Full Body Workouts Beat Split Body Workouts for Fat Loss
- The study found that participants who followed a full-body workout training routine experienced significantly greater reductions in whole-body and regional fat mass than those on a split-body routine, particularly in android fat mass.
- The full-body routine was associated with higher calories burned due to the engagement of larger muscle groups.
- The study found that the full-body workout routine resulted in lower muscle soreness levels than the split-body routine. This finding suggests that while the full-body routine is more effective for fat loss, it also minimizes the muscle soreness typically associated with resistance training, particularly in the lower limbs. This reduction in muscle soreness could help individuals maintain a higher level of physical activity throughout the week, further supporting fat loss efforts.
Optimizing Fat Loss and Muscle Gain: A Case for Full-Body Workouts
Traditionally, most fitness enthusiasts and bodybuilders have followed a split-body routine when building muscle and losing fat. In split-body workouts, individuals focus on one or two muscle groups per session, such as chest and triceps or back and biceps. While this approach has benefits, recent research challenges its effectiveness, especially for those aiming to maximize fat loss. On the other hand, once deemed too exhausting, full-body workouts are gaining attention for their ability to engage multiple muscle groups, increasing the calories burned per session. Exercises like squats, deadlifts, and bench presses are particularly effective because they activate large muscle groups, potentially optimizing fat loss
In a recent study titled “Full-body resistance training promotes greater fat mass loss than a split-body routine in well-trained males: A randomized trial,” researchers sought to examine this very topic.1 The study explored whether a full-body workout routine could reduce fat mass more effectively than a split-body routine among well-trained males. The findings of this study could have significant implications for anyone looking to enhance their body composition through full-body workouts.
Review of Literature: Full-Body Workouts vs. Split-Body Routines
The debate between full-body workouts and split-body routines is not new. The split-body routine, where muscle groups are trained once a week, is commonly favored by bodybuilding competitors and well-trained individuals for optimizing muscle hypertrophy gains.1 Previous research has shown that full-body and split-body routines are similarly effective in promoting muscle hypertrophy under different conditions.2-4 However, limited research has explored their effects on fat mass loss.
A 2016 study investigated the effects of full-body workouts versus split-body resistance training on fat mass loss in well-trained individuals. The results showed that the full-body workout routine yielded superior improvements in fat mass reduction compared to the split-body routine (1 kg vs. 0.5 kg, respectively).5 This finding aligns with the idea that full-body workouts may be more effective for fat reduction due to their potential to induce higher energy expenditure and positively influence fat mass loss.6,7
Moreover, research suggests that a full-body workout routine that engages large muscle groups on most training days can lead to greater excess post-exercise oxygen consumption (EPOC), increasing calories burned throughout week 6. This elevated energy expenditure has been associated with higher fat mass loss.8,9 Conversely, muscle fatigue and increased levels of delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS) can lead to behavioral compensation, resulting in reduced physical activity.10,11 This poses a risk to fat mass loss, as the split-body routine has been shown to lead to higher levels of DOMS, especially in the lower limbs.12
Overview of the Study Protocol
The recent study focused on well-trained males, randomly assigning them to either a full-body workout or split-body resistance training routine. Participants were required to perform three full-body workouts per week over eight weeks. The full-body workout group engaged in exercises that targeted all major muscle groups in each session. In contrast, the split-body group focused on specific muscle groups, such as the upper body one day and the lower body the next.
The workouts consisted of three sets of 8-12 repetitions, with a 60-90 seconds rest between sets. The exercises included compound movements like squats, bench presses, and deadlifts for the full-body workout group. In contrast, the split-body group performed similar exercises but spread across different days. Dietary intake was also monitored to ensure that nutritional factors did not skew the results.
Results: Full-Body Workouts Show Greater Fat Loss
Participants in the full-body workout group experienced significantly greater fat mass reductions than those in the split-body group. Specifically, the full-body workout group saw a decrease in both whole-body and regional fat mass, including android fat mass (the fat stored around the abdomen), which is particularly challenging to lose.
Interestingly, despite the common belief that full-body workouts lead to excessive fatigue and reduced performance, the study found no significant differences in strength gains between the two groups. This suggests that full-body workouts can be just as effective for building strength while offering the added benefit of enhanced fat loss.
Discussion: Breaking Down the Results of Full-Body Workouts
The findings of this study challenge the traditional preference for split-body routines among those looking to lose fat. The significant reduction in fat mass observed in the full-body workout group can be attributed to the higher energy expenditure associated with working multiple muscle groups in a single session. Exercises like squats and deadlifts, which engage large muscle groups, have been shown to increase caloric burn, making them particularly effective for fat loss.13
Moreover, the study highlights the importance of considering muscle gain and fat loss when designing a resistance training program. While split-body routines may benefit those focusing solely on hypertrophy, full-body workouts offer a more balanced approach that can lead to better overall body composition. Previous studies have suggested that muscle fatigue and elevated levels of DOMS may contribute to decreased physical activity, such as activities of daily living.14,15 Given the dependency of fat mass loss on energy expenditure, full-body workouts, which generally involve larger muscle groups and thus higher energy expenditure, might be more effective in reducing fat than split-body routines.
