{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025963808025177025, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0015735641227380016, 'mean_word_length': 5.913043478260869, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Fitness and strength responses to distinct exercise modes in twins: Studies of Twin Responses to Understand Exercise as a THerapy (STRUETH) study

Exercise is considered medicine; however, the individual degree of responsiveness to a standardized dose of exercise is idiosyncratic. Individual responsiveness between distinct exercise modalities and the genetic/environmental contributions to exercise response are not well understood. In this novel randomized cross‐over design study, monozygotic and dizygotic twins, as pairs, underwent 3 months of resistance and endurance training, separated by a 3 month washout period, aiming to assess training responses in strength and fitness outcomes to dichotomous training modalities, as well as the genetic/environmental contributions to exercise response. Our findings indicate that (i) individual responsiveness differs between exercise modalities; (ii) low‐responders to one mode may be ‘rescued’ by switching to an alternate mode of exercise; and (iii) genes may not play as large a role, as previously estimated from cross‐sectional data, for exercise training adaptation. The present study has implications for those charged with optimizing the benefits of exercise by means of individualizing the exercise prescription.