The Most Effective Weight Training, Cardio & Nutrition for Women | Dr. Lauren Colenso-Semple

As a woman, if I honestly thought there were things we should do differently to optimize our results, of course, I would be doing them myself and telling other women to do them, too. The narrative that women need a sexspecific program or nutrient timing guidance or a particular intensity of exercise or rep range or all of it. It makes women feel like they're being spoken to and being considered and then they're part of this community instead of oh, you know, just do what your boyfriend does or what your husband does or so the narrative is very much women are not men. And so obviously women need something different. The data says men and women respond to exercise very similarly. Welcome to the Huberman Lab podcast, where we discuss science and science-based tools [music] for everyday life. I'm Andrew Huberman and I'm a professor of neurobiology and opthalmology at Stanford School of Medicine. My guest today is Dr. Lauren Kenzo Simple. She holds a PhD in integrative physiology and is a certified strength and conditioning specialist. She is an expert in both the science and practice of building muscle and strength, cardiovascular fitness, and the relationship between hormones and exercise. Today's discussion is focused on fitness for women, and how it overlaps directly with the same things that men should do for their fitness. Therefore, today's discussion is relevant to both women and men. Dr. Keno Simple explains how to structure your ideal training routine according to the time you have available and your health and fitness goals. She also clearly explains what the science says about if and when women's hormone cycles, life stages such as menopause, and things like birth control should actually impact how women should train and when. As we all know, information about best practices for fitness, nutrition, and health are hotly debated online. Dr. Kenzo Simple has become one of the most trusted voices for explaining what the science says about women's specific fitness as well as for delivering clear actionable evidence for protocols that work in the real world. It was a true honor and pleasure to host her on the podcast. Before we begin, I'd like to emphasize that this podcast is separate from my teaching and research roles at Stanford. It is however part of my desire and effort to bring zero cost to consumer information about science and science related tools to the general public. In keeping with that theme, today's episode does include sponsors. And now for my discussion with Dr. Lauren Kenso, Simple. Dr. Lauren Kenzo Simple, welcome. Thank you. Very excited to have you here. To kick things off, is there anything fundamentally different about muscle tissue in men and women? And if not at the cellular level in terms of the hormone receptors that they express or the hormones that they're exposed to in a way that should change people's behavior about how to exercise when we look at how the muscle responds. So we look at muscle protein synthesis in response to exercise or nutrition. There are no differences. Very similar protein metabolism response, very similar growth response. The major difference and this is hormone related is that the baseline muscularity because during puberty when men experience a surge in testosterone that coincides with an increase in muscle mass. So if you take an untrained adult man and an untrained adult woman there will be a disparity in their baseline muscle mass and that is due to differences in testosterone. However, once they start training, they will gain similar relative size. So, not that I'm suggesting uh people get into competitive bodybuilding and use steroids, although some people might make that their life choice. The vast majority of people won't. But if we were to look at female bodybuilders at any point in the last 30 years or so, it's very clear that with chemical augmentation, which is typically increasing testosterone or some testosterone like uh derivative, that women can achieve a very impressive level of muscularity that in many ways rivals what certainly men who are not taking anabolic steroids can achieve. What does that tell us? the fact that the addition of androgens, testosterone and testosterone like derivatives can take female musculature and make it look essentially like male musculature. Does that tell us anything interesting that informs the non-steroid user, the non-bodybuilder? Not so much because we're talking about those suprahysiological levels and that's the real gamecher. So if we think about even with men what is the normal range of testosterone we don't see this relationship between oh you know you're closer to 900 and you are going to respond better to resistance training. So as long as you're within what that wide normal range there doesn't seem to be a predictability of your response to training. However, once we get into those supraphysiological levels and we're taking that exogenous hormone, then yes, we are going to develop levels of muscularity that wouldn't necessarily be possible. You said something several things uh very interesting. Um if I understood correctly, if a male is somewhere in the reference range, so typically I believe that's somewhere between 300 NOGS per deciliter and 900 NOGS per deciliter. Maybe in some countries it goes up to 1,200 but in any case that a male with 400 NOG per deciliter testosterone versus 600 it's not as if the male with 600 can make you know that much more muscle growth and the same is true for women. That's right. Okay. So as long as you're within that broad normal range and of course what's normal for you differs from what's normal for someone else. So if there are uh changes that might impact you because now you're below what is your normal then that can manifest in in a variety of ways. But there isn't this clear kind of linear relationship where we would say oh let's measure your testosterone you are going to be a hard gainer or you're going to put on mass really easily. If we were to just look at people who are not chemically augmented in any way, not know their testosterone in any way, and here I'm referring to women specifically, how much individual variation is there, or what's known about the individual variation among women in terms of the amount of potential to grow muscle and strength? Is it true that some women have a much greater potential to build muscle mass uh that's independent of their testosterone levels? I'd say yes, it's independent of the testosterone levels, but we're going to start with different baselines and then it depends on the stimulus that you are using for growth. And some people are adapting to that growth stimulus to a greater extent than others, but part of that is effective, consistent, progressive training, and then part of it is arguably some genetic factors. But when we even look at the molecular level, say fiber type differences, we see adaptation in both sexes that is quite dramatic. And that tells us that both men and women have the potential for large adaptations in either direction, whether we're saying, you know, to endurance type training or resistance type training. I would like to take a quick break and acknowledge one of our sponsors, JW. JWV makes medical grade red light therapy devices. Now, if there's one thing that I have consistently emphasized on this podcast is the incredible impact that light can have on our biology and our health. Now, in addition to sunlight, which I've talked about a lot on this podcast, red light, near infrared, and infrared light have been specifically shown to have positive effects on improving numerous aspects of cellular and organ health. These include faster muscle recovery, improved skin health, wound healing, improvements in acne, reduce pain and inflammation, improved mitochondrial function, and even improvements in vision. Nowadays, there are a lot of red light devices out there. But what sets Juv lights apart, and why they're my preferred red light therapy device, is that they use clinically proven wavelengths, meaning they use the specific wavelengths of red light, near infrared, and infrared light in combination to trigger the optimal cellular adaptations. Personally, I use the JWV whole body panel about three to four times a week, usually for about 10 to 20 minutes per session. And I use the JWV handheld light both at home and when I travel. If you would like to try JWV, they're offering up to $400 off select products for listeners of this podcast. To learn more, visit JV, spelled jvv.com/huberman. Again, that's jovv.com/huberman. Today's episode is also brought to us byleep. Eightle makes smart mattress covers with cooling, heating, and sleep tracking capacity. One of the best ways to ensure you get a great night's sleep is to make sure that the temperature of your sleeping environment is correct. And that's because in order to fall asleep and stay deeply asleep, your body temperature actually has to drop by about 1 to 3°. And in order to wake up feeling refreshed and energized, your body temperature actually has to increase by about 1 to 3°. Eight automatically regulates the temperature of your bed throughout the night according to your unique needs. I've been sleeping on an eightle mattress cover for nearly 5 years now and it has completely transformed and improved the quality of my sleep. The latest eightle model is the Pod 5. This is what I'm now sleeping on and I absolutely love it. It has so many incredible features. For instance, the Pod 5 has a feature called autopilot, which is an AI engine that learns your sleep patterns and then adjusts the temperature of your sleeping environment across different sleep stages. It'll even elevate your head if you're snoring, and it makes other shifts to optimize your sleep. If you'd like to try eight, go to eightsleep.com/huberman to get up to $350 off the new Pod 5. Eight ships to many countries worldwide, including Mexico and the UAE. Again, that's eight.com/huberman to save up to $350. I want to put aside the use of exogenous uh testosterone therapy although we can return to that a little bit later because it seems to be a popular theme in women's health circles now especially in the per perry menopause excuse me a menopause