The Claim
Fast or traditional velocity resistance training (concentric phase ≤2 seconds) produces greater strength adaptations than intentionally slow velocity resistance training (concentric phase ≥2 seconds) in healthy adults, with an overall effect size of Hedges' g = 0.21 (95% CI: 0.02–0.41, p = 0.034) and a 3.65% greater mean strength increase (25.77% vs. 22.12%).
What the research says
Supports is higher
Support is ahead, but a single strong opposing study can change this.
These are independent scores, not a percentage. Higher-grade studies count more, so a single strong opposing study can outweigh several weaker ones.
Lifting weights faster or normally gives you more strength gains than lifting weights very slowly, especially for healthy adults.
See the scientific wording
Fast or traditional velocity resistance training (concentric phase ≤2 seconds) produces greater strength adaptations than intentionally slow velocity resistance training (concentric phase ≥2 seconds) in healthy adults, with an overall effect size of Hedges' g = 0.21 (95% CI: 0.02–0.41, p = 0.034) and a 3.65% greater mean strength increase (25.77% vs. 22.12%), based on a meta-analysis of 24 studies involving 625 participants.
What the research says
1 studyStudy: Intentionally Slow Concentric Velocity Resistance Exercise and Strength Adaptations: A Meta-Analysis
This study looked at the same training methods as the claim and found that faster lifting speeds lead to slightly more strength gains than slower speeds, just like the claim says.
Score breakdown, mechanism chain, raw evidence, ideal studies needed & 1 supporting studies
Not medical advice. For informational purposes only. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional before making health decisions.