The Ohio University Study on CrossFit

raw_meal

Here is the Link to the Study Titled:
Crossfit-based high intensity power training improves maximal aerobic fitness and body composition
http://library.crossfit.com/free/pdf/CFJ_Devor_CrossFit_Publication_1.pdf

Affiliations
The Ohio State University, Department of Human Sciences – Kinesiology Program, Columbus,
Ohio

Running head: crossfit training improves aerobic fitness and body composition

Address for correspondence:
Steven T. Devor, Ph.D., FACSM
Department of Human Sciences – Kinesiology Program
The Ohio State University

Here is the link to an blog analysis of the study:
First CrossFit Study: It Works Wonders, If You Can Survive
http://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2013/08/finally-a-scientific-study-on-crossfit.html

Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of a crossfit-based high intensity power
training (HIPT) program on aerobic fitness and body composition. Healthy subjects of both
genders (23 males, 20 females) spanning all levels of aerobic fitness and body composition
completed 10 weeks of HIPT consisting of lifts such as the squat, deadlift, clean, snatch, and
overhead press performed as quickly as possible. Additionally, this crossfit-based HIPT program
included skill work for the improvement of traditional Olympic lifts and selected gymnastic
exercises. Body fat percentage was estimated using whole body plethysmography and maximal
aerobic capacity (VO2max) was measured by analyzing expired gasses during a Bruce protocol
maximal graded treadmill test. These variables were measured again following 10 weeks of
training and compared for significant changes using a paired t-test. Results showed significant
(P<0.05) improvements of VO2max in males (43.10±1.40 to 48.96±1.42 ml/kg/min) and females
(35.98±1.60 to 40.22±1.62 ml/kg/min) as well as decreased body fat percentage in males
(22.2±1.3 to 18.0±1.3) and females (26.6±2.0 to 23.2±2.0). These improvements were significant
across all levels of initial fitness. Significant correlations between absolute oxygen consumption
and oxygen consumption relative to body weight was found in both men (r=0.83, P<0.001) and
women (r=0.94, P<0.001), indicating HIPT improved VO2max scaled to body weight
independent of changes to body composition. Our data shows that HIPT significantly improves
VO2max and body composition in subjects of both genders across all levels of fitness.

Subjects
Participants of all levels of aerobic fitness and body composition were recruited from and trained
at a Crossfit affiliate (Fit Club, Columbus, OH). Out of the original 54 participants, a total of 43
(23 males, 20 females) fully completed the training program and returned for follow up testing.
Of the 11 subjects who dropped out of the training program, two cited time concerns with the
remaining nine subjects (16% of total recruited subjects) citing overuse or injury for failing to
complete the program and finish follow up testing. Subjects had already been following a
“Paleolithic” type diet prior to and following completion of the training protocol. All of the
subjects provided written informed consent and all study methods and protocols were approved
in advance by the Institutional Review Board at The Ohio State University.

Acg67

Here is the Link to the Study Titled:
Crossfit-based high intensity power training improves maximal aerobic fitness and body composition
http://library.crossfit.com/free/pdf/CFJ_Devor_CrossFit_Publication_1.pdf

Here is the link to an blog analysis of the study:
First CrossFit Study: It Works Wonders, If You Can Survive
http://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2013/08/finally-a-scientific-study-on-crossfit.html

Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of a crossfit-based high intensity power
training (HIPT) program on aerobic fitness and body composition. Healthy subjects of both
genders (23 males, 20 females) spanning all levels of aerobic fitness and body composition
completed 10 weeks of HIPT consisting of lifts such as the squat, deadlift, clean, snatch, and
overhead press performed as quickly as possible. Additionally, this crossfit-based HIPT program
included skill work for the improvement of traditional Olympic lifts and selected gymnastic
exercises. Body fat percentage was estimated using whole body plethysmography and maximal
aerobic capacity (VO2max) was measured by analyzing expired gasses during a Bruce protocol
maximal graded treadmill test. These variables were measured again following 10 weeks of
training and compared for significant changes using a paired t-test. Results showed significant
(P<0.05) improvements of VO2max in males (43.10±1.40 to 48.96±1.42 ml/kg/min) and females
(35.98±1.60 to 40.22±1.62 ml/kg/min) as well as decreased body fat percentage in males
(22.2±1.3 to 18.0±1.3) and females (26.6±2.0 to 23.2±2.0). These improvements were significant
across all levels of initial fitness. Significant correlations between absolute oxygen consumption
and oxygen consumption relative to body weight was found in both men (r=0.83, P<0.001) and
women (r=0.94, P<0.001), indicating HIPT improved VO2max scaled to body weight
independent of changes to body composition. Our data shows that HIPT significantly improves
VO2max and body composition in subjects of both genders across all levels of fitness.

So where was the control group not doing HIPT? Seems they didn't even bother trying to control for diet, not even a terrible food recall was done. All this seems to say is they took some fatties, put them on a 10 wk program and they improved body comp and fitness. Shocking

msf74

So HIPT (crossfit style training) reaps similar rewards to HIIT yet has a higher propensity for overuse injuries.

That begs the question surely it is better use HIIT which gives you the same results but less likelihood of being injured and out of action?

msf74

Oh, and a 16% drop out rate over 10 weeks is ridiculous...

servilia

Stop the presses!
People work out and get more fit! Revolutionary!

mynameiscarrie

Lots of statistical jargon that makes a study look like it says something, but doesn't really say anything. Sure, the results were significant that doing crossfit style training improves someone's fitness, but the study is kind of skewed by not reporting, as others have stated, diet, starting fitness level, injuries, etc.

I could put some numbers through SPSS and have it tell me that smokers burn more calories in a day, but it's a lopsided study.

Cherimoose

So vigorous exercise reduces body fat and improves cardio capacity. No surprise there.
The study was probably done by a Crossfitting grad student at Ohio U. as part of their thesis.

raw_meal

Here is the Link to the Study Titled:
Crossfit-based high intensity power training improves maximal aerobic fitness and body composition
http://library.crossfit.com/free/pdf/CFJ_Devor_CrossFit_Publication_1.pdf

Here is the link to an blog analysis of the study:
First CrossFit Study: It Works Wonders, If You Can Survive
http://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2013/08/finally-a-scientific-study-on-crossfit.html

Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of a crossfit-based high intensity power
training (HIPT) program on aerobic fitness and body composition. Healthy subjects of both
genders (23 males, 20 females) spanning all levels of aerobic fitness and body composition
completed 10 weeks of HIPT consisting of lifts such as the squat, deadlift, clean, snatch, and
overhead press performed as quickly as possible. Additionally, this crossfit-based HIPT program
included skill work for the improvement of traditional Olympic lifts and selected gymnastic
exercises. Body fat percentage was estimated using whole body plethysmography and maximal
aerobic capacity (VO2max) was measured by analyzing expired gasses during a Bruce protocol
maximal graded treadmill test. These variables were measured again following 10 weeks of
training and compared for significant changes using a paired t-test. Results showed significant
(P<0.05) improvements of VO2max in males (43.10±1.40 to 48.96±1.42 ml/kg/min) and females
(35.98±1.60 to 40.22±1.62 ml/kg/min) as well as decreased body fat percentage in males
(22.2±1.3 to 18.0±1.3) and females (26.6±2.0 to 23.2±2.0). These improvements were significant
across all levels of initial fitness. Significant correlations between absolute oxygen consumption
and oxygen consumption relative to body weight was found in both men (r=0.83, P<0.001) and
women (r=0.94, P<0.001), indicating HIPT improved VO2max scaled to body weight
independent of changes to body composition. Our data shows that HIPT significantly improves
VO2max and body composition in subjects of both genders across all levels of fitness.