conversation but it's well known from studies uh I believe that were exclusively carried out in men that training a certain way sprints resistance training and um we talk about exactly how can increase circulating testosterone grown in meaningful ways that can feed back on psychology and can feed back on growth and strength development etc. Have the same studies been carried out in women? In other words, if a woman lifts weights um in a certain manner for 45 minutes or 60 minutes, do we expect a big surge in her circulating levels of testosterone? Well, the circulating levels are already quite low. And one of the issues here is that the way testosterone has been measured in women for a very long time is such that the assays are not capable of detecting some of these normal low levels. So we know a lot less about those lower kind of circulating levels of testosterone in women than I think people acknowledge. But more importantly, that acute response to exercise, th that those that increase in um post exercise, testosterone, growth hormone, etc., people used to think that was the driver of hypertrophy. And so there were all of these training styles to sort of maximize that response. And so people would uh promote high rep training or supersets and they'd say, "Oh, you know, this is going to really maximize that response." But what we know now is that response, although acutely, it's not the driver of growth long term. And so it it doesn't really make sense to chase that short-term response because it's not predictive of longer term adaptation. Until fairly recently, women doing resistance training, especially heavy for them, you know, uh somewhere between 70 and 90% of a one rep max or even a one rep max. So, heavy for them was scary for a lot of women. I've women in my family and they're like, I don't want to lift weights. I don't want to I don't want to get too big. This is, you know, was a common statement. What do you think changed? I think part of it was the introduction of the bikini category in competitive bodybuilding because that was a level of muscularity that people didn't look at and say, "Oh, that's bulky." That was, "Oh, she looks good in a bikini." And so, people wanted to look like that, realized that they needed to lift weights to do it. And it kind of opened up a door for resistance training being more feminine. Um, I think that in combination with the introduction of more group fitness, it had resistance training components, crossfit, which um, a lot of women were drawn to. I think all of that has made women feel more empowered to lift weights and less fearful of the the results. Although I think there is still a sentiment in some circles that lifting weights or lifting too heavy is going to make you huge instead of you know quote unquote toned. Also if there are all of these where are all of these bulky women? When do you walk how often do you walk down the street and see an incredibly jacked woman? It's very very rare. And so clearly no one is getting huge by accident. you're not getting extremely muscular without working really really hard and often incorporating some pharmacological help for a a woman who's not currently doing resistance training. Um maybe we could talk to her uh for a second. Um at what age is too early for a woman to do resistance training? What does the data say? I think is a cultural stereotype that at least in high school the girls didn't belong in the weight room. That was certainly my experience growing up. Now I think that's shifting. And so it's not that it's unsafe, it's just that it wasn't done. And so people weren't teaching teenage girls how to lift weights. And there's a lot of advantages to that, especially if you're playing sports. Because we have female athletes who are teenagers and then going into college and continuing to play their sports and there can be not only a performance improvement but also an injury reduction from doing some resistance training along with your sports specific training. So I think it's it's certainly valuable to to start younger also from a habit building perspective because I know you know if you're somebody who has gone decades without ever doing a lot of structured exercise or without ever lifting weights it can feel kind of daunting and intimidating to learn the new skill. That said we know that you can gain muscle anytime even if you start at 70. So, it's not that it's ever too late to start, but if we start earlier, we are building muscle in the way that you're building a savings account or a retirement account. Because if we're not lifting weights and if we're not physically active, then we do start to lose muscle with age. And later in life, it does become a problem. I wonder uh if resistance training should be taught earlier. Um it doesn't sound like it should be avoided for young girls. Is that correct? Yeah. I mean I think if we see a young kid doing a barbell squat, there's something kind of jarring about that. But think about all the kids we see all the time, you know, on the monkey bars essentially doing pull-ups or muscleups and developing a lot of upper body strength. And certainly young gymnasts have been doing that for a very long time. So, it's not that there isn't any sort of resistance training or going around or or or happening in childhood. It's just not the structured training that we think when we talk about lifting weights. That's an excellent point and it makes me realize that probably early in development, boys and girls are doing resistance training at the level of pull-ups and monkey bars and all the rest. Um, to the same extent, maybe even the girls a bit more if the boys are all playing video games or like I don't know. Oh no, who knows? But then there's a drop off because of this what really is just a a a cultural stereotype um that boys are going to go to the gym and girls aren't. Although that seems to be changing. Okay. Well, that's a bit of the sociology around resistance training in in young girls. What about um a woman in her, you know, teens, 20s, 30s or older who's just never done formal resistance training, perhaps has done other forms of exercise. How should she think about starting resistance training? We could break this down into days per week, sets and reps, etc. But what's the the sort of general contour of a really good starter program for a woman at essentially any age? Historically, I think women have been told that exercise is for weight loss. And so, it's really important that we start to shift that narrative because resistance training isn't about being smaller. It's not about the number on the scale. So, we want to think about getting bigger, about growing muscle. And in order to do that, we need to challenge the muscle in a way that is a sufficient stimulus for growth. So, if we think about a full body training program, we want to target all of the major muscle groups and a challenging load will differ depending on the exercise and and the muscle groups that we're targeting. And we can train in low, moderate, or high rep ranges, but we need to train close enough to failure. Meaning, if we can only do 10 and not an 11th, that's failure. So, we can stop at maybe eight or nine and that's an appropriate stimulus. But if we finish that set of 10 and we could easily do another 10, then that load is too light. So making sure that we are doing a full body training program targeting all the major muscle groups that we're using appropriate loads and we're progressing over time because what you'll be able to do whether it's load or number of repetitions this month will change next month and the month after. You mentioned full body program. Does the entire body ha uh have to be trained each session? Or could um somebody use a so-called split like you know chest and back one day rest legs the next day rest shoulders and arms calves some ab work stretch repeat that sort of thing. If you're only going to train two or three times a week, I think it's better to do a full body session because you're hitting all those major muscle groups at an appropriate number of times per week. If you want to train more often than that, it does make sense to split it up. So, if you're training four days per week, I would do, you know, maybe upper body, lower body, upper body, lower body. If you're training 5 days or six days per week, then we might split it up even more the way that you suggested. And there are also uh options depending on your personal goals. And so if we're thinking about muscle growth for overall health, then maybe we're not doing as many exercises like accessory type exercises. But if we're thinking about changing the physique with resistance training, then we might tailor the program to your goals and preferences and um work a little bit more on those muscle groups that are important to you. for sake of example then I I'll just try and build a structure around what you're saying. Let's say uh a woman decides to do a Monday, Wednesday, Friday whole body workout each time. Take the weekends off. Obviously the days that it starts could shift. Um but due to schedule or other things, sometimes it's a Monday, Friday, sometimes it's a Monday, Wednesday, sometimes they hit Monday, Wednesday, Friday. Seems like a reasonable framework. Would you suggest training the entire body all three or in some cases two two days per week using the same exercises to target the same muscle groups each time? Meaning if she squats on uh Monday for her quads and of course also for uh other muscle groups, you know, hamstrings and glutes and lower back are going to get hit too. But should she squat again on Wednesday and Friday or do you recommend varying the the the movement by uh per muscle group? It's an option to do either. I I think it's there's an element of personal preference. If you're working on improving squat strength, then you probably do want to squat more than once per week because it practicing the movement is important. But if we're talking about muscle growth, then we have a lot of options. And so you can do barbell work, you can do machine work, you can do dumbbells. And we can break it up if you wanted more variety by saying, "Okay, Monday your lower body exercises are going to be a squat and on Wednesday we'll do a a good morning and we'll work more