Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Interval training is a type of training, which consists of alternating periods of high and low-intensity workouts interspersed with rest or relief periods. The high-intensity parts can be close to or in the anaerobic zone while the rest and relief periods involve lower intensity exercise. Interval training gets your rate up and burns more fat in less time than less intense forms of exercise. Here’s an example of an interval training routine:
We've said it before, but HIIT really does the job when you want to trim ab fat: A study published in the Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness found that people who did two HIIT and two strength sessions a week lost more visceral fat (11 percent of the dangerous kind around your organs)—about an extra inch from their waist—than those who ran twice and did two strength sessions. Plus, many of those speedy intervals, such as sprints, are total-body moves that engage your abs big time. Do speed bursts on a cardio machine or try three-minute boxing rounds (another transverse tightener) with a minute of active recovery in between. This unique HIIT workout incorporates some boxing moves and some weight training for double the benefits. (Don't get along with HIIT training? Studies show adding music will make it more enjoyable.)
A simple example of an eccentric contraction is to hold something in your hand with your elbow bent. Slowly allow your elbow to straighten out while holding the weight.  You can visualize your bicep muscle lengthening as you are holding the weight while you are slowly straightening your elbow.  This is an eccentric contraction or eccentric loading of your bicep muscle.
Frequency, intensity, type, location and social setting (alone vs. together with others) of exercise were assessed using exercise logs from 618 older adults (aged 70–77 years) randomized to MCT or HIIT. All participants completed exercise logs after each exercise session they performed during one year. Pearson Chi-square tests were run to assess the association between intensity, type, location and social setting of exercise with training group.
The MMB exercises are not pathology orientated or sport specific, rather all exercises are recommended for everybody, whether they are injured, healthy, or a competitive athlete; the ability to perform the exercises represents the normal. The exercises and sequence do not change, besides the difficulty levels which are adjusted according to the individual level of practice. The MMB progressions occur when the exercises become easier and eventually autonomous and harmonious, ensuring the short- and long-term benefits of practice. Harmonious breathing and relaxation techniques are employed in every exercise repetition. Furthermore, there is the recommendation to train daily in relaxed environments, with abundant fresh air and appropriate sunlight levels and to bath regularly. Studio training is recommended for beginners, people with ailments or performing athletes.
But many of us made the observation that one of the best ways to objectively measure the aerobic benefits of endurance exercise was the HDL (cholesterol) level, and that these three activities usually had very little effect on HDL. We here are now following 29 patients on this high intensity (Superslow) protocol (17 minutes in the gym every 5th day), and 28 of the 29 have more than doubled their HDL's, mostly from the low 20's to the mid/high 50's. (Show this to your doctor and see if he knows of any drug or activity that can double HDL!)
Sample characteristics are presented as mean ± standard deviation for continuous variables and proportions for categorical variables. Pearson Chi-square test and independent samples t-test were used to assess potential sex differences. For BMI and weight, a non-parametric test (Mann-Whitney U) was conducted due to the lack of normal distribution. Data from the exercise logs are presented as proportions of the total number of exercise logs. Pearson Chi-square tests were run to assess the associations between frequency, intensity, type, location and social setting of exercise with sex and training group. The results were considered statistically significant if the p-value was less than 0.05. All statistical analyses were performed with SPSS 22 (Statistical Package for Social Science, Chicago, IL, USA).
The VE group consisted of 8 women and 12 men (age 69.6 ± 3.9 years; weight 70.7 ± 12.1 kg; height 161.3 ± 6.9 cm). The control group consisted of 6 women and 14 men (age 71.2 ± 3.7 years; weight 76.1 ± 12.3 kg; height 167.5 ± 9.8 cm). Only 20 subjects of the VE group and 8 of the control group correctly completed the trials (see Figure 1 and Limitation of the Study paragraph). Adherence to protocol of the VE group was checked daily by our motor scientist by means of a daily record where he noted the week and participation number, the mean HR of the sessions, the type of exercises, and the number of repetitions per set carried out. During the training period, no adverse events such as dizziness, musculoskeletal pain, or cardiovascular issues were recorded. After 12 weeks, there were significant improvements in strength, flexibility, balance, and agility tested by SFT. T0-T1 differences are shown in Figures ​Figures22 and ​and3.3. Namely, 5 tests out of 6 showed significant improvement: Chair Stand (T0 12.4 ± 2.4; T1 13.5 ± 2.6, p < 0.01), Arm Curl (T0 14.2 ± 3.6; T1 16.6 ± 3.6, p < 0.01), 2 min step (T0 98.2 ± 15.7; T1 108.9 ± 16.2, p < 0.01), Chair Sit-and-Reach (T0 −9.9 ± 7.7 cm; T1 1.7 ± 6.3 cm, p < 0.01), and Back Scratch (T0 −15.8 ± 10.9 cm; T1 −8.4 ± 13.1 cm, p < 0.01). Conversely, the 8-foot up and go test (T0 6.5 ± 7.6 sec; T1 4.5 ± 0.6 sec, p > 0.05) showed no significant statistical difference due to a high SD in T0 assessment.