So where was the control group not doing HIPT? Seems they didn't even bother trying to control for diet, not even a terrible food recall was done. All this seems to say is they took some fatties, put them on a 10 wk program and they improved body comp and fitness. Shocking

I posted the participants in the OP for your critique.

Subjects
Participants of all levels of aerobic fitness and body composition were recruited from and trained
at a Crossfit affiliate (Fit Club, Columbus, OH). Out of the original 54 participants, a total of 43
(23 males, 20 females) fully completed the training program and returned for follow up testing.
Of the 11 subjects who dropped out of the training program, two cited time concerns with the
remaining nine subjects (16% of total recruited subjects) citing overuse or injury for failing to
complete the program and finish follow up testing. Subjects had already been following a
“Paleolithic” type diet prior to and following completion of the training protocol. All of the
subjects provided written informed consent and all study methods and protocols were approved
in advance by the Institutional Review Board at The Ohio State University.

raw_meal

Lots of statistical jargon that makes a study look like it says something, but doesn't really say anything. Sure, the results were significant that doing crossfit style training improves someone's fitness, but the study is kind of skewed by not reporting, as others have stated, diet, starting fitness level, injuries, etc.

I could put some numbers through SPSS and have it tell me that smokers burn more calories in a day, but it's a lopsided study.

See the edit of the original post. I added the subjects tested. 11 dropped out due to injury or reuse. Paleo diet supposively

jim9097

Hmmm, I just don't know what I would have done if someone hadn't told me exercise could possibly affect my body weither and O2 utilization.

raw_meal

Hmmm, I just don't know what I would have done if someone hadn't told me exercise could possibly affect my body weither and O2 utilization.

Did you read the the second link?

First CrossFit Study: It Works Wonders, If You Can Survive
http://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2013/08/finally-a-scientific-study-on-crossfit.html

"Previous research has shown high intensity interval training to significantly improve cardiovascular fitness, blood pressure, and body fat after just ten weeks of a workout regimen composed of 25-minute workouts conducted three times per week. Does CrossFit take these results to the next level?

According to the new study, apparently so. Researchers at Ohio State University assigned 54 healthy participants to a five-day per week CrossFit-based exercise program that lasted ten weeks. The 43 participants that competed the program saw incredible improvements in measures of aerobic fitness and body composition. Maximum aerobic capacity grew by 13.6% for men and 11.8% for women. At the same time, male participants' body fat decreased from 22.2% to 18% and female participants' fell from 26.6% to 23.2%. Both men and women also enjoyed significant increases in lean muscle mass. What's more, the improvements in aerobic fitness and body composition were significant when broken down across participants' initial fitness levels. In other words, people of all shapes and sizes saw tremendous physical improvements."

TR0berts

So where was the control group not doing HIPT? Seems they didn't even bother trying to control for diet, not even a terrible food recall was done. All this seems to say is they took some fatties, put them on a 10 wk program and they improved body comp and fitness. Shocking

I posted the participants in the OP for your critique.

Subjects
Participants of all levels of aerobic fitness and body composition were recruited from and trained
at a Crossfit affiliate (Fit Club, Columbus, OH). Out of the original 54 participants, a total of 43
(23 males, 20 females) fully completed the training program and returned for follow up testing.
Of the 11 subjects who dropped out of the training program, two cited time concerns with the
remaining nine subjects (16% of total recruited subjects) citing overuse or injury for failing to
complete the program and finish follow up testing. Subjects had already been following a
“Paleolithic” type diet prior to and following completion of the training protocol. All of the
subjects provided written informed consent and all study methods and protocols were approved
in advance by the Institutional Review Board at The Ohio State University.

But that doesn't really answer the questions.

Seemingly nobody in the study did any other sort of exercise.
They all followed the quasi-same basic dietary plan - but there didn't seem to be a control on Calories or macros - just that it was Paleo, although that, like "clean eating," means different things to different people.