of the posterior chain or Friday maybe we'll do more of a a glute dominant exercise and we'll do some hip thrusts." And so I think it depends how many exercises you're doing in a session and then how long the workout's going to be before we decide how we're going to split that up. And so you could do this a a more quad dominant movement like a squat, a lunge, a leg press, a step up, and also do more of a glute hamstring dominant movement like a good morning or a stiff leg deadlift. and do both in the same session. Or you could split those up and have more of a quad dominant day and a more hamstring glute dominant day. Got it. Um, I'm going to drill down a little bit more into specifics because I anticipate that's what people will want and it's uh probably the first time we've had somebody uh so well qualified to get into these specifics about resistance training on this podcast specifically for women. Although you're going to tell us later that the words specifically for women is dangerous language. We'll we'll get back to that. Okay. So, let's assume two or three days per week whole body workouts. Um, one could vary or keep the exercises per muscle group the same. Um, how many work sets after a sufficient warm-up? And when I think of warm-up, I'll take the liberty here and you can tell me where I'm wrong. I think, okay, a light set to kind of remind yourself what the mechanics are, get some blood flow going, see if anything feels like it might need another light warm-up set and just kind of like a stretching out. Then a moderate set, like 50% of your one rep max, something where you could do 10 to 15 reps, but maybe you do seven or eight or maybe even a little heavier. And then move to the work set. The work set that's taken within to failure or within a rep or two just shy of failure. How many work sets after a sufficient warm-up for that muscle group? At least two. I prefer three. Uh you could do four. Beyond that is probably overkill. And that's assuming one exercise for that muscle group for the entire workout. So four three to four sets per muscle group per workout, each muscle two to three times per week with the understanding that many exercises work more than one muscle group. So, if I'm doing a leg extension, then I know I'm specifically working the quads, right? But if I'm doing a leg press or a squat, then yes, I'm working the quads, but I'm also working the glutes. And you can kind of say, well, is that a half a set for the glutes? Is that a full set for the glutes? And same thing if we're doing a bench press. Yes, you're working your chest, you're working your delts, you're also working your triceps. So, uh, is that a full set for the triceps, or is it just a tricep push down that I'm going to consider a set for the triceps? So it it gets a little bit murky when we think about exercises that work multiple muscle groups. But I think if we focus on those compound movements, the the bench press, the squats, the deadlifts, then we should think in that range that we're doing at least two, preferably three, uh but beyond four probably unnecessary. Well, at three workouts per week, you know, it's, you know, that's getting anywhere from, you know, nine to 12 sets for the quads. That's that's a fair amount of work. If one were to collapse all of that into a single workout, that's that's a lot of quad work. What sort of rest intervals between sets? I prefer autoregulation for rest. I think if you have strength specific goals, meaning you're really working on a one rep max deadlift, let's say, in order to repeat that type of performance, you will need longer rest. Um maybe four minutes, 5 minutes, it depends, right? Uh but for an average gym session, you know, using some machines [clears throat] or using some dumbbells, then two minutes is probably fine for most people. And once you're you've been training for a while, you'll know when you're ready. But if it makes you feel better to set the timer, then I'd say 2 minutes for most exercises. Um maybe 3 minutes for for something like a squat or deadlift. Is there anything of value that can be done during the rest period other than rest and change the weight? Of course, if you want to maximize time efficiency, then we might consider agonist antagonist supersets. So when you look at somebody doing a bench press or chest press and then instead of resting for the two to three minutes and then doing the next set, they go and they do a row. And so you're going back and forth and you're you're pairing a push and a pull. And that doesn't seem to interfere with adaptation or even acute performance the same way it would if you didn't rest in between your straight sets of bench press. So that can be a really viable way to train especially if you are crunched for time. So maybe a bench press or some other press type movement, dumbbell incline presses, whatever um she selects and then um move immediately from there to a pull down. Sure. And then wait out the remainder of the rest interval and then do another superset. That sort of arrangement. Yep. superers setting or doing an exercise that normally you would rest two or three minutes between and instead resting a minute than going doing the antagonistic muscle and back also um prevents getting lost in your phone because you're on task. You know, it's amazing how much longer workouts get when when one starts texting or paying attention to other things and and the the switching back of focus from exercise to phone is a I don't know I don't know any good studies on this but it it can't can't be healthy. Yeah. There are also studies about stretching in between or doing some sort of active recovery type work in between. We don't have enough data to say that's necessarily beneficial. Uh but I think if [clears throat] people are thinking I don't want to sit and rest and do nothing, then the the superset or even a circuit type of structure is probably a better way to go. What about pushing past failure? some, you know, assisted reps, aka forced reps, done in reasonably good form, so injury isn't a risk. Uh, drop sets where you immediately lower the weight and get a few more reps after failure. Are you a fan of these so-called um intensity techniques? I think forced reps where we're not getting much benefit from other than it can be fun if you're working with a training partner. [laughter] Uh [clears throat] drop sets um are a good kind of finisher because they can especially if you're doing a cable type exercise. I'm not I'm not going to say drop sets are better than straight sets, but it is a way to add some kind of variety into especially the last set of of a workout. um or if if you're doing exercises that are um just more conducive to drop sets like a bicep curl or a leg extension or something that's really easy to to immediately [clears throat] drop the weight and go to the next. So, it's not better, but it's certainly a tool and it fits into that timeefficient strategy. For the longest time, I thought time under tension and moving the weight really slow was a value. I know that everyone should control the weight so that you don't get injured. No, you know, dropping the weight and swinging it back up and this kind of thing. Um, but assuming that the weight is under control, meaning momentum isn't doing most of the work, you're being careful to protect your um form and posture, etc. Is there a best rate of movement for the resistance? Should we emphasize the the lowering phase, etc.? There's always going to be a harder part of the movement and an easier part of the movement. So, we should move the weight as quickly as we can during that difficult phase and then control on the easier phase. But trying to intentionally slow down either direction is not particularly advantageous, especially if we think about like standing up from from a squat. We want to stand up from the bottom of the squat as quickly as we can under load. If we have a lot of load, we're not going to stand up super fast, but we should be thinking stand up because if we don't, we're less likely to be able to complete that repetition. I think this is a really important point that most non muscle physiologists, exercise physiologists have not been trained on, but I'm hearing more about this these days that trying to move the weight as fast as one can under control against resistance should be the mindset inside of the set. Is that correct? Did I I want to make sure I'm not contorting your words at all. That's right. And when you think about doing a set of 10, right? By the time you get to seven, eight, nine, the weight is already moving more slowly. You're starting to grind it out because it's getting more and more challenging. And so if you are using a load that that is appropriate, then the rate the the time it takes for you to complete that rep will inevitably get a little bit longer. But that's not something you're doing intentionally. Got it. Um, getting really granular here, but I get asked these questions all the time and um, as it relates to women's training specifically. You'd be amazed that people are coming to me for that, but almost certainly so that I could ask you. Partial repetitions and isometric holds. Do they have any value? The problem with doing partial repetitions or even playing with tempo is that it's really difficult to replicate consistently. And so I mentioned earlier that we want to progress over time. And if we're standardizing the range of motion and we're standardizing the exercise and we're standardizing the tempo, then it's easy to say, "Okay, I'm using 2 and a half more pounds this week. I've progressed." If we're playing around with all of these variables and then we're trying to add load, it starts to get a little tricky because you're saying, I know I'm using more load, but am I cutting the range of motion short in order to to to lift more? Uh am I speeding up the reps in order to lift more? So we want to introduce fewer variables to make sure that we are progressing whether it's a rep or load repetition ranges. Uh earlier you said getting close to failure or going to failure is the critical component but within a pretty broad range. Um, do you think it's necessary to limit uh oneself to certain repetition ranges on the order of a workout, the week, the month, a phase of the year? Um, are