Moore Physically Fit

08/22/2026

Lifting to failure is usually treated as the honest way to train. In 158 men, stopping halfway to it built more strength than going all the way.

Bar speed falls inside a set as the muscle fatigues. Velocity loss is simply how far it has fallen when you rack the bar, and it works as a live readout of how close that set came to failure. A 25 percent loss means the last rep moved three quarters as fast as the first. A 50 percent loss means it moved half as fast, which is close to the point where nothing else could be lifted. Because the number is measured rather than guessed, it does the same job as reps in reserve without depending on anyone's honesty about how hard a set felt.

The physiology behind the split is fatigue itself. Extending a set forces recruitment of the largest, fastest motor units and drives the metabolic disturbance thought to trigger growth, which is why longer sets tend to build more tissue. The cost is that those final grinding reps are slow, and rehearsing slow reps trains the nervous system toward the wrong end of the force-velocity relationship. Stopping earlier keeps every repetition fast, preserves the fastest muscle fibre types, and appears to protect the coordination that expresses strength.

The trial randomised 158 resistance-trained men across twelve bench press programmes, crossing three loads with four stopping rules over eight weeks. Load mattered most. Training at 70 to 85 percent of maximum produced the largest gains in chest cross-sectional area, in one-repetition maximum, in bar speed against submaximal loads, and in repetitions to failure. Underneath that, the stopping rule split the outcomes: allowing a 50 percent velocity loss produced the greatest muscle growth and rep endurance, while stopping at 25 percent produced the greatest maximal strength.

The population is trained young men and the exercise is bench press alone, so nothing here transfers automatically to squats, to beginners, to women, or to older lifters. Twelve groups from 158 people leaves roughly thirteen per condition, which is thin for detecting anything but the largest differences and means the ranking within the grid should be held loosely. Eight weeks is short enough that early neural adaptation dominates and structural change is only beginning. The published summary reports directions rather than magnitudes, so how much better 25 percent was for strength, or 50 percent for size, is not stated. And the two variables were analysed as separate main effects, which means the correct reading is that heavy load and stopping rule each acted on their own, not that one particular cell of the grid was crowned.

This is not the first time the split has appeared, and the earlier version came from the same group. In 2017 they compared 20 against 40 percent velocity loss in the squat across eight weeks in 22 men. The lighter stopping rule matched the heavier one for squat strength and beat it for jump height, 9.5 percent against 3.5, while performing 40 percent fewer total repetitions. The heavier stopping rule produced more growth in two of the quadriceps muscles, but also shifted fibre composition away from the fastest type. Different exercise, seven times the sample, same pattern.

A broader analysis of proximity to failure across the wider literature found the dose-response models fit only modestly, and confidence intervals for strength spanned enough ground to leave the shape of the relationship open.

Load is the decision that matters most, and this trial says heavy served both goals. The stopping rule is the second decision, and it is a genuine trade rather than a matter of effort or discipline. Stopping while the bar is still moving well is not leaving results behind; it is choosing strength over size. Someone chasing a bigger chest should sit in the long, slow sets. Someone chasing a bigger bench should rack it earlier than instinct suggests, and take the repetitions saved into another set.

Pareja-Blanco et al., Med Sci Sports Exerc 2026;58(8):1773-1781 · PMID 41872733
Pareja-Blanco et al., Scand J Med Sci Sports 2017;27(7):724-735 · PMID 27038416
Schoenfeld et al., J Strength Cond Res 2017;31(12):3508-3523 · PMID 28834797
Robinson et al., Sports Med 2024;54(9):2209-2231 · PMID 38970765
Tundidor-Duque et al., Scand J Med Sci Sports 2026;36(3):e70265 · PMID 41855389

08/12/2026

Strength gives you capability.
Cardio gives you capacity.
Mobility gives you access.
Consistency keeps all three.

08/12/2026

Good stuff.

There is a dose of resistance training where the mortality curve stops responding. It arrives earlier than most people expect.

Three long-running cohorts of American health professionals were pooled: the Nurses' Health Study, its second wave, and the Health Professionals Follow-Up Study. Together, 147,374 adults followed up to thirty years, with 35,798 deaths. What separates this from most physical activity research is that training time was reported every two years across three decades rather than once at enrolment, so the analysis tracks a habit as it changes rather than a single answer given long ago.

Against people who reported no resistance training at all, those doing 90 to 119 minutes a week had a 13 percent lower rate of death from any cause. Death from cardiovascular disease was 19 percent lower. Death from neurological disease, which covers dementia and Parkinson's, was 27 percent lower and was the largest single drop in the paper. Above roughly 120 minutes a week the curve flattened, and more hours were not associated with any further reduction.

The result the coverage has left out concerns cardio. The authors also examined aerobic activity and resistance training together. Among people already doing a high volume of aerobic activity, mortality ran roughly 42 to 47 percent lower whether they lifted a lot, a little, or not at all. Put the two side by side and the asymmetry is hard to miss: the resistance training association tops out around 13 percent, the aerobic one at more than three times that. Lifting added further reduction at every aerobic level below the threshold, but not at the top of it.

This is observational, and nobody was assigned to lift. People who train twice a week differ from people who never train in income, education, sleep, diet and baseline health, and no statistical adjustment fully removes that. Training was self-reported in minutes, so ninety minutes describes time in a gym rather than a stimulus. The sweet spot is also unstable across the literature: a 2022 pooling of sixteen prospective cohorts found the same J-shaped pattern but placed the maximum benefit at roughly 30 to 60 minutes a week, less than half of what this analysis reports. And this cohort is overwhelmingly white, educated American health professionals.

