Strength training and the risk of dying

In Momma 2022, about 40 minutes a week of muscle-strengthening was linked to a 17% lower risk of dying, from any cause, than none. Lowest risk was at about 30 to 60 minutes a week; whether more helps is not settled.

Read your number

Is my amount of strength training good?

Some muscle-strengthening activity is the useful comparison with none. Momma 2022 found the largest association around 30–60 minutes a week, while the effect of higher amounts was unclear. The evidence was observational and rated very low certainty. The calculator assumes each day you enter represents 30 minutes; use your actual activity when planning your week.

If you're 70 or older

At 70 and older, the practical options below include short sessions with weights, bands or body-weight movements. Choose movements suited to your ability. Momma’s cohorts were adults without severe illness, so use a clinician’s guidance for a diagnosed condition. Treat the calculator’s assumed session length as a scoring convention when choosing your own schedule.

Try your numbers in the free calculator Choose a practical next step

Evidence already on this page: Momma H, Kawakami R, Honda T, Sawada SS. 2022.

Where you stand

Momma 2022 is the study behind the number. Lower risk was greatest at about 30 to 60 minutes a week and smaller above that, and whether more helps is not settled. The score stays flat past an hour; that is the score's choice, not a finding. The reference is zero days, which is why this row can raise your score but never lower it.

None is the reference. The row can only raise the score. It overlaps steps and VO₂ max. Risk is lower with a couple of sessions a week, then the line stays flat.

At 1 day a week0.87×a typical 45-year-old’s risk, lower than typical.

See the same numbers as a table

Strength training and risk of death from any cause, as a multiple of a typical 45-year-old’s risk
Days a week of strength work	Risk vs typical	In words
0 days a week	1.00×	about the same as typical
1 day a week	0.87×	lower than typical
2 days a week	0.80×	lower than typical
3 days a week	0.80×	lower than typical
5 days a week	0.80×	lower than typical; beyond the studies, so this is the model’s estimate
7 days a week	0.80×	lower than typical; beyond the studies, so this is the model’s estimate

Risk of death from any cause, with every other marker held at typical. Drag the marker or use the arrow keys. Nothing you move here is saved.

Hatched areas are beyond the studies. The line there is the model’s estimate, or flat.

Each day counts as 30 minutes, an assumption. The flat line above two days is the model’s choice: the studies disagree above about two hours a week.

Source: Momma et al. 2022, British Journal of Sports Medicine (PMID 35228201)

The study, not the score

any vs no muscle-strengthening activity

Momma H, Kawakami R, Honda T, Sawada SS. 2022

0.85 (0.79–0.93)

15% lower all-cause mortality

The bar shows the study’s 95% confidence interval, the range of values consistent with its data. The tick is the study’s best single figure. The centre line is no difference. The chart above is the score’s own curve, not this study.

What it is

How many days in a typical week you do exercise on purpose to strengthen your muscles: weights, bands, or body-weight moves like push-ups. Your answer counts as 30 minutes a day. Walking, sport and physical work do not count unless you do them as strength work.

How the score uses it

Technical notes

The curve is Momma 2022 (16-study review, aerobic-independent): any vs none RR 0.85 (0.79–0.93) from 7 studies; lowest dose-response RR 0.83 (0.79–0.86) at 40 min/week from 6, figures confirmed against the full text. Days per week become minutes at an ASSUMED 30 min/session (no source, LOW confidence). Curve: 0 min 1.00, 30 min 0.87, 40 min 0.83, 60 min 0.80, flat above. Main source: Momma. Supporting: Shailendra 2022 (0.85 any-vs-none from 6 of the same 7 studies, so not independent; lowest RR 0.74 near 60 min/week in a 4-study dose analysis) / Patel 2020 (HR 0.88 under 1 h/week, 0.90 at 1–2 h, but 1.01 at 2+ h, which is why the plateau is a judgment, not a finding) / Zhao 2020 (self-reported; versus meeting neither guideline: strength-only HR 0.89, aerobic-only 0.71, both 0.60). The reference is 0 days/week (inferred from NHIS: about 32% of US adults meet the 2-day guideline), so this marker can only raise a score, never lower it. Weight 5% of the composite, the other seven scaled proportionally. Confidence LOW-MEDIUM: observational, healthy-user bias, and Momma grades the evidence very low certainty.

How to improve it

Do two short strength sessions a week: weights, bands, or push-ups and squats
Work the big muscle groups, legs, back, chest and shoulders, not just one
Keep it sustainable: in Momma 2022 the lowest risk of dying sat around 30–60 minutes a week (near 40 in its 6-study dose analysis); Shailendra 2022 put it nearer 60
Pair it with walking or cardio; in one large US survey (Zhao 2020, self-reported activity), meeting both activity guidelines was linked to a lower risk of dying than meeting just one