repetition ranges between, you know, three and five compatible with repetition ranges for the, you know, other muscle groups are the same in the same week of 10 10 to 15? I mean, I think there's a lot of um kind of uh vagueness around there this for women and for men. You know, you hear, "Oh, low reps get you strong but don't grow muscle." And then here, higher reps, as long as you go to failure, they'll grow muscle. And uh that's all fine and good, but no one really has ever said clearly how to vary this stuff in a way that allows for the best progress. And um I realize that's a lot to to ask you to tackle in one answer, but you have the mic. uh what what are your thoughts on repetition ranges and and how to vary them uh and when we used to think and they used to teach all the personal trainers this there was a strength endurance continuum such that you're doing one to five reps and you're building strength and then you're doing something kind of moderate range up to 12 and that's hypertrophy and then beyond that 12 to 20 that's in muscular endurance and our understanding of that has evolved certainly if you're training for maximal strength, i.e. a one rep max, then you need to be training in in those lower rep ranges because that is a sports specific uh training. And so it's not that if you do sets of 10, your one rep max won't get stronger. It will, but to maximize your one rep max, then we need to do some very high load, very low rep training. If the goal is hypertrophy, we have way more flexibility because we do see similar growth whether you're training in those high load low rep ranges or the lower load high rep ranges and anything in between provided that we train close enough to failure. However, we need to think about overall volume because that's very important for growth. So, if we're doing sets of three, we're going to need to do a lot of sets of three to accomplish the same overall volume that we would get by doing sets of eight or 10. That last point, I'm so grateful you said that. I used to hear the late Charles Pulquin say this that if you're going to use higher repetitions, let's say between eight and 15, which for me seems like high repetitions, um you can I don't want to say get away with, but you could do two or three sets per muscle group um or per exercise and maybe two exercises for a muscle group. Whereas, if you were going to train in the three to six rep range, you might need to do eight sets of and because typically one rests longer in between sets when with heavier loads. Those are two very different workouts. One is actually much more efficient than the other, even though it gets you something slightly different. I'm sure people are wondering, and I know you don't want to bias people's choices, but do you have a favorite repetition range for you for your level of experience these days? I mean, what do you typically select? I typically do something in the six to 12 depending on the exercise, but I think some exercises are fun to do 15 reps of um and some are not. So I I think if you're doing something like face pulls for your rear delts or leg extensions, I would never say, "Yeah, do a set of three." But if you're doing squats, I don't want to do a set of 20 squats ever. And most people don't. Uh so I think we can for most people say all right, somewhere in the the kind of 6 to 12ish is a good sweet spot. If you're new, I'd say go 8 to 12 because we want to get really comfortable with the movement pattern. And so if you're only doing sets of four or sets of five, then you're not repeating the movement enough to get really proficient with the technique. So I'd love for for those people to start in a moderate rep range. I think also if you go beyond that, then there's there's more of a chance of uh kind of form failure and injury risk. And so we want to be really proficient in the moderate rep range before we start exploring those lower or higher rep ranges. Do you think it's valuable uh for women to vary the repetition or men uh to vary the repetition ranges um like week by week like okay this week I'm going to train six to 10 reps on everything or um I'm going to go three to five reps on everything for three weeks then I'm going to switch to six to eight for three weeks and then I'm going to go you know 10 to 15 for three weeks and then repeat. Is there is there any um known value for hypertrophy and strength training to doing it sticking with one thing and then systematically varying every say three weeks? You can do it that way. I prefer to combine it into the week. So if let's say we're doing squats twice a week, then let's do a lower rep set day and a moderate rep set day. And you can do that for all of your kind of main compound lifts. And that adds some variety, but also means you have the data to make sure that you're progressing in each of those rep ranges kind of simultaneously. Whereas if we were to do sets of six for three weeks and then move to sets of 12, then I don't really have that anchor point for am I making progress because now I'm doing the that lift in another rep range. If you're a regular listener of the Huberman Lab podcast, you've no doubt heard me talk about the vitamin mineral probiotic drink AG1. And if you've been on the fence about it, now is an awesome time to give it a try. For the next few weeks, AG1 is giving away a full supplement package with your first subscription to AG1. They're giving away a free bottle of vitamin D3 K2, a bottle of omega-3 fish oil capsules, and a sample pack of the new sleep formula, AGZ, which by the way is now the only sleep supplement I take. It's fantastic. My sleep on AGZ is out of this world good. AGZ is a drink, so it eliminates the need to take a lot of pills. It tastes great and like I said, it has me sleeping incredibly well, waking up more refreshed than ever. I absolutely love it. Again, this is a limited time offer, so make sure to go to drink a1.com/huberman to get started today. A moment ago, you said something and I'm so grateful that you said this because I don't think it's ever been communicated as clearly as you did and I would just want to double click on it. Um, there's this assumption that heavier sets, and I'm not referring to one to three reps. I mean, let's say in the five to eight repetition range, final repetitions close to failure or failure, that somehow they are more dangerous um than high repetition sets. In my experience, high repetitions from 15 to 25, especially on compound movements, get people hurt at least as often as the heavy stuff. And I think it's because it's I'm I'm guessing here, but that it's hard to concentrate and generate perfect form on a very high repetition set. And compound movements are where you can get hurt. You can get hurt on isolation movements, but multi- joint movements done for 20 reps, I mean, unless you're really locked in mentally, that's often where people get injured is my observation. Yeah, I think it's an equal opportunity game. You know, we we really need to make sure that form is dialed in and that you have a spotter or a training partner if appropriate depending on the lift that you're doing. Because if you're doing high rep deadlifts, for example, you do have more opportunities to lift the weight in such a way that you just tweak something. And sometimes if people are doing those lower rep heavier sets, they're more likely to kind of take that moment, reset, lock in, and then perform the next rep. And it's a bit easier to rush the set and not kind of force yourself to to to reset and and focus on those form cues when you're using a load that doesn't require you to do so. Thank you. Yes, recently there was a pretty uh avid debate online about heavy weights versus not heavy weights, especially for older folks. And since now I'm 50, I place myself in that category. I'm a big fan of low repetitions, but not three or less. Um, but let's just say some of my peers feel that that's super dangerous not to recommend, you know, five to eight repetition range. It could be that some people are just better at quote unquote locking everything in and getting really focused and doing a proper set when there's fewer repetitions then and some people might be great at I I realize that doing 20 repetitions of stiff-legged deadlifts and every repetition is just beautiful. But isn't there the idea that some of the smaller supporting muscles can fatigue as a set goes on and make one susceptible to injury? Is that or is that just gym? Is that just like jock science? No matter what, we need to make sure that we're appropriately warmed up and that we're using proper technique. So, if you try to go do a one rep max or a set of three and you're not properly warmed up, I'm concerned. Sure. But assuming all else is equal, then depending on the exercise, we also have to think of overall systemic fatigue. Even fatigue um on the cardiovascular system if you're doing 30 squats, you might be out of breath before your legs give out and that can introduce another mental challenge to the set. Excellent point. I hadn't considered that. I also don't enjoy 20 repetition squats. Although on the belt squat, I'm finding some, let's just say, some personal growth through them. Mental personal growth. It's a whole different thing to do high repetition leg work. It's like a and it is very cardiovascular. Speaking of which, um I think most people nowadays, men and women, uh understand that cardiovascular exercise is important as well. And I realize that term pisses off the endurance athletes because what is cardiovascular exercise? I'm talking about something that you can repeat for six minutes or more. um continuously uh gets heart rate elevated and so on. I think most people think of this as cardio. Um how do you recommend uh scheduling cardio with the two or three day per week um resistance training? Does it matter if somebody does it before or after their weight training on a given day? Um can they do it on the same day? Would they be better off doing it on other days? Uh what are the guidelines? So the concept of kind of the interference effect or issues with concurrent training come from the idea that you have both endurance training goals and resistance training goals and that if you perform those too close together that the endurance training might