of resistance exercise. PeerJ. 2026 Oct 16;14:e21827. doi: 10.7717/peerj.21827.

What eating less and exercising more have in common:

The "best" diet probably isn't the one that makes you eat the least, but the one that makes eating less easier.

The "best" training program probably isn't the one that makes you do the most, but the one that makes coming back easier.

We tend to have a “muscle-centric” view of the effects of ageing and inactivity on health and physical performance.

But as this great new article by @orssattolucas and colleagues argues, sarcopenia is a disease of the whole motor system, not just our muscles.

Ageing affects the entire system responsible for producing movement - from the brain and spinal cord to motor neurons, peripheral nerves, the neuromuscular junction, and finally - the muscle itself.

This is likely why the loss of muscle mass alone doesn’t always do a great job of accounting for the much larger declines we see muscle function, like strength and power, and physical function with ageing. It's also one reason why modern definitions of sarcopenia place more emphasis on muscle strength and physical function, rather than just muscle mass.

But I think this broader view also helps us understand why resistance training is such a critical intervention here.

Because resistance training already trains the whole motor system.

With every repetition, the brain generates a signal, the spinal cord and motor neurons transmit it, the neuromuscular junction passes it on to the muscle, and the muscle fibres ultimately contract and produce force.

That’s why resistance training is not just about building muscle, but challenging the whole system responsible for creating movement. It’s also why resistance training can produce large (and more rapid) gains in strength, power, and physical function, even without measurable changes in muscle size.

I totally agree with the shift away from a “muscle-centric” view of sarcopenia. But perhaps we should do the same with resistance training too.