As such, the only real conclusion we can reach is that exercising helps fitness. No kidding.

msf74

In other words, people of all shapes and sizes saw tremendous physical improvements."

In comparison to what exactly?

Doing nothing? Working at a lower intensity? Above that afforded by traditional HIIT? Read Acg's comment above as he already addressed this.

All it really tells us is that high intensity training has fitness and body composition benefits but you probably shouldn't do Crossfit as even with supervision and a periodised training regimen there is a remarkable propensity for injury without any additional benefit over traditional high intensity methods as far as we know.

raw_meal

In other words, people of all shapes and sizes saw tremendous physical improvements."

In comparison to what exactly?

Doing nothing? Working at a lower intensity? Above that afforded by traditional HIIT? Read Acg's comment above as he already addressed this.

All it really tells us is that high intensity training has fitness and body composition benefits but you probably shouldn't do Crossfit as even with supervision and a periodised training regimen there is a remarkable propensity for injury without any additional benefit over traditional high intensity methods as far as we know.

I believe the comparison is HIIT vs HIPT. The second link in the original post discusses this. It concluded that HIPT takes it to a higher level (fat burn and performance) than HIIT based on previous HIIT studies but is higher risk for injury.

You have to look at other similar type studies on other exercise regimens to find a comparison. I have not looked for this. It would be interesting to see.

At my gym they have a level I, level II, and competition level.

Level I is HIT/HIIT/HIPT bottom kicking
Level II HIPT bottom kicking at a higher level with also a higher injury risk according to this study
Competition level is ridiculous bottom kicking

I did not consider level II until I read this. I don't know if I ever want to go there. Maybe after a year of level I conditioning. There are some killer workouts in level II. (Cringing:noway: ). I can see why 11 dropped out (9 due to injury or overuse) .

msf74

I believe the comparison is HIIT vs HIPT. The second link in the original post discusses this. It concluded that HIPT takes it to a higher level (fat burn and performance) than HIIT based on previous HIIT studies but is higher risk for injury.

No dude. The study simply asked if HIPT would reap the same fitness benefits of HIIT. It did. To determine whether it actually lead to superior results they would have needed a HIIT group of participants of similar starting positions and controlled for diet etc. It didn't do that. Although the article you linked has an isolated remark about "taking it to the next level" or whatever this is not supported by anything.

You have to look at other similar type studies on other exercise regimens to find a comparison. I have not looked for this. It would be interesting to see.

Yep as well as the risk / reward ratio.

I like that your gym progresses you though different levels (ie if you are a beginner you start out with a more suitable routine.) However, what isn't known is their attitude to injury, risk and individual monitoring.

jonnythan

This is a surprisingly pointless study. I'm surprised anyone funded it at all.

No control. No comparison group. High loss rates.

raw_meal

I believe the comparison is HIIT vs HIPT. The second link in the original post discusses this. It concluded that HIPT takes it to a higher level (fat burn and performance) than HIIT based on previous HIIT studies but is higher risk for injury.

No dude. The study simply asked if HIPT would reap the same fitness benefits of HIIT. It did. To determine whether it actually lead to superior results they would have needed a HIIT group of participants of similar starting positions and controlled for diet etc. It didn't do that. Although the article you linked has an isolated remark about "taking it to the next level" or whatever this is not supported by anything.

You have to look at other similar type studies on other exercise regimens to find a comparison. I have not looked for this. It would be interesting to see.

Yep as well as the risk / reward ratio.

I like that your gym progresses you though different levels (ie if you are a beginner you start out with a more suitable routine.) However, what isn't known is their attitude to injury, risk and individual monitoring.

This was stated in the discussion:
"While improvements in aerobic fitness are similar to those previously found in HIIT programs, the
current HIPT program has demonstrated an increase of maximal oxygen consumption, even in
subjects with well-above average VO2max. This increase in VO2max has not previously been
documented in response to a HIIT program, indicating HIPT may be a possible strategy for
improvement of aerobic fitness in athletes who are considered to be well-above average. Future
research is needed to investigate these differences."