blunt some of that hypertrophic adaptation. um we see that could be true if you're doing very high volume work and you're stacking it very close together. So assuming your hypertrophy or strength is the goal, then we would want to perform that first and if possible, separate them by, you know, at least several hours. But we really don't run into true uh interference effect type results unless we're doing tons of training and you know, you're doing your sprints before you do your leg workout. I would avoid that. I think we also need to think about whether we have endurance training goals or we're just trying to be fit for health. Most people listening to this probably um would like to get stronger, probably would like to add muscle to specific muscles and maybe have it in mind and we'll get here in a moment to not deliberately not add muscle to other muscles and um to be what they consider lean enough and that want to be fit. I always think of the the general life requirements like you want to be able to carry your suitcase or bagging if you have to run for the plane that you can do it without coughing up along. Pick things up and not get injured. Sprint if you need to. Play a game of frisbee or soccer or or or volleyball, a pickup game at the picnic or something. Uh go for a hike maybe with a kid on your back, maybe with a backpack if you don't have kids. I think the sort of like just ability to go out on a Sunday and take a long hike with a pack without having to train for it. the ability to sprint for the plane without without dying when you arrive there. Um, these kinds of things to me are the real life metrics. I feel like that's what most people want. And then of course some people want to run marathons and be powerliffters and, you know, Alex Hunnel just, you know, scaled a a tower in Taipei without any ropes. So, you know, there's a huge range, but I think what I described, I think, is where most of us are at. What do you think most women are at? Lifting weights is so important because we don't have a lifestyle fun equivalent activity. Mhm. But I don't think we all need to be going for a jog or spending an hour on the elliptical if we prefer playing tennis or going for bike rides with friends or going for hikes or something that is physically active and enjoyable and that we will be more likely to do consistently. So there is an element of that that can be really freeing for people because they think, "Oh, well then I don't need to worry about adding these structured cardio sessions in my week. I'm just going to do those outdoor physical activities with friends that I'm enjoying and also benefiting from." What are the data on walking? Um I've heard 7,000 steps or so per day is a is a good number to shoot for. where I heard that the 10,000 number was just kind of thrown out there the same way that 8 hours of intermittent fasting was just kind of thrown out there. We'll get back to that. How important and helpful is walking for women in particular? I like to think of walking as something you can do that is not structured exercise. And so we're not thinking about meeting a step count necessarily. You can do that, but people who focus on something like step counts usually do so for a few months and then stop because being kind of obsessive about tracking that metric gets a little old. And it's important to think not only about hitting one target, whether it's, you know, minutes of exercise per week or step count or heart rate goal, but what are we doing for the the other hours in the day? So I think somebody who isn't active at all going from doing very few steps to getting it up to four, five, 6 thousand steps, yes, we're going to see a huge benefit. But if you're somebody who is physically active in a variety of ways and you are moving throughout the day, not necessarily focusing purely on steps, then that metric of step count is a little bit less useful because we are getting in that overall activity that is going to be beneficial for health. So, what I'm hearing is if a woman is in the gym two or three days per week lifting the way that you described and has some outdoor or or indoor social sport type activities that she enjoys, there's no need to specifically add cardio unless there's an endurance goal or a sprint competition goal. Is that right? Yeah. And I think a lot of people are adding cardio for weight loss goals and that is a bit of a fool's errand because the fat loss that we will get from just adding exercise is pretty disappointing relative to the fat loss that we will see when we adjust our nutrition. What about getting up toward max heart rate for sake of the dreaded V2 max? No, I don't say dreaded. I mean, I just think it's funny cuz, you know, 5 years ago, no one was talking about heart rate variability and V2 max. I mean, again, I'm not trying to inject male fitness or my routine into it, but by virtue of what I've learned in the course of the podcast and also what I enjoy, I make it a point to get on the aine bike or some other thing I can do at max effort or close to it without getting injured um and do, you know, 30 second sprint, 30 second rest, 30 second sprint for at least once a week, ideally twice. I'm assuming, and you tell me, you have the the the credentials here. Uh I'm assuming that by getting my heart rate way way up uh for a couple minutes each week, that I'm doing myself some benefit separate from my resistance training. Is that true or is it or is it um because I I see I mean, I'm not a calorie counter. Kind of an intuitive sense of what I need. Um, but I see, you know, at the end of those workouts, it says I burned 100 calories, which is, you know, I, you know, I walk I eat 100 calories of blueberries in one pass by the [clears throat] blueberry basket. So, so I'm not trying to do it for caloric burn sake. Yeah. The value of the really highintensity stuff is time efficiency. So, if we look at those adaptations to endurance exercise or if we're going to just say cardio broadly, then you can get those by doing more long form moderate intensity. You can also get those by doing higher intensity for shorter amounts of time. So, it's not that [clears throat] it's magic in terms of the adaptation, but you're able to get more bang for your buck because you're doing that higher intensity and you don't need to do it for quite as long. Let's talk about the somewhat barbedwire topic uh these days about variations in hormones as they relate to the menstrual cycle and training requirements. There's a lot of assumptions about this. There's a lot of conjecture and I do believe there's also a lot of outright fabrication. Not because anyone necessarily uh wants to mislead, but I don't think anyone has spent as much time with the data on this as you have. So, should women train differently depending on where they are in their menstrual cycle? The short answer is no. The conversation around the menstrual cycle is good. I think it's good that we're talking about it. It's good that people feel comfortable discussing it with their coach. The unfortunate shift of because you have a menstrual cycle and because hormones are fluctuating, you need to change how you are exercising is way too simplistic and doesn't align with the data that we have. So instead of worrying about whether you're in this phase or that phase or whether estradile is high or low, I would really focus on how you feel. Train hard, train consistently, train progressively. If at some point in your cycle you experience menstrual symptoms or fatigue or a lack of motivation that you relate to menration, then having an option to skip a workout or adjust the exercises that you're doing for that workout or do another form of exercise that day is completely fine. Not saying you have to grind it out, push through, but you are not less capable that day because you have your menstrual period or because the hormone profile has shifted in one direction or another. There's a broader conversation around this, I think, about when to push through internal resistance, either just kind of general malaise, like one doesn't feel well or didn't sleep well, um whether or not one is feeling run down. Maybe we can kind of tuck that into this conversation about uh ways to vary training or not vary training according to phase of the menstrual cycle. Let's say somebody is not feeling as rested as they normally do or would like to. And I say that because people assume you need eight hours of sleep, right? I one might need eight, they might need 10. I'm fine on 6 and 1 half to seven. I prefer eight, but actually 6 and 1 half to seven I'm good. five, that's a whole other issue. So, should women push through a day of a workout if they got, you know, maybe an hour or two less than their normal ration of sleep that they need? Is it or are they putting themselves in some sort of danger if they do that? There's no danger. You might feel worse, but subjective measures of performance are different often from objective measures of performance. And that goes for the menstrual cycle symptoms and and other factors as well. So you might go in and and deadlift the same weight as last week and you'd say, "Wow, this feels really heavy or the weight's moving really slow this morning." But you're still lifting it. So objectively, the performance was the same. It's just your experience of what it felt like differs. It feels harder today. To your point, that can be the case for a variety of reasons. We can be underslept or we are jet-lagged or we're stressed about something workrelated and feeling distracted. There's a lot of reasons why we don't have a 10 out of 10 workout every single time we go to the gym. So, I think there's an argument to be made to Yeah. push forward, just do it anyway. even a subpar workout is better than no workout at all. In your experience and observation, um do you think that women who take up resistance training enjoy it on average? Do they tend to enjoy it or do they tend to um enjoy the feeling afterwards? How do you how do you feel about resistance training? I think it's particularly powerful for women because and I alluded to this earlier, there's a history of marketing ineffective programs to women or encouraging them to constantly switch it up. Try this new group fitness class or try this new at home