Exercise principles define adaptation response. Most Americans who work out lack an understanding of basic human physiology, causing them to forego specifically applied progressive overload. Selye’s general adaptation theory states that when the body is strained it will adapt to and overcome the stress. However, after adaptation has occurred, a new level of stress is required. The same absolute stress will not be perceived as “a new stress” by the body. If the stress is reduced, the body will in turn reduce the response and the principle of reversibility is invoked, explaining the adaptational diminution. This being said, physiological adaptations are simply a response to stress that is applied at a frequency significant enough to require the body to change in order to better manage it. Inherently the body does not like to change, and in fact, is resistant to chronic adjustments. For instance, muscle hypertrophy training can be applied for 4-6 weeks before the body will increase contractile protein content, and the body will continue to resist significant change for 18-24 months before a shift to higher protein synthesis, associated with higher anabolic hormone concentrations, occurs. This is a natural defense mechanism to heightened metabolism. Tens of thousands of years ago a human with more muscle would need more calories, and in the type of environment experienced at that time, a high metabolism was a curse rather than a blessing. Likewise we have defensive mechanisms for weight loss. Consider the same human 30,000 years ago; a high metabolic rate equates to a need for more food, and a low body fat meant risk for starvation and hypothermia when exposed to the elements. Most resistance to physiological adaptations stem from defense mechanisms for survival. These mechanisms also explain our actual impressive initial resistance to obesity and paradoxical ability to add fat and mature lipid cells.
Due to these benefits or consequences, depending on how they are viewed, training for improved strength, size, and leanness must comply with specifically applied stress (specificity), at a new perceived level of strain (overload), with consistent incremental increases (progression). Most fitness enthusiasts are able to apply these principles when they first start training either out of instruction, copying others, or the simple fact that at this point any stress is a new perceived stress, but mostly due to the fact that the body is not accustomed to training and a routinely added stress of any kind will work. Anyone who does not work out can get results by entering a gym, copying the actions, correct or incorrect, of others if they do it routinely and the intensity is above what they have experienced before. The body, though, will initially make neural adjustments, alleviate some stress via muscle and coronary adjustments, and then level off. That is, unless a new stress is applied. Many refer to this as plateauing or going stale. This does not mean one has reached a genetic potential; rather it suggests the body is not impressed with the training and can deal with it in its current physiological state. Research indicates when left to one’s own accord, training will consistently be below threshold (60% of max). Studies have demonstrated this for both aerobic and anaerobic training. This explains why some of the common faces in the gym are also those without results. Everyone knows individuals who are in the gym day after day, year after year and look and perform exactly the same. How is this possible with that amount of time? It’s simple physiology, the body changes to a new stress not the same one it has already adapted to. If you read the same book over and over again the ending is always the same.
Although there is much to learn, science has advanced enough to outline necessary steps to achieve improvements in human performance; and has also been kind enough to identify bogus claims including amazing short-term gains in muscle mass without steroids, and the fat loss of ten pounds in a weekend, or six inch spot reduction of the waist from the latest ab-based infomercial product. A novel emerging principle can be used to consistently get results. It’s called the applied exercise principles principle. Simply stated, following immediate adjustments from the nervous system, the body can adjust about 2-5% a week depending on the nature of the adaptation and the relative proximity to one’s genetic potential. Therefore to make gains, the stress needs to be 2-5% harder than what was previously adapted to. This doesn’t mean an increase in resistance weight by 5% every week, notice the words previously adapted to – not previously performed. Case in point, you may increase temporary flexibility after a properly performed yoga session but the elastic properties of the tissue have not become plastic properties. Likewise, you may improve performance of a new exercise via neural adjustments but that does not mean the next time it is performed it will be perfect based on true motor patterning. These adaptations take several exposures to the stress which is why the 2-5% improvement is over a week, not a day.
Training should reflect and address these needs of the body and an easily applied rule can help. Coined here, it is the “plus-two” rule. “Plus two” simply suggests premeditated increases of stress. Either add two reps, 2% more resistance, or increase the total weekly volume 2%. For example, if the resistance for the standing shoulder press was 30 lbs, and it was successfully performed for two sets of twelve, next workout make it two sets of 14 repetitions. By increasing the repetitions by two rather than one it eliminates the psychology of repetitions – where one stops at the reps defined, regardless of capability. When a trainer puts a resistance on a bar and says perform 10 repetitions, the client will always stop at 10 regardless of his or her immediate capabilities. Some days we are stronger than others. If volitional failure stops the exercise, overload has obviously been reached.
This can also be applied to resistance. If 200 lbs was used on the leg press last week, this week’s resistance (200 x 2% = 204 lbs) is 205 pounds. Since there are typically no 1 lb Olympic plates, we’ll round up. Now consider this, when was the last time anyone actually used the 2.5 lb Olympic plates on the leg press? Or anything else? The least used plates in the gym are actually the most physiologically correct resistance for weight training applications (bodybuilding, strength training, and power training). Even drag training used for speed should reflect this seemingly small incremental change. If the body can only adapt at a certain, consistent speed and nothing besides illegal and dangerous drugs can accelerate this process, why is everyone ignoring it? If you observe people bench press, squat, leg press, military press, and row you will see incremental increases of ten if not twenty pounds or more in some cases. Certainly, some individuals use the smaller weights but often their justification is to avoid mass, not utilize overload. Is it ego or ignorance? Perhaps even a combination.
Volume can also be adjusted by 2% per week if the goal is total work. Volume is the total work performed in the week. It can be determined by multiplying the number of sets by the reps, and then by the weight lifted.
| Example: | Weight | Reps | Sets | Total |
| Deadlift | 125 | 8 | 4 | 4000 |
| Military press | 75 | 8 | 3 | 1800 |
| Bent-over row | 80 | 10 | 3 | 2400 |
| Alt Lunge with ball rotation | Bodyweight + 6lb | 16 | 2 | 4992 |
| Alternating incline press | Total 80 lbs (DB 40 lbs) | 12 | 2 | 1920 |
| Medicine ball rotation | 8 lb | 15 | 2 | 240 |
| Total work = 15,352 lbs lifted | *Note: DB = dumbell | |||
If this value is used consistently for three sessions in a week, the next week a total work of (15,352 x 2%) 310 lbs must be added per day. The 310 lbs. should be distributed over the exercises to accommodate total work performed by all exercises. This way, non-specific exercises can be used to generate progressive work. It all is a factor of what the intentions of the training are or again, the principle of specificity.
If trainers want to see continuous goal attainment from their clients, beyond that reached in the first two months (which occur regardless of skill), they must premeditate programming based on training cycles of appropriate applied principles. The term Exercise Science in university settings is such due to the science of physiology. Human adaptations are extremely predictable. This knowledge is a huge advantage for personal trainers who are willing to exploit this fact. Tracking progress, collecting data, and applying principles all equate to very successful training practices.