They are basing their control on previous study results I guess. You may right, but I don't know. I have to look at the referenced studies to see if it this is a valid assumption. They also state further research is need to investigate the deltas.

On CF gyms:
It's probably good to have different levels otherwise CF would not be appealing to anyone out of shape. There are some beginners in really bad shape at my gym. Like this is the last resort and if I don't do this I am going to die. Which is probably true. One guy started crossfit the day after he quite smoking. He was 300 lbs at the start (around June), when I talked to him last month he was 280. He still can't do the full level I Rx workouts but he is there every day.

Also the gym makes you pay $50 a month more if your a Level II and you must be approved so they don't take it lightly. I know one guy, who suffers from little man's disease he wanted to do CF level II when his friend (Who is in superior shape, dude looks like the cast from 300) started Level II. Little man was also trying to 2 level I workouts a day, they told him no for both initially. He had to do at least another month plus of level I.

The trainers demo proper form for every exercise for each WOD every day.
You have to use the right form for HIPT or HIIT or CF without right form or you will get hurt. No doubt. If you don't know how to monitor yourself don't do CF you will hurt yourself. If think you have no limits, CF will prove you wrong.

raw_meal

Here is the Link to the Study Titled:
Crossfit-based high intensity power training improves maximal aerobic fitness and body composition
http://library.crossfit.com/free/pdf/CFJ_Devor_CrossFit_Publication_1.pdf

Here is the link to an blog analysis of the study:
First CrossFit Study: It Works Wonders, If You Can Survive
http://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2013/08/finally-a-scientific-study-on-crossfit.html

Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of a crossfit-based high intensity power
training (HIPT) program on aerobic fitness and body composition. Healthy subjects of both
genders (23 males, 20 females) spanning all levels of aerobic fitness and body composition
completed 10 weeks of HIPT consisting of lifts such as the squat, deadlift, clean, snatch, and
overhead press performed as quickly as possible. Additionally, this crossfit-based HIPT program
included skill work for the improvement of traditional Olympic lifts and selected gymnastic
exercises. Body fat percentage was estimated using whole body plethysmography and maximal
aerobic capacity (VO2max) was measured by analyzing expired gasses during a Bruce protocol
maximal graded treadmill test. These variables were measured again following 10 weeks of
training and compared for significant changes using a paired t-test. Results showed significant
(P<0.05) improvements of VO2max in males (43.10±1.40 to 48.96±1.42 ml/kg/min) and females
(35.98±1.60 to 40.22±1.62 ml/kg/min) as well as decreased body fat percentage in males
(22.2±1.3 to 18.0±1.3) and females (26.6±2.0 to 23.2±2.0). These improvements were significant
across all levels of initial fitness. Significant correlations between absolute oxygen consumption
and oxygen consumption relative to body weight was found in both men (r=0.83, P<0.001) and
women (r=0.94, P<0.001), indicating HIPT improved VO2max scaled to body weight
independent of changes to body composition. Our data shows that HIPT significantly improves
VO2max and body composition in subjects of both genders across all levels of fitness.

So where was the control group not doing HIPT? Seems they didn't even bother trying to control for diet, not even a terrible food recall was done. All this seems to say is they took some fatties, put them on a 10 wk program and they improved body comp and fitness. Shocking

No related, but what is your workout regimen?

WVprankster

So, a major university that happens to be in the same city as Rogue fitness (major crossfit sponsor) found that people who move more are fitter? These findings aren't newsworthy.

brb buying silly high socks
brb eating dinosaurs (or whatever the hell paleo is)
brb brb'ing

Mr_Knight

Oh, and a 16% drop out rate over 10 weeks is ridiculous...

Yikes. If they aren't including the "no improvement" stats from the drop-outs in the final results, then the results are completely skewed by survivorship bias.

kevinvs

Save for later reading