video workout and they never really see the results that they are hoping to see. And so you're just program hopping and disappointed and feeling like I'm putting in all this work. I'm doing the thing and I'm not seeing results. When you stick to a good resistance training program for long enough, not only do you start to see results in the way that your body looks, because muscle growth can change your body composition and can change your physique, but you also have this empowering feeling of progression over time. I can get stronger. I can do more. And that keeps you coming back. It's really motivating. So, I think that can be really powerful that you feel like you're getting something out of what you're putting in and you're more likely to stick to it long term. For anyone, but since we're talking mainly about uh women's resistance training today, um do you think there's value to spending two or three weeks, maybe less, maybe more, just learning movements properly before getting into the whole business of progressive overload? Yes. Because the problem is you start to see, oh, I can do more than I did last week. And then you think, oh, well, this is linear, right? And so you think, I can add 10 pounds every week forever. It doesn't work like that. So inevitably you end up uh training in or many of us have trained in such a way that we injured something, tweaked something, form failed because we got so focused on just lifting more weight, lifting more weight, lifting more weight. So, I agree that uh a slower progression could be better, but that's also the power of just trying to add another rep instead of trying to add weight week in and week out. We're all told we just kind of like need to exercise. And there's examples of how to do movements, but be wonderful if there was kind of like getting the basics. Like a sprinter doesn't just go sprint, they learn how to do all these drills and um and move into it. And some of these things are complex and it's not just about avoiding injury. It's about getting the most out of the exercise over time. That's kind of how I'm I'm thinking about this. I think it's also making sure that you are using proper technique and full range of motion because that's one of the other things that is often the first to go when we really try to load up and load up and load up. And you see this with people squatting and benching all the time. they're just adding another plate but then cutting the range of motion short to accommodate that additional load. And so that's not really progressive overload because you changed your range of motion. So I think especially if a lift is technically demanding something like a hinge, you know, deadlift, good morning. For a lot of people who've never done that movement pattern, it can be really difficult to just develop that kinesthetic awareness like where am I in space? Am I bending my knees too much or not enough? Um am am I starting to round my upper back? And when you can really understand the proper form, then you know how to load it. If a woman just feels lousy at one particular phase of her cycle, and that's a consistent month-to-month thing for her and she doesn't want to train during that time. It sounded like there's no issue with that that you're not suggesting that you that women push through that necessarily that they we're on the West Coast that they honor their their feelings is how people speak out here. Um that they honor their feelings as opposed to push against the you know the the sense like it this is just a tough time to do this. But you're from New York and you're giving me this look now where that makes people who are people are just listening. Um Lauren's looking at me like, "Yeah, that sounds like uh you know, I don't know." So, but I don't want to put words in your mouth. What are you thinking? Well, I'll tell you this. We have survey data looking at how many people report experiencing menstrual symptoms, things like uh cramps and low back pain, uh lack of motivation, irritability. And 75 80% of women report feeling those symptoms. and none of them report changing their training in response to those symptoms. So, and not to say that you shouldn't, but typically, at least where the data shows, it's not that common that people are overhauling their training even in response to menstrual symptoms. That said, most people experience them for one or two days. So, we're only talking about skipping or adjusting one, maybe two workouts. So, I I don't feel that strongly about it either way. I think it, you know, it's up to you. And like I said, there will be a variety of reasons within any given month why we show up to the gym and we don't feel our best. And some of those days, again, for a variety of reasons, we might decide to make some adjustments and other days we might just decide to push through. And both are completely acceptable. It's an unfortunate reality, but tap water often contains contaminants that negatively impact our health. In fact, a 2020 study by the Environmental Working Group estimated that more than 200 million Americans are exposed to PAS chemicals, also known as forever chemicals, through drinking of tap water. These forever chemicals are linked to serious health issues such as hormone disruption, gut microbiome disruption, fertility issues, and many other health problems. The Environmental Working Group has also shown that over 122 million Americans drink tap water with high levels of chemicals known to cause cancer. It's for all these reasons that I'm thrilled to have Rora as a sponsor of this podcast. I've been using the Aurora countertop system for almost a year now. Rurora's filtration technology removes harmful substances, including endocrine disruptors and disinfection byproducts, while preserving beneficial minerals like magnesium and calcium. It requires no installation or plumbing. It's built from medical grade stainless steel and its sleek design fits beautifully on your countertop. In fact, I consider it a welcome addition to my kitchen. It looks great and the water is delicious. If you'd like to try Rora, you can go to roora.com/huberman and get an exclusive discount. Again, that's r o r a.com/huberman. If I'm not mistaken, you've uh looked at the data on the relationship between hormone-based contraception and effects of exercise. Um, and I want to be very clear. I said hormone-based contraception because there are so many different forms of contraception. Some of which are hormone based, some of which aren't. And of course, within the domain of hormone-based, you've got estrogen based, progesterine based, and and there's others as well. What are the general and more specific takeaways from that uh literature? Does hormone-based contraception impact the adaptation to exercise, the motivation to exercise, or anything else that women should be aware of? Um, what do the data say? The majority of these studies are on folks taking combined oral contraceptive pills. So, this wouldn't apply to something like a hormonal IED uh or or the there's a patch that people are using now that it's more modern take, but there is enough data at this point to say when it comes to strength, hypertrophy, power, we're not seeing combined oral contraceptive pills move the needle in either direction. And there were appropriate hypotheses to say, oh, maybe this could be detrimental or maybe this could be beneficial. But what we see similar to the influence of the endogenous hormone fluctuations, which are quite substantial, if those aren't affecting performance or exercise induced adaptations, it's not that shocking that the hormonal contraceptives wouldn't move the needle to a great extent either. Yeah, it's an excellent point. I mean, if one just looks at the uh the plot of estrogen levels or progesterone levels across the different phases of the menstrual cycle, you know, these are enormous differences. Uh likewise for testosterone and other and other hormones in women. Um and you're making the point that uh hormone based uh pill contraception um is making changes in hormones of at least that magnitude. And and so there's no reason to expect that it should impact um at least ability. I can think of motivation to train um ability somehow like if it relates somehow to contractile ability the muscles or or tendon um uh tendon strength or something and then the actual adaptation like so it sounds like none of these things block the adaptation to exercise the increase in muscle size or strength or both. Is that right? That's right. I I would say if you're just starting a contraceptive pill there some people have symptoms and side effects some of which are kind of attenuated over time and some of which are not and you need to switch to something else. So you might for a short term because that pill is not a good fit for you then there could there could be some short-term influence in that sense. But on the flip side, a lot of people go on a hormonal contraceptive because they have really severe menstrual symptoms and then that can be helpful in relieving that pain. And so then you might be willing to to go to the the gym more frequently during the week where you have your menstrual period. So I I think we can we can think about those kind of practical implications, but in terms of just the hormones themselves and the fact that, you know, we're downregulating the endogenous hormone production by introducing these synthetic hormones that doesn't seem to impact performance or adaptations to exercise. What if any are the really good data around the relationship between pmenopause and menopause and the hormone changes that tend to occur? Let's assume without hormone replacement therapy for the moment and training. Should women change their training as they enter permenopause, menopause? There's no reason to change your training because we still want the same adaptations. We want to increase and maintain muscle size and strength. We want to reduce fall risk and fracture risk, maintain bone density. And so resistance training is going to be a really key component of an exercise program for somebody uh pre and post menopause. I think the idea that somehow the hormonal changes would influence muscle are really tied to that same thought process that cycle syncing is based on. And so it comes