Background: This study compared the muscle activity and six repetition maximum (6-RM) loads in bench press with narrow, medium, and wide grip widths with sub-group comparisons of resistance-trained (RT) and novice-trained (NT) men. Methods: After two familiarization sessions, twenty-eight subjects lifted their 6-RM loads with the different grip widths with measurement of electromyographic activity. Results: Biceps brachii activity increased with increasing grip width, whereas wide grip displayed lower triceps brachii activation than medium and narrow. In the anterior deltoid, greater activity was observed using a medium compared to narrow grip. Similar muscle activities were observed between the grip widths for the other muscles. For the RT group, greater biceps brachii activity with increasing grip width was observed, but only greater activity was observed in the NT group between narrow and wide. Comparing wide and medium grip width, the RT group showed lower triceps activation using a wide grip, whereas the NT group showed lower anterior deltoid activation using a narrow compared to medium grip. Both groups demonstrated lower 6-RM loads using a narrow grip compared to the other grips. Conclusion: Grip widths affect both 6-RM loads and triceps brachii, biceps brachii, and anterior deltoid activity especially between wide and narrow grip widths.

The aim of the study was to compare neuromuscular activation in the gluteus maximus, the biceps femoris and the erector spinae from the Romanian deadlift, the 45-degree Roman chair back extension and the seated machine back extension. Fifteen resistance-trained females performed three repetitions with 6-RM loading in all exercises in a randomized and counterbalanced order. The activation in the whole movement as well as its lower and upper parts were analyzed. The results showed that the Romanian deadlift and the Roman chair back extension activated the gluteus maximus more than the seated machine back extension (94-140%, p < 0.01). For the biceps femoris the Roman chair elicited higher activation compared to both the Romanian deadlift and the seated machine back extension (71-174%). Further, the Romanian deadlift activated the biceps femoris more compared to the seated machine back extension (61%, p < 0.01). The analyses of the different parts of the movement showed that the Roman chair produced higher levels of activation in the upper part for both the gluteus maximus and the biceps femoris, compared to the other exercises. There were no differences in activation of the erector spinae between the three exercises (p = 1.00). In conclusion, both the Roman deadlift and the Roman chair back extension would be preferable to the seated machine back extension in regards to gluteus maximus activation. The Roman chair was superior in activating the biceps femoris compared to the two other exercises. All three exercises are appropriate selections for activating the lower back muscles. For overall lower limb activation, the Roman chair was the best exercise.

In June 2020, the paper “Changes in Muscle Pattern Activity during the Asymmetric Flat Bench Press” was published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

Background: Both unilateral and asymmetric loading have been used to increase training specificity and create over-load in a target limb to reduce inter-limb asymmetries. The aim of the study was to compare the effects of conducting either unilateral- or asymmetric-loaded resistance training with traditional bilateral resistance training on maximal dynamic and isometric strength in untrained women. Methods: Thirty-four women not conducting regular resistance training were randomized into unilateral (UNI), bilateral (BIL) or asymmetric (ASY) upper-body resistance training (2–3·wk⁻¹, 10 wk, 24 sessions in total). UNI conducted all exercises unilaterally (one arm at a time), BIL conducted all exercises bilaterally (both arms), and ASY added 10% of the total load to the non-dominant side. Maximal strength was tested in chest press, seated row (1-RM and MVC in both), and pallof press (only MVC). Results: At post-test, BIL demonstrated greater bilateral 1 RM strength than ASY (p = 0.017, d = 1.25) in chest press, while UNI demonstrated greater 1 RM strength in the dominant side than ASY (p = 0.006, d = 1.45). For the other strength tests, no differences were found between groups in chest press (p = 0.068–0.481), seated row (p = 0.091–0.591) or MVC peak force for both chest press and seated row (p > 0.05). All groups demonstrated pre–post improvements for all measurements in chest press (p < 0.05) and seated row (p < 0.05), but only ASY demonstrated improvements in pallof press on the non-dominant side. Conclusions: Compared to traditional bilateral training, unilateral resistance training did not result in similar effects on dynamic or isometric strength. Asymmetric resistance training demonstrated a lower change in chest press strength on the bilateral and dominant sides compared to the other groups.

Background: The incremental model of doping behavior (IMDB) posits that doping develops over time through the habit of using performance enhancers such as dietary supplements. We investigated the association between dietary supplement use and beliefs and doping attitudes among Norwegian sportspersons. Methods: A total of 1441 subjects (females: 44%; age 31.3 ± 11.6 years) responded to an online questionnaire including measures of dietary supplement use and beliefs, performance enhancement attitude (PEAS), and a doping likelihood vignette. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, correlations, and multiple regression analysis. Results: 58% used dietary supplements. Dietary supplement beliefs were positively correlated with doping attitudes (r = 0.27 (PEAS) and r = 0.16 (vignette), p < 0.001). Among non-competitive respondents, younger respondents were more likely to endorse supplement use (r = −0.08, p = 0.073 vs. r = −0.30, p < 0.001) and doping use (r = −0.17, p < 0.001 and r = −0.21, p < 0.001). Males endorsed supplement use (Welch’s t tests > 5.19, p < 0.001) and doping (Welch’s t tests > 4.08, p < 0.001) more than females. Norwegian sportspersons are generally ambivalent about dietary supplements but opposed to doping practices in sport. Results of multiple regression analysis indicated that younger, male, non-competitive, and supplement-endorsing participants were more likely to endorse doping likelihood. However, these differences were small, and participants were generally against doping. Conclusions: The associations between dietary supplement use and beliefs and doping attitudes are weak but compatible with the IMDB. The differences between groups are small; however, focusing on beliefs about dietary supplements in young, male, non-competitive persons may improve the effectiveness of anti-doping interventions.