The flattening is the part most likely to be misread. A plateau in observational data is not proof that additional training does nothing. Very few people in these cohorts trained more than two hours a week, so estimates out at the tail rest on small numbers and become imprecise. What can be said is that the data show no further reduction beyond that point, which is not the same as showing there is none.

If the reason you have not started lifting is a belief that it demands four sessions a week, this data does not support that belief. Two sessions of about 45 minutes sits inside the range where the entire association was observed. If you already train more than that, nothing here suggests cutting back. It suggests those extra hours are buying strength, muscle and capability, all worth having, rather than additional movement on this particular curve. And if you are choosing between adding a third lifting session and adding a walk, the joint analysis points at the walk.

Same finding, two readings. The dose is smaller than expected, and the ceiling arrives sooner.

Zhang et al., Br J Sports Med 2026;60(12):874-883 · PMID 42230125
Momma et al., Br J Sports Med 2022;56(13):755-763 · PMID 35228201
Fukushima et al., J Am Med Dir Assoc 2024;25(3):417-430 · PMID 37925162

07/03/2026

Exercise Spotlight 🇺🇸

Starting with one of the most important movement patterns: The Squat.

Whether you’re an athlete, a beginner, or just want to move better as you get older — learning to squat properly matters.

Strength isn’t just built in the gym. It carries into life.
Joe

04/22/2026

Your nervous system shapes how you feel, respond, and move through your day, and most of us were never taught how to actually work with it.

In honor of Mental Health Month (May) I created Rooted & Regulated, a class designed to bridge women’s mental health with simple, practical tools you can use in real life.

We’ll walk through how your nervous system works and how to support it in a way that feels sustainable, not overwhelming.

Here is the link to join!
https://app.acuityscheduling.com/schedule.php?owner=19509302&appointmentType=91873552

04/14/2026

Hello everyone
I know a lot of people around here are joining gyms right now — VASA, Crunch, Anytime, Lifetime, etc.

A lot of people sign up… walk in… and realize they’re not really sure what to do.

Or maybe you’ve been there before — walked into a gym and had the same questions…
and just couldn’t seem to stay consistent.

I’ve been doing this for over 20 years — personal training, working in gyms, managing fitness equipment stores, installing and servicing equipment, and training clients in their homes.

One of the biggest things in my experience is many people aren’t lazy.
They just don’t have a clear plan that works with their life schedule. They also want big results in short time which will mostly result in stopping all together.
Other

No real structure.

And then people go all-in for a few weeks…
burn out… and fall right back off.

Find a system you can actually stick to for life.

Not something that looks intense for a few weeks — something you can keep doing even when life gets busy.

And this isn’t just for beginners —
a lot of people who’ve been training for years still don’t have real structure.

Because let’s be real — most of us don’t have time to schedule sessions, line things up, and rely on someone else just to get a workout in.

You need something you can run on your own time.

That’s why I built my training “reprograms.”

You pull it up on your phone at the gym and follow it:
• Step-by-step workouts
• Exercise demos built in
• You can reach out to me if you get stuck
• No scheduling — just train when it fits your life

Simple. Structured. Repeatable.

If you just signed up somewhere or you’ve struggled to stay consistent, just comment or message me — I’ll help point you in the right direction.

01/21/2026

Always recommend movement after eating. You’ll feel the difference.
Great info here. Thank you and credit William Wallace, Ph.D.
Give him a follow.

Your muscles clear glucose in two different ways after a meal.
Most people only use one.

When you sit after eating, glucose disposal depends almost entirely on insulin signaling from the pancreas. That pathway works, but it has limited capacity, which is why post-meal glucose spikes are higher and longer.

When you move after eating, even lightly, a second pathway turns on in parallel.

Muscle contraction independently activates glucose transporters (GLUT4), allowing glucose to enter muscle without waiting for insulin. The result is faster clearance, lower peaks, and less strain on the pancreas.

What’s happening under the hood:
• Muscle contraction triggers GLUT4 translocation
• Glucose enters muscle directly
• Blood glucose falls more quickly
• Insulin demand is reduced, not replaced

This isn’t about burning calories or “earning” food. It’s about using the physiology you already have. Walking after meals doesn’t override insulin. It adds another clearance pathway.

That’s why timing matters.

01/20/2026

MOORE PHYSICALLY FIT
Five Ones Training System

Already have a gym membership but no clear plan?
Five Ones is built for people who want structure without burnout.

What it is:
• App-based training — follow, track, and record every workout
• 16 weeks to start (4 separate phases)
• Designed to continue long-term — a forever reprogram

Who it’s for:
• Gym members with fitness center access
• Beginner to intermediate lifters
• People tired of guessing what to do

Why it works:
• Manageable fitness training — effective, not overwhelming
• Workouts ~65 minutes or less
• Low time & financial investment with a high payoff
• Longevity-focused — built to last, not crash-and-burn
• Rewards consistency with discipline, not extremes

If you want more details, I can send the full info breakdown.
Moore Physically Fit . com

10/21/2025

Great job Romeoville putting this in. I can see some unique training here. Very pretty park and setting.
#2026

10/15/2025

I use Levels and Kaged mostly which are not on here. Look for 3rd party tested protein/supplements.

A new Consumer Reports investigation found protein powders and shakes have a concerning level of lead. Here are the products that were tested and what CR found.