down to this hypothesis that there is this relationship between estrogen and muscle. And so is if estrogen is declining with menopause, then that would have some effect on muscle. But we don't see that. We see age related muscle loss that is exacerbated by physical inactivity. But you look at lean mass across the men the across the menopause transition and that in and of itself isn't accelerating the loss of of muscle. I think for understandable reasons there's this correlation that people draw between hormones and muscle and since resistance training is more kind of muscle oriented in people's minds anyway I mean you got you know tendon and bone etc than cardiovascular training. It's a silly thing but we kind of make that association. There seem all these things around uh women's fitness. It's like should training change uh during different phases of the menstrual cycle because after all menstrual cycle is hormones. Hormones affect how one feels but also muscle. Here we are you know back to muscle. that changes in muscle size and strength as one ages in my understanding are just as much a function of atrophy of nerve to muscle connections the strength of those as they are some drop in hormones and I think it's never really been stated out loud you know so I just want your thoughts on this um do you think that if people understood that a lot of muscle and strength loss is inactivity as you said and inact activity brings a weakening of the nerve to muscle connection that it might help us get away a little bit from this idea that everything about muscles is hormones and everything about hormones is muscle that they're equally important. I really realize I'm leading the witness here a little bit, but I I'll just out you. Your father's a neuroscientist. How important is the nervous system and the changes that the nervous system normally undergoes as one ages important here? Is that what we're trying to do or are we trying to offset some of that? It's important too because we need to maintain those connections for all movement patterns right and so when we see long periods of physical inactivity think you know immobilization or bed rest the rate at which you lose muscle is shocking I mean it's really really dramatic and so we know that is a very extreme model of of atrophy that we we want to avoid but there are other versions of that in just daily kind of sedentary life. You're not on bed rest, but and you're not technically immobilized, but you're moving so infrequently that you are exacerbating muscle loss. And even if you are just physically active, even if you're not lifting weights, you're much more likely to maintain that muscle. But once you stop being physically active, then we run into a lot of problems. If more people understood the neural aspect of all this exercise stuff and muscle and how that relates to fitness and brain health, I think it would help men and women kind of get around this thing that you mentioned earlier. It's just kind of hovering my mind that so much of the way that fitness has been presented, exercise has been presented to women is around weight loss. And now the conversation seems to be changing. It's about longevity. It's about maintaining muscle. It's about maintaining brain health and not getting injured. And so it seems like it's morphing slightly. I think that is missed in resistance training because we just think about it at the muscle level. But when we think about motor unit recruitment, that is a neural pathway. And we need all of those to stay intact to perform any kind of motor function. And so when we are lifting weights, we're not exclusively building muscle. And that's why we see tendon adaptations, bone adaptations, everything is connected. And it's also why if you're somebody who is aging, but you're physically active in a way that requires a certain type of coordination, maybe it's pickle ball, um that that is really helpful as well. I think the idea that you have to go to the gym is intimidating for some people because a lot of women in their minds think that they're going to be the only woman in the gym. That's less and less true, but in my experience, it's still the weight room is still probably a maledominated section of the gym. I think the biggest fear is not knowing what to do. And machines can be a really good place to start if you're somebody who doesn't want to work with a trainer and is a little bit nervous about trying to selfach those movement patterns with barbells or dumbbells. A lot of commercial gyms these days have a circuit of machines and you can start there and kind of get comfortable with those movement patterns. get comfortable with what is challenging, what is close to failure, and then progress to some of these other exercises and equipment. Yeah. When I've tried to encourage family me female family members like to weight train, like I don't want to go to a gym. Like, why not? They're like, I I like my yoga class. I like Pilates. I like going for hikes. What do you think are some things that women could do to sort of lower those barriers for for people? starting with group fitness because even though most group fitness classes are suboptimal from the perspective of a sound resistance training program, it gets you into the gym. It gets you feeling comfortable. It will teach you some of those movement patterns that we've discussed. And then maybe after class, you and a couple of friends that you've made in class can go and and try out a couple of machines. And so you can kind of ease into it that way. And people gravitate towards group fitness because it's social and you have an appointment because you have to be there at at a specific time. So that can be another good kind of entry point to get you going to the gym without feeling overwhelmed by exercises you're not sure how to perform or or equipment that you're not sure how to use. In terms of the relationship between hormones, menstrual cycle, and training, I know I'm staying on this, but it comes up. I mean, you've on social media. I mean, I don't know what percentage of questions that you get on social media relate to hormones and training uh as they relate to one another. It's a lot. I think now more than ever, you're just seeing more and more of this messaging pop up. And with the menstrual cycle, it's not only about exercise. I see uh the way you should eat differently due to cycle phase, the way you should work differently, the way you should socialize differently. Um there are all of these messages that are saying you need to kind of overhaul this aspect of your life to align with these phases. Is there any evidence that resistance training can help amelate some of the um symptoms of of the negative symptoms of uh certain phases of the cycle that women might be experiencing? In other words, do they often feel better by training during the most difficult phase of their cycle? Has that ever been demonstrated? Not with resistance training specifically, but with physical activity, sure. Uh it it it can definitely help. Um because you if you have something like cramps then just kind of doing something to increase blood flow even if it's going for a walk can be helpful and it also kind of gets your mind off of it so you're not actually sitting there kind of focusing on the fact that you're uncomfortable and it depends on the person but I think some sort of physical activity can be beneficial and that's something that that you should consider exploring whether it's resistance training or anything else. What about the nutrition um aspect uh in the menstrual cycle? The nutrition data is pretty poor because as is most nutrition data, it's kind of self-report. And so we're saying observationally people tend to eat a little bit more in this phase versus that phase on average based on self-reported food diaries. Does that mean that you should change caloric intake or protein intake or carbohydrate intake? We don't have the data to support any of that. And a lot of it comes back to this theory that you have a kind of an anabolic phase or a catabolic phase. And so that extended from oh you should focus on more resistance training during this phase to oh well then you must need more protein in this other phase. So what kind of started as a hypothesis about anabolic and catabolic states has twisted into changing your exercise program and changing your diet among other things. I spoke to a couple different uh women prior to sitting down with you today because I needed data from actual women as opposed to my ideas about what they might be thinking, right? Or what I see online, right? Um these are people I'm close with and and uh I believe they were honest with me and for the it wasn't an enormous poll. This is uh not an official study, but I heard something at least three times out of the five people I spoke to and it was this. I know I should lift weights, but I feel like I get enough muscle training from my Pilates or yoga. And I said, "Yeah, but couldn't those things be really different than resistance training?" And the answer that I got back was similar in several cases, which was, "Yeah, but my Pilates teacher, she looks awesome and she has tons of energy and she's 10 years older than me and I want to look like her, so I'm going to do Pilates." And I said, "Well, do you does she lift weights?" And she said, "No, she just does Pilates." And I said, "Well, I wonder if she like did gymnastics when we were younger." And then pretty soon I'm now the guy having this like conversation trying to essentially negotiate something I have no interest in negotiating. But it gave me a window into something that I think might be pretty common, which is that um we all look at somebody and what they're doing and we go, "Oh, like that seems like a look that is reasonable and and attractive and I I would want that and they seem to be like kicking butt in life and happy and I'm going to just do that." And so what do you say to women who perhaps think like they're as muscular as they want to be now doing Pilates and walking and maybe doing some other activities, but they're not doing resistance training. Is there some reason why they should be motivated to also resistance train? what you're describing is very common and unfortunately for the vast majority of people they then