Resting for 1 to 3 minutes between sets doesn’t seem to build more muscle than resting for 1 to 1.5 minutes — the difference is too small to matter in practice.
Scientific Claim
The current body of evidence does not support a clinically meaningful difference in muscle hypertrophy between rest intervals of 60–90 seconds and 90–180 seconds, as effect sizes are small and confidence intervals include zero.
Original Statement
“Our analysis did not detect appreciable differences in hypertrophy when resting >90 s between sets... Analyses of arm hypertrophy did not show an appreciable effect of rest interval durations beyond intermediate (>60 s) durations.”
Evidence Quality Assessment
Claim Status
appropriately stated
Study Design Support
Design supports claim
Appropriate Language Strength
probability
Can suggest probability/likelihood
Assessment Explanation
The claim accurately reflects the data’s lack of clear superiority beyond 90s, using 'does not support' and 'clinically meaningful' to avoid overstating small, uncertain effects.
Evidence from Studies
Supporting (1)
Give it a rest: a systematic review with Bayesian meta-analysis on the effect of inter-set rest interval duration on muscle hypertrophy
The study found that resting 60–90 seconds vs. 90–180 seconds between sets doesn’t make a meaningful difference in muscle growth — the results are so similar that you can’t tell which is better.