Repstra
Meta-analysis · Twenty-eight studies

Heavy versus light loads for muscle growth and strength

Across 28 studies that included only training in which sets were performed to volitional failure, low, moderate and high loads produced no detectable difference in muscle hypertrophy, while strength gains were greater with high-load and moderate-load training than with low-load training.

Lopez P (2021) · Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise · PMID 33433148

What this does not say

It does not say load does not matter. Strength clearly favoured heavier loads (SMD 0.60-0.63 for high vs low). It also does not say you can grow equally well with light weights taken to a comfortable stopping point — the entire analysis included ONLY studies where sets were carried to volitional failure, so the null on hypertrophy is conditional on that. Nothing here licenses "high reps build as much muscle" as a general statement, and nothing here establishes the result in trained athletes specifically, since the sample is healthy adults, with greater hypertrophy effects observed in untrained participants (P = 0.033). The abstract states no training-duration range, so no claim about how long this holds is supported. The abstract reports no confidence intervals or equivalence bounds for the hypertrophy comparisons, so this is a failure to detect a difference, not a demonstration that the loads are equivalent.

The numbers, and where each one comes from

Every figure below is shown with the sentence it was taken from, so you can check it against the paper rather than trusting us.

Twenty-eightstudies

number of studies pooled in the network meta-analysis

Twenty-eight studies involving 747 healthy adults were included.
747healthy adults

total participants across the pooled studies

Twenty-eight studies involving 747 healthy adults were included.
>15 repetitions maximum (RM)RM

how the review defined a low (light) load

Including only studies that performed sets to volitional failure, the effects of low- (>15 repetitions maximum (RM)), moderate- (9-15 RM), and high-load (≤8 RM) RTs were examined in healthy adults.
9-15 RMRM

how the review defined a moderate load

Including only studies that performed sets to volitional failure, the effects of low- (>15 repetitions maximum (RM)), moderate- (9-15 RM), and high-load (≤8 RM) RTs were examined in healthy adults.
≤8 RMRM

how the review defined a high (heavy) load

Including only studies that performed sets to volitional failure, the effects of low- (>15 repetitions maximum (RM)), moderate- (9-15 RM), and high-load (≤8 RM) RTs were examined in healthy adults.
P = 0.113-0.469p-value range

overall analysis found no difference in hypertrophy between loads

Although no differences in muscle hypertrophy between RT loads were found in overall (P = 0.113-0.469) or subgroup analysis (P = 0.871-0.995), greater effects were observed in untrained participants (P = 0.033) and participants with some training background who undertook more RT sessions (P = 0.031-0.045).
P = 0.871-0.995p-value range

subgroup analysis restricted to studies deemed of high quality also found no hypertrophy difference between loads

Although no differences in muscle hypertrophy between RT loads were found in overall (P = 0.113-0.469) or subgroup analysis (P = 0.871-0.995), greater effects were observed in untrained participants (P = 0.033) and participants with some training background who undertook more RT sessions (P = 0.031-0.045).
P = 0.033p-value

meta-regression covariate: greater hypertrophy effects observed in untrained participants (an association across studies, not a between-load comparison)

Although no differences in muscle hypertrophy between RT loads were found in overall (P = 0.113-0.469) or subgroup analysis (P = 0.871-0.995), greater effects were observed in untrained participants (P = 0.033) and participants with some training background who undertook more RT sessions (P = 0.031-0.045).
0.60-0.63standardized mean difference (SMD)

strength advantage of high-load over low-load training

Muscle strength improvement was superior for both high-load and moderate-load compared with low-load RT in overall and subgroup analysis (SMD, 0.60-0.63 and 0.34-0.35, respectively; P < 0.001-0.003), with a nonsignificant but superior effect for high compared with moderate load (SMD, 0.26-0.28, P = 0.068).
0.34-0.35standardized mean difference (SMD)

strength advantage of moderate-load over low-load training

Muscle strength improvement was superior for both high-load and moderate-load compared with low-load RT in overall and subgroup analysis (SMD, 0.60-0.63 and 0.34-0.35, respectively; P < 0.001-0.003), with a nonsignificant but superior effect for high compared with moderate load (SMD, 0.26-0.28, P = 0.068).
0.26-0.28standardized mean difference (SMD)

strength difference between high and moderate load — explicitly nonsignificant

Muscle strength improvement was superior for both high-load and moderate-load compared with low-load RT in overall and subgroup analysis (SMD, 0.60-0.63 and 0.34-0.35, respectively; P < 0.001-0.003), with a nonsignificant but superior effect for high compared with moderate load (SMD, 0.26-0.28, P = 0.068).
P = 0.068p-value

the high-vs-moderate strength comparison did not reach significance

Muscle strength improvement was superior for both high-load and moderate-load compared with low-load RT in overall and subgroup analysis (SMD, 0.60-0.63 and 0.34-0.35, respectively; P < 0.001-0.003), with a nonsignificant but superior effect for high compared with moderate load (SMD, 0.26-0.28, P = 0.068).
Who was studied

747 healthy adults across 28 studies. The abstract specifies "healthy adults" and distinguishes untrained participants from "participants with some training background"; it does not report sex breakdown, age range, or athlete status. Not a trained-athlete population.

The receipts

Lopez P, et al. (2021)Resistance Training Load Effects on Muscle Hypertrophy and Strength Gain: Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise · PMID 33433148
Meta-analysis · Twenty-eight studies · 747 healthy adults

Who funded itAuthors declare no conflicts of interest.

How we check these numbers

What next
You coach people through this every week.

Repstra handles the programming, check-ins and admin so the conversation you have with a client is the coaching one. Free for your first 5 clients, 0% commission on your own.

See how it works