Is Less Really More?
Written By Aalijah David
A recent growing body of peer reviewed studies have supported the idea that “less can be more” when it comes to your exercise/training regimen. These findings emphasize that even minimal, time‑efficient or low‑volume activity can yield meaningful health benefits, especially for cardiovascular health, metabolic control, strength, and functional fitness.
But what is the catch? Let’s dive into it:
Whether it is obese individuals, athletes, sedentary individuals, or endurance biased patients, many of these studies have shown no difference in utilizing lower volume or higher volume. Many of these individuals have succeeded just by integrating low volume training. Example studies down below.
A systematic review and meta‑analysis found no significant difference in fitness outcomes (strength, endurance, jump performance, sprint speed) between lower‑volume and higher‑volume training in team‑sport athletes. Effect size was essentially zero (ES ≈ –0.05) with very low certainty of evidence. https://www.reddit.com/r/AdvancedFitness/comments/leio7z/effects_of_very_low_volume_high_intensity_versus/?utm
In obese individuals with metabolic syndrome, a 12‑week program combining low-volume HIIT with single-set resistance training led to marked improvements in blood pressure, lipid profile, inflammation (CRP drop ~37%), and metabolic syndrome severity—comparable to pharmacological effects.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39940419/
For new or sedentary individuals, a single weekly RT session (multi‑joint exercises at ≤50% 1RM, ≤3 sets) was sufficient to produce strength and endurance improvements over the first 2–3 months. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-023-01949-3?utm
A 6‑week intervention of just 60 min/week of low-to-moderate intensity aerobic exercise in seniors with multimorbidity significantly improved blood pressure, waist circumference, muscle mass, mobility, and balance. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34183717/
Endurance performance can be maintained for up to 15 weeks using just 2 sessions/week (~13–26 min/session), if intensity is preserved. Strength and muscle mass in older adults can be maintained with as little as 1–2 sessions/week and minimal sets, so long as intensity is maintained. https://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr/Fulltext/2021/05000/Maintaining_Physical_Performance__The_Minimal_Dose.35.aspx?utm
But, when integrating low volume training, there are other variables that must be manipulated. One of the most important variables AKA prime drivers of adaptation, intensity. In order for changes in strength, hypertrophy, neuromuscular efficiency, cardiovascular fitness, & metabolic adaptions to occur, intensity has to be properly integrated.
When fewer sets or shorter sessions are integrated into your training regimen, you have less total exposure to the stimulus. So to get the same or better adaptations (fat oxidation, muscle protein synthesis, metabolic disruption), you need to increase the quality or intensity of each rep, set, or interval.
Here is a summary table for adaptations!
Adaptation Area
Evidence & Outcome
VO₂max / Aerobic Fitness
Low-volume HIIT (<15 min/session) yields substantial improvements vs. MICT (arXiv, PubMed)
Strength
Single-set HIT can outperform multi‑set protocols for most exercise strength outcomes (PubMed, NCBI)
Resistance Frequency
Well-trained individuals gain more from 2 sessions/week at high intensity than with higher volume lower intensity (SpringerLink)
Applied / Team Sport
Lower-volume resistance training performs similarly to high-volume in performance outcomes (PubMed)
Efficiency & Mitochondria
SIT/HIIT delivers greater mitochondrial gains per time than longer moderate sessions (Reddit)
Keep in mind that yes, when volume or time is limited, intensity becomes the critical variable. But: Intensity alone isn’t everything. It must be programmed with:
Think of intensity as the engine of adaptation — but volume and frequency are the fuel. You need the right balance based on your goals and capacity.