go and do the exercise class or follow what this person eats in a day and they never end up looking like that person because we have genetic factors, nutritional factors, exercise factors and sometimes no matter what we're not going to have the body of this other person. But Pilates is particularly guilty of promising these dramatic changes in body composition. And that if you do this class that you're going to get toned, you're you're going to increase your muscle mass and get these long lean lines or you'll look like a dancer. And so we're when we when we use that word, which we don't, toned, but when people use it, they mean increase muscle size and decrease body fat. And the most effective and efficient way to accomplish that is through resistance training to increase muscle size and through nutritional adjustments to decrease body fat. Even if you're happy doing the Pilates and walking right now, and I'm not saying give that up because I'm a fan of all physical activity that people enjoy, but it is not sufficient resistance. It's not progressive resistance to stave off that age- related muscle loss that I mentioned. All we need is two 20 minute workouts per week, full body resistance training to make a pretty powerful impact on trying to attenuate some of that decline and losing muscle mass, increasing fall risk, fracture risk, all of those downstream health effects that lead to an existence in your 80s or 90s that is not very functionally independent. We don't want that. And so if we know we can implement this and it's not that much of a time investment, it's not that much of a financial investment, it's kind of a no-brainer. I'm so glad you mentioned the genetic piece. Um because genetics are huge when it comes to, you know, lean mass to non-lean mass body ratio. People don't I mean obviously people over consume calories. They're going to gain weight. Some people more quickly than others perhaps. Um but you know it's it's such a big factor. It seems to me that so is um h someone having done strength and speed sports when they were younger. Like you look at someone who is a gymnast, um a sprinter, a pole vter, a competitive tennis player, any a lot of like speed type movement and I've noticed even when they just do yoga or something in their 30s, I know this because as a graduate student, as you know, right in your when I was in my 20s and then a posttock in my 30s, you know, I was exercising less and the people around you are exercising less. just doing experiments all the time and studying all the time and some people just seem to stay really fit through that and you go like what do you do and they're like oh I just like these days I just do yoga did you play a sport in high school yeah it was like you know D1 soccer gymnast and I do think that people who play these competitive sports early in life they hold on to a certain amount of musculature now maybe there's a selection bias that led them to be a D1 athlete combined with training right so they were kind of had genetics that then they built on but what I'm I I feel like these situations are very misleading And with men it tends to be misleading where somebody is extremely muscular and lean. I think of my friend Nimma. He does a podcast with Mark Bell. Um Sema is completely steroid and TRT free. He really is. I I believe him and and is actually to speak to your earlier point his testosterone he sh he's he shown his charge to somewhere in like the mid5s. The guy is like his muscle density is insane. He's got he walks around with 8% body fat. he's a terrific athlete, etc. He has genetic gifts that he's built upon with very hard work. So, I can't look at him and say, "Oh, I'm going to just do what he does, right?" The parallel in women's fitness, and I don't want to discount the, you know, the women out there who want to be very, very muscular, but let's just consider the averages here. They might look at their Pilates teacher and she might have been a gymnast who was also slightly genetically gifted and now can just do that. No one talks about this and it really contorts people's thinking and people are trying to figure out what to do, what to eat, etc. So, I'd love for you to elaborate on this a bit more where if you think it's appropriate, but like no one acknowledges this. I share your hypothesis about the activity you do as a kid. Even if you don't become an elite athlete, I think that is something that does kind of stick with you. And let's say you were a child gymnast and then you pick up lifting in your 20s. I see women develop that upper body strength a lot more easily because I think they were doing that in in childhood. I the genetic variability is huge because it's the structure um our our bone structure our muscle insertions uh the size of our waist. There are certain things that we can't change. You can't change your shape. Yes, we can gain fat, lose fat, gain muscle, lose muscle, but some people have naturally broader shoulders or have delt insertions that mean they have that look of these capped shoulders or they just don't carry a lot of body fat on their arms or on their legs. And so the way that where we tend to store fat or or distribute that fat varies from person to person. The place in which we lose fat first and last will vary. And often when you compare yourself to somebody with a very different structure, perhaps they have a metabolism that allows for them to maintain a certain body weight or a certain body fat at a a really comfortable caloric intake. Whereas for you to maintain that certain level of of body size or body fat would require a very uncomfortable unsustainable level of caloric intake and that is just is what it is. In the old days of fitness meaning when I started uh in the '9s it's not old days but here I am. Um there was this idea of ectomorph endomorph and misomorph. We don't hear that anymore. ectomorph being very thin, long syninnowy muscles, small joints, quoteunquote hard gainer. There was a misomorph, which is the kind of, you know, more muscular, somewhat lean perhaps. And then there was the endomorph idea, somebody carrying a lot of excess body fat kind of um idea. Is that just completely irrelevant now in terms of picking training programs? Um, have we just really landed in a place where it's all about, hey, listen, if you're a endomorph, you're eating more than you should. There's muscle under there. Perhaps if you're an ectomorph, you're just, you know, maintaining a very low body weight. You need to lift more and eat more. Is there any reality to this? I could be wrong, but I think those labels and those descriptors don't even come from any sort of physiology u research or framework. I think they come from psychology, which makes no sense given that we're using them to describe how one might expect to adapt to training. You can say, "Oh, if you're somebody who is kind of skinny, maybe you can expect to be a hard gainer, but sometimes that's not the case at all." You see teenage boys that were kind of skin and bones and lanky and then they start lifting and they blow up. Oh, I didn't I raised my hand as you said I didn't blow up but I mean I was 61 150 lbs. Yeah. And in my first year of training I think I put on like 2530 lbs of maybe it wasn't all muscle but it did that didn't continue. It definitely can happen. But I also knew guys that when we finished junior high school, they were like built even though they had never touched a weight. They were like my bulldog Costello who had these huge forearms. He never touched a weight. It was just, you know, so I do think the genetic variation piece is is huge. There's also the height component too though because if you think about if you are 5'6 and you have you know the same kind of relative muscle mass as somebody who is 5'11 you are going to look way more muscular than the tall counterpart. So if the person who's 5'11 or 6'2 wants to look really muscular, they're going to have to put on a lot of mass because they're taller. I'd like to take a quick break and acknowledge one of our sponsors, Function. Last year, I became a Function member after searching for the most comprehensive approach to lab testing. Function provides over 100 advanced lab tests that give you a key snapshot of your entire bodily health. This snapshot offers you with insights on your heart health, hormone health, immune functioning, nutrient levels, and much more. They've also recently added tests for toxins such as BPA exposure from harmful plastics and tests for PASES or forever chemicals. Function not only provides testing of over 100 biomarkers key to your physical and mental health, but it also analyzes these results and provides insights from top doctors who are expert in the relevant areas. For example, in one of my first tests with function, I learned that I had elevated levels of mercury in my blood. function not only helped me detect that, but offered insights into how best to reduce my mercury levels, which included limiting my tuna consumption. I'd been eating a lot of tuna while also making an effort to eat more leafy greens and supplementing with knack and acetylcyine, both of which can support glutathione production and detoxification. And I should say by taking a second function test, that approach worked. Comprehensive blood testing is vitally important. There's so many things related to your mental and physical health that can only be detected in a blood test. The problem is blood testing has always been very expensive and complicated. In contrast, I've been super impressed by Function's simplicity and at the level of cost. It is very affordable. As a consequence, I decided to join their scientific advisory board and I'm thrilled that they're sponsoring the podcast. If you'd like to try Function, you can go to functionhealth.com/huberman. Function currently has a wait list of over 250,000 people, but they're offering early access to Hubberman podcast listeners. Again, that's functionhealth.com/huberman to get early access to function. So, let's talk about training fasted or not training fasted. I'm chuckling because, you know, there are these times when I think, oh, you know, recently it got really intense online. Should women train fasted or not train…

Transcript truncated. Watch the full video for the complete content.