The main questions of our study are to examine the maximal V̇O2 achieved during five sets of squat exercises (10 reps per set, 5 sets, 3 min rest interval, 65% of 1RM) in relation to predetermined V̇O2max and how these values differ according to participants’ training status. Our study showed that the highest V̇O2 was observed during the 5th set of squat exercises, almost reaching 100% of the participants’ predetermined V̇O2max. When the highest V̇O2 values were presented according to training status, participants with higher strength experienced an increase in V̇O2 during squat exercise up to 108% of their V̇O2max, while the highest V̇O2 of participants with lower strength was 93.7% of their V̇O2max, measured immediately after the final set. When the highest V̇O2 during five sets were averaged, participants reached over 90% of their V̇O2max. Regardless of participants’ training status, oxygen demand during squat exercise was extremely high.
An increase in V̇O2 during resistance exercises has been previously reported. However, there are substantial differences in the amount of V̇O2 between our study and previous studies9,19. Previous studies reported V̇O2 during squat exercises ranging from approximately 16 to 31.3 ml/kg/min depending on the length of the rest intervals9,19. In the present study, we observed values above 40 ml/kg/min, and in some participants, V̇O2 increased above 50 ml/ kg/min, exceeding their pre-determined V̇O2max. A significantly greater V̇O2 observed among our participants could be due to training status and the specific exercise protocol. The 1RM among our participants was 141.4 ± 31.3 kg, whereas the 1RM reported by Ratamess et al.9 was 127.9 ± 31.1 kg. Furthermore, Ratamess et al.9 employed higher intensity resistance exercise, set at 75% of 1RM, whereas our study employed a lower intensity, 65% of 1RM. Given that all participants in our study successfully completed 10 reps of squats until the fifth set whereas participants from Ratamess et al.9 did not, the exercise in the current study elicited a higher demand for aerobic metabolism. Another rationale for the relatively higher V̇O2 during our squat exercise could be due to different squat techniques. In the present study, all participants were instructed to perform a full squat with a full range of motion. In contrast, other studies either utilized only half squats or did not specify the depth of the squat. Performing full squatting is likely to elicit a higher oxygen demand.
Interestingly, the levels of V̇O2 relative to V̇O2max and the highest heart rate relative to maximal heart rate clearly showed that multiple sets of resistance exercise could be considered as vigorous- or high-intensity cardiovascular activity20,21,22. When viewed from an intensity perspective, squat exercise can be classified as a form of vigorous- or high-intensity activity22. However, since vigorous- or high-intensity aerobic activity is defined as an activity sustained for a prolonged period (e.g., ≥ 10 min)22, squat exercise does not meet this criterion given the rest interval periods and therefore may not be described as such. Furthermore, our findings suggest that aerobic demand of resistance exercise is much greater when individuals could exercise at a higher intensity without sacrificing the volume, represented as number of repetitions. Among the participants with high strength, V̇O2 exceeded their pre-determined V̇O2 max at the 4th set of squat exercise, while participants with low strength reached up to 91.69% of their V̇O2max at the 4th set. One noteworthy implication of our study is that we examined the fluctuations in cardiorespiratory responses and RPE throughout the progression of squatting repetitions and sets. This stands in contrast to merely assessing the average and peak V̇O2 observed during one bout (i.e., session) of squatting.
During rest intervals, we observed higher CO2 production than VO2 consumption, whereas the opposite was observed during the squat exercise periods. Typically, individuals only breathe once at each descending and ascending motion within a repetition during squat exercise, resulting in this distinctive breathing pattern that may cause a difference between pulmonary and cellular metabolic demands. During squatting exercises, participants may not be able to exhale sufficient amounts of CO2 produced as a result of bicarbonate buffering process. Breathing is modulated by central and peripheral chemoreceptors, which may respond to CO2 and H+23,24. Although elevations in CO2 and H+ during squat exercise are the primary precursors to an increase in breathing, breathing is limited to the exercise rhythm during squatting, which may cause hypercapnic acidosis24,25. When breathing was no longer limited to the exercise rhythm during rest intervals, participants hyperventilated and exhaled CO2. The increase in V̇CO2 in relation to V̇O2 was significant. While we did not measure the partial pressure of arterial CO2, our results indicated that participants experienced hypercapnia during the five sets of squat exercise. This was demonstrated by the ventilatory efficiency (Supplemental Fig. 2), which showed a continuous increase with successive sets. Diverse breathing techniques employed during squatting may yield varying V̇O2 and V̇CO2 responses.
