Two short sessions a week, not a training program
You can change this. Whether strength training lowers the risk of death is untested in trials, and the studies are observational.
Days a week you do exercise on purpose to strengthen your muscles. The studies link it to lower all-cause mortality independent of aerobic activity. The pooled evidence is mostly observational; Saeidifard’s abstract provides no trial-only mortality estimate.
Time
2
short sessions a week
- Level
- Any
- Impact
- Low to moderate
- Equipment
- None required; weights, bands or body weight
Dose
2 or more days a week, about 60 minutes a week (2 × 30 min). The calculator counts each day as 30 minutes and holds flat above 60 minutes a week. That plateau is a judgment: Patel 2020 found no reduction at 2 or more hours a week.
The days-to-minutes conversion (30 min/session) is an assumption with no source, and the flat curve above 60 min/week is a judgment. The reference is 0 days, so this marker can only raise a score.
Dose-response shape: plateau
How to get there
Two short sessions a week that work the big muscle groups, legs, back, chest and shoulders. Weights, bands or body weight all count.
Count the days you did it each week. Two is the target; the calculator does not reward more.
No cited source shows a clear extra benefit above about an hour a week, and one large cohort saw none at 2 or more hours.
Evidence, by endpoint
| Endpoint | Grade | Citation |
|---|---|---|
| All-cause mortality, muscle-strengthening vs none | B | Momma et al. 2022, British Journal of Sports Medicine Review of 16 prospective cohort studies, independent of aerobic activity. Any vs none RR 0.85 (0.79–0.93; 7 studies); lowest dose-response RR 0.83 (0.79–0.86) at 40 min/week (6 studies); below 1.00 up to about 140 min/week. J-shaped; the authors call the effect of higher volume unclear and grade the evidence very low certainty. |
| All-cause mortality, resistance training vs none | B | Shailendra et al. 2022, American Journal of Preventive Medicine 10 studies. Any resistance training vs none RR 0.85 (0.77–0.93); dose-response RR 0.74 (0.64–0.86) at about 60 min/week, diminishing at higher volume. |
| All-cause mortality by weekly hours, aerobic-adjusted | B | Patel et al. 2020, Preventing Chronic Disease Cancer Prevention Study-II, 72,462 adults. Under 1 h/week HR 0.88 (0.82–0.94); 1–2 h/week HR 0.90 (0.84–0.97); 2 or more h/week HR 1.01 (0.92–1.09). |
| All-cause mortality, guideline strength activity | C | Zhao et al. 2020, BMJ NHIS, 479,856 US adults. Strength guideline only HR 0.89 (0.85–0.94); aerobic only 0.71 (0.69–0.72); both 0.60 (0.57–0.62). |
| All-cause mortality from a randomized strength intervention | X | Saeidifard et al. 2019 included one randomized trial and 10 cohorts, totaling 370,256 adults. The abstract reports mortality associations versus no exercise but does not isolate the randomized trial’s contribution, so it provides no trial-only estimate for this endpoint. |
What the dose is
Two or more days a week of exercise done on purpose to strengthen your muscles, weights, resistance bands, or body-weight moves like push-ups and squats. Momma et al. 2022 found the lowest risk at about 40 minutes a week, and Shailendra et al. 2022 at about 60. The calculator counts each day as 30 minutes.
What the evidence shows
In Momma et al. 2022 (7 of its 16 studies), any muscle-strengthening carried all-cause mortality RR 0.85 (0.79–0.93) versus none, independent of aerobic activity; Shailendra et al. 2022 pooled 6 of those same 7 studies and also found 0.85 (0.77–0.93), so it is not a separate check. In Zhao et al. 2020 (self-reported activity), meeting the strength guideline alone was linked to all-cause HR 0.89, the aerobic guideline alone 0.71, and both 0.60, each versus meeting neither. Momma et al. 2022 pooled Zhao with two other studies for strength plus aerobic activity: RR 0.60 (0.54–0.67) versus neither. All of that is prospective cohort evidence.
What the number is not
The mortality evidence is mostly observational, and people who lift are different in other ways. Saeidifard’s abstract provides no trial-only mortality estimate, so this is not proof that lifting lowers the risk of death. It is not a finding that more than an hour a week does nothing. Patel et al. 2020 saw no benefit at 2 or more hours and Momma et al. 2022 a J-shape, and both are thin at high volume, so the calculator stays flat there.
What argues against this
Patel et al. 2020 found no lower mortality at 2 or more hours a week of muscle-strengthening after HR 0.88 and 0.90 at lower volumes, and Momma et al. 2022 also finds a J-shape and rates its all-cause mortality evidence very low certainty. Every study here is observational: people who lift also tend to have other favorable habits, and none of these studies can separate the two. The evidence base is the thinnest of the scored markers, which is why its weight is 5%.
Gotchas
- The question counts leisure-time exercise done to strengthen muscles. Physical work, sport and walking do not count unless you do them as strength work, so a strong manual worker with no gym habit scores as zero.
- Zero days is scored as typical, not as a penalty. This marker can add to your score and never subtracts from it.
- Days become minutes at an assumed 30 per session. If your sessions are much longer or shorter, the score will not know.
- More is not scored as better above about an hour a week. That is a choice made because the studies disagree, not a finding that more does nothing.
Safety
- Start light and build gradually, especially if you are new to lifting, older, or have a heart, joint or blood-pressure condition. Ask a clinician first if unsure.
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 →