Hour‑plus workouts questioned
The Independent ran a feature arguing that hour‑plus workouts can blunt progress—saying shorter, more targeted sessions build strength more effectively and help maintain motivation. The piece recommends tailoring session length to goals rather than defaulting to long gym stints (independent.co.uk).
The feature ran as an excerpt from Harry Bullmore’s Well Enough newsletter on 29 March 2026 and cites coach Paddy James (CoachPaddy/Patrick James) when outlining a two–session, time‑savvy approach and set targets for weekly working sets per muscle. (independent.co.uk) The American College of Sports Medicine published an updated resistance‑training Position Stand on 17 March 2026 that synthesized 137 systematic reviews covering more than 30,000 participants and explicitly prioritised consistency and frequency (train major muscle groups ≥2×/week) over rigid rules about session length. (acsm.org) A randomized study led by Brad Schoenfeld (2019) compared low, moderate and high‑volume protocols (1 vs 3 vs 5 sets per exercise) across three weekly sessions for eight weeks and reported similar strength gains across groups while higher weekly volume produced greater hypertrophy; the authors noted marked strength increases from just three ~13‑minute weekly sessions in that trial. (vuir.vu.edu.au) A 2025 systematic review and meta‑analysis of 54 studies (N=1,136) on HIIT/SIT versus other modalities found HIIT can affect body composition but that resistance training is likely superior for improving leg‑press strength (standardized mean difference −0.82, 95% CI −1.97 to 0.33) and that overall certainty of evidence was low. (mdpi.com) Public‑health literature and reviews repeatedly identify “lack of time” as the most commonly reported barrier to regular exercise, a finding reflected in the EXPERT model and in US guidance that recommends short, practicable activity slots when longer sessions aren’t feasible. (bjsm.bmj.com) The combination of the Independent piece, the Schoenfeld trial and ACSM’s 2026 Position Stand frames the debate around weekly volume, session frequency and adherence rather than fixed hourly gym stints — a point echoed in ACSM commentary that “the best resistance training program is the one you’ll actually stick with.” (vuir.vu.edu.au)