It is unclear whether training proficiency and subsequent muscular strength are determinants of cardiorespiratory fitness26,27,28,29. Highly trained individuals are accustomed to a higher training intensity and frequency than relatively less-trained individuals, leading to greater neuromuscular output and adaptation30. As such, highly trained individuals can perform a greater volume (load, repetitions, intensity) of squat exercises, which may result in a higher level of V̇O2 than those with low strength during resistance exercise. Interestingly, we observed that the high strength group showed a higher level of V̇O2 (relative; normalized to body weight) at the same relative intensity compared with the low strength group. These results suggest that aerobic demand of resistance exercise may be more evident among individuals with certain levels of resistance training status. In addition, the predetermined V̇O2max level was lower in the high strength group compared to the low strength group, although this difference was not statistically significant. Furthermore, it is crucial to note that all study participants performed the squat exercise at 65% of their individual 1RM. This indicated that the squat load was obviously higher in the high strength group compared to the load used by the low strength group. Therefore, the high strength group may exhibit higher V̇O2 responses compared to the low strength group due to relatively lower aerobic efficiency and/or the absolute training load during exercise in the high strength group. Individuals, who are not accustomed to resistance exercise, may not have the same cardiorespiratory response as observed in our study.
The effort inherent to the execution of squatting exercises at 65% of 1RM, as performed in our study, is submaximal. This relative intensity corresponds to a margin of repetitions that is less than maximal exertion, influencing the V̇O2 observed. Previous research11,31 has established a relationship between the number of repetitions and selected percentages of one repetition maximum in both trained and untrained men. These studies11,31 indicate that the effort required at 65% of 1RM is substantial but not maximal, which aligns with our findings of significant oxygen demand during the exercise intervals. Our study further highlights that the substantial oxygen demand observed during the squatting exercise is influenced by both the training status of the participants and the submaximal nature of the effort. The high strength group demonstrated a higher V̇O2 relative to their V̇O2max compared to the low strength group. This suggests that individuals with higher strength capacity may be able to sustain higher aerobic demands during resistance exercises, even at submaximal intensities.
This study has several limitations. First, the findings of this study are specific to the squat exercise protocol used and cannot be generalized to other resistance exercise protocols, such as chest presses or arm curls. Different volumes (i.e., intensity, repetition, and training load) of squat exercises may result in different outcomes11. Second, nutritional and hydration intakes, which may be potential confounders, were not controlled for in this study. These factors may have impacted the association between squatting and cardiorespiratory outcomes. Lastly, our findings may not be generalizable to wider populations, given that we examined young, healthy, well-trained, male participants only.
Enough has been said about the benefits of exercise. 30 minutes of exercising everyday is known to have long-term health effects, including lowering your BP, better cardiovascular health, and even weight loss. However, do you know that for every hour you exercise, you can actually increase your lifespan by three hours? Yes, you heard that right!
Exercise, and live longer
Dr. John Scharffenberg, a professor of nutrition at Loma Linda University in California, shared some tips for living a longer life in a YouTube video. At the remarkable age of 100, the centenarian shared that one of the biggest tools to live longer is exercise, and for every hour you exercise, you add three hours to your life. He also mentioned that while exercise is important at every age, you must definitely exercise between the ages of 40-70, as your body start to degenerate at 40.
Here are some more tips that he added:
Tobacco: The doctor outlines the dangers of tobacco, known since the 1964 Surgeon General report. He said that when it comes to Alzheimer’s, it has an extremely small percentage of tobacco users. That is because tobacco users do not live long enough to get any chronic disease later on.