Practical Applications: Implementing Full-Body Workouts
Full-body workouts should be strongly considered for fitness enthusiasts and bodybuilders aiming to optimize fat loss while maintaining or even increasing muscle mass. By incorporating exercises that target multiple muscle groups, individuals can maximize caloric burn and achieve more significant fat loss without sacrificing strength gains.
Conclusion
In conclusion, full-body workouts offer a compelling alternative to the traditional split-body routine, especially for those looking to optimize fat loss. The recent study on well-trained males demonstrated that full-body workouts lead to greater reductions in fat mass without compromising strength gains. By incorporating full-body workouts into your routine, you can achieve a more balanced and practical approach to fitness, ensuring that both muscle gain and fat loss are maximized. For those serious about transforming their body composition, it’s time to reconsider the full-body workout. The evidence is clear: engaging multiple muscle groups in a single session burns more calories and promotes greater fat loss. So, next time you hit the gym, consider ditching the split routine and trying full-body workouts.
References
1 Carneiro, M. A. S., Nunes, P. R. P., Souza, M. V. C., Assumpção, C. O. & Orsatti, F. L. Full-body resistance training promotes greater fat mass loss than a split-body routine in well-trained males: A randomized trial. Eur J Sport Sci 24, 846-854 (2024). https://doi.org:10.1002/ejsc.12104
2 Benton, M. J., Kasper, M. J., Raab, S. A., Waggener, G. T. & Swan, P. D. Short-Term Effects of Resistance Training Frequency on Body Composition and Strength in Middle-Aged Women. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 25, 3142-3149 (2011). https://doi.org:10.1519/JSC.0b013e31820f505f
3 Gomes, G. K., Franco, C. M., Nunes, P. R. P. & Orsatti, F. L. High-Frequency Resistance Training Is Not More Effective Than Low-Frequency Resistance Training in Increasing Muscle Mass and Strength in Well-Trained Men. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 33, S130-S139 (2019). https://doi.org:10.1519/jsc.0000000000002559
4 Yue, F., Karsten, B., Larumbe-Zabala, E., Seijo, M. & Naclerio, F. Comparison of 2 weekly-equalized volume resistance-training routines using different frequencies on body composition and performance in trained males. Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism 43, 475-481 (2018). https://doi.org:10.1139/apnm-2017-0575 %M 29216446
5 Crewther, B., Heke, T. & Keogh, J. The effects of two equal-volume training protocols upon strength, body composition and salivary hormones in male rugby union players. Biology of Sport 33, 111-116 (2016). https://doi.org:10.5604/20831862.1196511
6 Farinatti, P. T. & Castinheiras Neto, A. G. The effect of Between-Set Rest Intervals on the Oxygen Uptake During and After Resistance Exercise Sessions Performed with Large- and Small-Muscle Mass. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 25, 3181-3190 (2011). https://doi.org:10.1519/JSC.0b013e318212e415
7 Ormsbee, M. J. et al. Regulation of fat metabolism during resistance exercise in sedentary lean and obese men. Journal of Applied Physiology 106, 1529-1537 (2009). https://doi.org:10.1152/japplphysiol.91485.2008
8 Miller, T., Mull, S., Aragon, A. A., Krieger, J. & Schoenfeld, B. J. Resistance Training Combined With Diet Decreases Body Fat While Preserving Lean Mass Independent of Resting Metabolic Rate: A Randomized Trial. International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism 28, 46-54 (2018). https://doi.org:10.1123/ijsnem.2017-0221
9 Bouchard, D. R., Soucy, L., Sénéchal, M., Dionne, I. J. & Brochu, M. Impact of resistance training with or without caloric restriction on physical capacity in obese older women. Menopause 16, 66-72 (2009). https://doi.org:10.1097/gme.0b013e31817dacf7
10 Martin, C. K. et al. Effect of Calorie Restriction on Resting Metabolic Rate and Spontaneous Physical Activity. Obesity 15, 2964-2973 (2007). https://doi.org:https://doi.org/10.1038/oby.2007.354
11 Redman, L. M. et al. Metabolic and behavioral compensations in response to caloric restriction: implications for the maintenance of weight loss. PLoS One 4, e4377 (2009). https://doi.org:10.1371/journal.pone.0004377
12 Gomes, G. K., Franco, C. M., Nunes, P. R. P. & Orsatti, F. L. High-Frequency Resistance Training Is Not More Effective Than Low-Frequency Resistance Training in Increasing Muscle Mass and Strength in Well-Trained Men. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 33 (2019).
13 Cheung, K., Hume, P. A. & Maxwell, L. Delayed Onset Muscle Soreness. Sports Medicine 33, 145-164 (2003). https://doi.org:10.2165/00007256-200333020-00005
14 Gray, P., Murphy, M., Gallagher, A. & Simpson, E. E. A. A qualitative investigation of physical activity compensation among older adults. British Journal of Health Psychology 23, 208-224 (2018). https://doi.org:https://doi.org/10.1111/bjhp.12282
15 Swelam, B. A., Verswijveren, S. J. J. M., Salmon, J., Arundell, L. & Ridgers, N. D. Exploring activity compensation amongst youth and adults: a systematic review. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 19, 25 (2022). https://doi.org:10.1186/s12966-022-01264-6