What the studies found

Endpoint	Grade	Finding
—	METHOD	Bonus-only, aerobic-adjusted curve Days per week become minutes at an assumed 30 min/session (no source). Curve 0 min 1.00, 30 min 0.87, 40 min 0.83, 60 min 0.80, then flat. Every anchor is from a study that adjusted for aerobic activity. The reference is 0 days, so this row can only raise a score. The flat top is a judgment: the studies disagree above about 2 hours a week.
All-cause mortality	B	0.83 at 40 Minutes a Week (Momma 2022) Technical notes A review of 16 prospective cohort studies; the link held independent of aerobic activity. In its 6-study dose-response analysis, the lowest RR was 0.83 (0.79–0.86) at 40 min/week, and the estimate stayed below 1.00 up to about 140 min/week. Any vs none was RR 0.85 (0.79–0.93), from 7 studies. The authors grade the evidence very low certainty and call the effect of higher volume unclear.
All-cause mortality	B	0.85 Again, and 0.74 at an Hour (Shailendra 2022) Technical notes Ten studies (six for the all-cause RR): any resistance training vs none carried all-cause mortality RR 0.85 (0.77–0.93), the same centre as Momma from a partly different pool. The dose-response showed RR 0.74 (0.64–0.86) at about 60 min/week, diminishing at higher volume. The calculator uses 0.80 there, a haircut for healthy-user bias.
All-cause mortality	B	The Flat Top Is a Judgment (Patel 2020) Technical notes Cancer Prevention Study-II, 72,462 adults, controlling for aerobic activity. Under 1 h/week HR 0.88 (0.82–0.94) and 1–2 h/week HR 0.90 (0.84–0.97), but 2 or more hours a week HR 1.01 (0.92–1.09). The authors could not explain the lack of benefit at higher volume. The calculator holds flat rather than rewarding more or penalizing it.
All-cause mortality	C	Strength Plus Aerobic, HR 0.60 (Zhao 2020) Technical notes NHIS, 479,856 US adults, 59,819 deaths. Versus meeting neither guideline: strength only HR 0.89 (0.85–0.94), aerobic only 0.71 (0.69–0.72), both 0.60 (0.57–0.62). Activity was self-reported leisure time.
All-cause mortality	C	Mostly Observational (Saeidifard 2019) Technical notes The pooled evidence is 10 cohorts and one randomized trial: resistance training versus no exercise alone HR 0.79 (0.69–0.91), with aerobic exercise 0.60 (0.49–0.72). The abstract does not isolate the randomized trial’s mortality contribution. This mostly observational evidence is an association, not proof that lifting lowers the risk of death.

What argues against this

Patel et al. 2020 (Cancer Prevention Study-II, 72,462 adults), controlling for aerobic activity, found no reduction at 2 or more hours a week of muscle-strengthening (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.92–1.09) after HR 0.88 under 1 h/week and 0.90 at 1–2 h/week, and the authors could not explain it. Momma 2022 also finds a J-shape and calls the effect of higher volume unclear, and rates the all-cause mortality evidence very low certainty. That disagrees with the curve on SHAPE above about an hour a week, which is why the curve is held flat rather than rewarded further, but not on the sign of the effect at ordinary volumes. Healthy-user bias applies to every study in the set.

Last reviewed 12 October 2026

Sources

10 cited

Momma H, Kawakami R, Honda T, Sawada SS. (2022) — British Journal of Sports Medicine
Muscle-strengthening activities are associated with lower risk and mortality in major non-communicable diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies
View source
Shailendra P, Baldock KL, Li LSK, Bennie JA, Boyle T. (2022) — American Journal of Preventive Medicine
Resistance Training and Mortality Risk: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
View source
Patel AV, Hodge JM, Rees-Punia E, Teras LR, Campbell PT, Gapstur SM. (2020) — Preventing Chronic Disease
Relationship Between Muscle-Strengthening Activity and Cause-Specific Mortality in a Large US Cohort
View source
Zhao M, Veeranki SP, Magnussen CG, Xi B. (2020) — BMJ
Recommended physical activity and all cause and cause specific mortality in US adults: prospective cohort study
View source
Stamatakis E, Lee IM, Bennie J, Freeston J, Hamer M, O’Donovan G, Ding D, Bauman A, Mavros Y. (2018) — American Journal of Epidemiology
Does Strength-Promoting Exercise Confer Unique Health Benefits? A Pooled Analysis of Data on 11 Population Cohorts With All-Cause, Cancer, and Cardiovascular Mortality Endpoints
View source
Saeidifard F, Medina-Inojosa JR, West CP, Olson TP, Somers VK, Bonikowske AR, Prokop LJ, Vinciguerra M, Lopez-Jimenez F. (2019) — European Journal of Preventive Cardiology
The association of resistance training with mortality: A systematic review and meta-analysis
View source
Kraschnewski JL, Sciamanna CN, Poger JM, Rovniak LS, Lehman EB, Cooper AB, Ballentine NH, Ciccolo JT. (2016) — Preventive Medicine
Is strength training associated with mortality benefits? A 15year cohort study of US older adults
View source
Garcia L, Pearce M, Abbas A, Mok A, Strain T, Ali S, Crippa A, Dempsey PC, Golubic R, Kelly P, Laird Y, McNamara E, Moore S, de Sa TH, Smith AD, Wijndaele K, Woodcock J, Brage S. (2023) — British Journal of Sports Medicine
Non-occupational physical activity and risk of cardiovascular disease, cancer and mortality outcomes: a dose-response meta-analysis of large prospective studies
View source
Celis-Morales CA, Lyall DM, Anderson J, Iliodromiti S, Fan Y, Ntuk UE, Mackay DF, Pell JP, Sattar N, Gill JMR. (2017) — European Heart Journal
The association between physical activity and risk of mortality is modulated by grip strength and cardiorespiratory fitness: evidence from 498 135 UK-Biobank participants
View source
Craig CL, Marshall AL, Sjöström M, Bauman AE, Booth ML, Ainsworth BE, Pratt M, Ekelund U, Yngve A, Sallis JF, Oja P. (2003) — Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
International physical activity questionnaire: 12-country reliability and validity
View source

See how strength training fits your full score

See how it fits the 8-metric index in the calculator.

Open calculator

Educational content only — not medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Not a medical device; not FDA evaluated. Consult a qualified healthcare professional about your own health, and call emergency services for urgent symptoms. Full medical disclaimer →