Alcohol: Following closely on the heels of tobacco is alcohol. Dr. Scharffenberg said that especially for women, alcohol increases the chances of getting breast cancer. He also added that while earlier studies claim that two drinks a day for men, and one drink a day for women was probably safe, new studies refute that, and add no amount of alcohol is safe.
Exercise: As mentioned earlier, Dr. Scharffenberg is a huge advocate of exercise, and recommends it everyday. He adds that even if someone is obese and exercises everyday, he will still outlive a person who is thin, but does not exercise. And, while a lot of people think that 40 is the age to slow down, on the contrary, one should start exercising the most from this age, upto the age of 70.
Smoking: At one point of life, smoking will kill you, says Dr. John Scharffenberg. It could be at 40 or 60, depending on how long you have been smoking. And unlike alcohol, on which debate is sketchy, there is no debate on smoking – even 1 cigarette is not recommended.
Diet: Dr. Scharffenberg largely recommends a vegetarian diet, with an occasional lean meat here and there. According to him, “The optimum diet is the vegetarian diet. Everybody should know this. It’s not something unusual.” He notes that top scientists advised the U.S. government in 2015 that a vegetarian diet is among the optimal dietary patterns, as it can help reduce the risk of age-related diseases.
This apart, Dr. Scharffenberg recommends low consumption of sugar, reducing fat intake, and other lifestyle changes that can make you live longer.
True exercise begins with the will — especially when aligned with the One who made us.
By now, almost all of us in this country are aware of the health crisis that exists. Obesity even in the youngest has skyrocketed in the past few decades. Type 2 diabetes rates (once called adult-onset diabetes) are at a record high for all ages. We as a country spend more on healthcare than anyone else in the world and get some of the worst results. I could go on but safe to say we are all tired of hearing about the woes.
Amid all the bad news, I have a confession to make. I hate exercise, or working out, as you might say. For those who have read my previous writings or know of our mission, this might seem surprising to you. So let me explain.
It’s not that I hate the act of exercising my body (and mind). It’s that I don’t like the term exercise itself (or anything related) and the connotation it carries. And not only do I dislike it, although admittedly I have used it many times before (and probably will to some degree) — I think the term itself and our perspective around it is a huge reason why we are in such a bad situation in this country.
Unlike many other places in the world, and certainly unlike much of what existed previous to our modern times, exercise today is often regarded as an exclusive commodity. But unfortunately, for various reasons, the notion of exercise has become dichotomized, compartmentalized and “obligatized” (my new word) in a way that has increasingly created barriers (mental, physical and logistic) for people to be as active as we are designed to be. It has led us to believe that the only activity worth having is the kind of movement that is carved out of an otherwise busy schedule, often costs us a reasonable (or not) amount of money, and can be quantified in memberships, calories, minutes and inches.
Don’t get me wrong. I am a super-busy guy who believes that not carving out time for regular movement is a huge mistake, a culprit of many of our woes and that regular activity is one of the most essential things in the universe. Truly, we move therefore we are, even if our movements are significantly restricted by injury or disability. But in the process of making a case for prioritizing movement just as much as we prioritize our work and other entertainment, I think we have done a massive disservice in regard to a fundamental problem that exists beneath so many of our health woes.
Simply put, never in the history of our world has a group of people burned so few calories in comparison to what they have consumed. It’s not just that the restaurant business has taken off like a rocket to nowhere; the grocery expenditures (and I am not talking about rising costs) are climbing just behind them. Meanwhile, we as a country keep trying to find ways to motivate more people to exercise more often. And despite billions of dollars spent, it’s not working for many reasons, not the least of which involves the allure of the online world for everything from buying to entertaining to networking to being (or whatever we think this is).
Last fall, I attended what has long been one of the biggest rivalry matchups of the year, the Mater Dei vs. Reitz High School football game. Held in the historic Reitz Bowl, it was a gorgeous evening pitting two teams that had only lost a collective three games all season. The game came down to the final seconds, after (unfortunately as an MD grad) Reitz stormed back from 10 points down to take the lead with less than 90 seconds to play. All was perfect except for one gaping problem: the stands weren’t even half full. Years and decades prior, as detailed by my uncle who went to high school in the 1970s, not only were the stands often full, but even the sloping, grassy area next to the stands was adorned with rabid fans hoping to cheer on their team. But in recent years, it has been obvious that people aren’t showing up like they used to, just like they stopped showing up years ago at Wesselman Par 3, the only 18-hole par-3 course in the state, which the city of Evansville was forced to shut down.
You might be wondering: What does a football game on a Friday night have to do with my disdain for our perspective toward exercise (especially when adding a slice of pizza and an ice cream cone doesn’t exactly evoke images of fitness)? The reality is that all activity remains activity, and all activity burns calories and activates our minds and systems to an extent that inactivity does not. A simple walk to the grocery store to get a few items, or down to the corner pizza place to secure the pies. Raking the yard, gardening, going outside to throw a football, or even hitting a few golf balls on a Friday night (back when the lights were on). Or maybe even a run down to see a family member or friend who lives around the corner, or simply walking to school much like our predecessors did. It all remains movement no matter how we categorize it.
Don’t get me wrong. There are benefits to prolonged physical activity involving sustained elevation of heart rate and respiration. But what other people and countries have figured out, which we in the U.S. have largely lost in awareness and execution, is that when you build in activity as an essential part of our lives, it gets so much easier to pursue a healthy balance of calories in, and calories out. Yet when our perspective has become that exercise or working out is only worthwhile when it is a carved-out commodity, we get stuck. Especially if we can’t find or prioritize the time to do this, which leads us to believe the rest of what we do doesn’t matter physically and psychologically (which activity hugely influences), putting us in a serious pickle (especially if we eat a bunch of them). But if we saw all activity, even getting up from the couch to turn the TV channel, as worthwhile and valuable to the moving people we are, then it would be a monstrous step in redefining just how we go about approaching the health crisis that exists today.
Truth be told, I don’t hate exercise. I actually like it now more than ever, even though it can be hard, uncomfortable, and inconvenient. I like it because of what it offers me during the activity and when I am not active. And I don’t see it as an isolated part of my day, but rather as one link of a continuous chain that occurs from the moment I wake up in the morning to the moment I go to bed at night. Whereas I used to only regard my “scheduled workouts” as having real value, the last couple of decades have transformed my perspective. Just the walk to the drinking fountain is a gift, and also kind of compelling. I wonder where my next movement will lead.
At the beginning of Lent, we were asked to consider the timeless phrase, “Dust you are, and to dust you will return.” It reminds us that at the core of our being, we have been created by God from a cosmos that is built on many principles, one of which is that we are a people of movement, and that deeply ingrained in our biology is a need to move often and regularly as the Lord would have us do.
As we go forward and submit ourselves to our Lenten discipline, all designed to bring us closer to him and his design for us, let us consider that in God’s eyes, the only exercise truly ordained is the exercise of our will to align with his, no matter the minute, hour or day.
Many of us struggle to find the time to make it to the gym, but if you buy a pair of dumbbells for your home, you can squeeze in effective full-body strength workouts in as little as 20 minutes.
This workout from personal trainer Rachael Sacerdoti jumped out at me as a great routine for time-poor exercisers, so I got in touch to find out more about the workout and each of the moves.
How a Major Democratic Law Firm Ended Up Bowing to Trump
ICE Tells a Cornell Student Activist to Turn Himself In
Dismantling the Department of Education will strip resources from disabled children, parents and advocates say | CNN
Washington Bends to RFK Jr.’s ‘MAHA’ Agenda on Measles, Baby Formula and French Fries
Trump Is Trying to Gain More Power Over Elections. Is His Effort Legal?
EXCLUSIVE: Groundbreaking new prayer book designed for demographic most targeted for abortion
Film Review: Rachel Zegler is the Best Part of an Otherwise Dull Remake of ‘Snow White’ – Awards Radar
Shooting at Park in New Mexico Leaves at At Least 3 Dead and 16 Injured
