Blog

Cardio Doesn't Kill Your Gains (Here's What 43 Studies Found)

"Cardio kills gains." You've heard it everywhere. Gym forums, Instagram, that guy at the squat rack who hasn't done a conditioning workout since 2015. Skip the treadmill if you want muscle. Avoid conditioning if you want strength.

It's wrong. A 2022 meta-analysis of 43 studies found no meaningful difference in strength or muscle gains between people who mixed cardio and lifting versus those who only lifted. Zero. The "interference effect" everyone warns you about? It only kicks in at training volumes nobody outside elite athletics ever reaches.

If you're doing 3-5 workouts per week like a normal person, you can mix strength and cardio and get excellent results in both. Here's what the research actually shows.

Where the Myth Comes From

The interference effect entered fitness culture through a 1980 study by Robert Hickson. He had subjects train 11 sessions per week: strength work six days, running or cycling six days, with one rest day. That's not a typo. Eleven sessions. Per week.

Under that extreme protocol, yes, the concurrent training group showed less strength gain than the strength-only group. The study was well-designed for its purpose: understanding the limits of simultaneous adaptation in highly trained individuals. But it wasn't designed to answer whether a normal person doing 3-5 workouts per week can mix modalities effectively.

Fitness culture took that finding and ran with it. Cardio became the enemy of muscle. An entire generation of lifters avoided conditioning work because they thought it would compromise their gains.

The problem is that nobody checked whether this applied to normal training volumes. It took decades before researchers systematically reviewed what happens when regular people combine strength and cardio at reasonable frequencies.

What Modern Research Actually Shows

In 2022, Moritz Schumann and colleagues published a comprehensive meta-analysis examining 43 studies with 1,090 participants. They looked at what happens when people do concurrent training (combining strength and endurance work) compared to doing strength training alone.

The results were striking.

For maximal strength development, there was no significant difference between concurrent training and strength-only training. The statistical measure (standardized mean difference) was -0.06 with a p-value of 0.446. In plain terms, the difference was so small it could easily be random noise.

For muscle growth, the story was the same. No meaningful difference. People who combined modalities built just as much muscle as those who only lifted weights.

"But I've heard cardio raises cortisol and kills gains." This is technically true but practically irrelevant at normal training volumes. Yes, extended endurance work elevates cortisol. But so does heavy strength training. The transient spike in cortisol from a 20-minute conditioning piece isn't enough to meaningfully impact muscle protein synthesis, especially when you're eating and sleeping properly. Chronic under-recovery kills gains, not the cortisol from a finisher.

The only area where interference showed up was explosive power: vertical jump height and sprint performance. And even there, the effect was modest (standardized mean difference of -0.28). More importantly, when researchers looked at studies where people separated their strength and cardio sessions by at least three hours, that interference disappeared entirely.

This matches an earlier meta-analysis by Wilson et al. in 2012, which analyzed 21 studies and came to similar conclusions. For recreational trainees (people not at the edge of their genetic potential), combining strength and endurance work produces excellent results in both domains.

Why the Interference Effect Doesn't Apply to You

The key is training volume and recovery capacity.

Elite athletes train at volumes most people can't sustain. A competitive powerlifter might squat heavy three times per week, deadlift twice, bench three or four times. A competitive endurance athlete might run 60-100 miles per week. When you try to do both simultaneously at those volumes, yes, you run into problems. Your body can't recover from that much stimulus.

But if you're doing three to five workouts per week, mixing strength sets with intervals or a finisher, you're nowhere near that threshold. Your body has plenty of capacity to adapt to both stimuli. The interference effect requires pushing both systems so hard that recovery becomes impossible. Most people never get close to that point.

"But what if I'm training for a specific strength goal, like a powerlifting meet?" Then yes, specificity matters more. In the weeks leading up to competition, prioritize your sport-specific work and reduce other modalities. But even competitive powerlifters benefit from conditioning work in the off-season and early training phases—it improves work capacity, supports recovery, and maintains general health. The interference effect only becomes relevant when you're peaking for performance, not during the majority of your training year.

There's also the modality question. Running causes more interference than cycling because of the eccentric muscle damage from impact. But even there, Wilson's analysis showed the practical effects are negligible for non-elite populations. Yes, if you're trying to peak for a powerlifting meet, maybe skip the 10-mile runs in the weeks leading up to it. But for general fitness development, the trade-off is worth it.

"What about people over 40? Recovery is slower." True, recovery capacity decreases with age. But that doesn't mean you should avoid concurrent training—it means you should manage volume and intensity more carefully. The Schumann meta-analysis included participants across age ranges and found no meaningful interaction between age and interference effects. Older trainees benefit just as much from mixed-modal training; they just need to be smarter about programming, recovery, and listening to their bodies. If anything, maintaining both strength and cardiovascular fitness becomes more important with age, not less.

What You Gain from Mixing Modalities

Focusing exclusively on one quality means neglecting others. Pure strength training builds muscle and force production but does little for your cardiovascular system or work capacity. Pure endurance training improves aerobic capacity but doesn't build meaningful strength or muscle mass.

Most people don't need to maximize one thing at the expense of everything else. They need to be generally capable: strong enough to move heavy objects and conditioned enough to handle physical exertion without gassing out.

Mixed-modal training delivers that. You build strength through loaded movements and conditioning through high-intensity intervals or longer aerobic work. The result is a body that's useful across a range of demands.

"But I'm a beginner. Shouldn't I focus on just one thing first?" Beginners actually have a huge advantage: you can make progress on everything simultaneously. Novice lifters gain strength quickly, and adding conditioning work doesn't slow that down. Building work capacity early makes it easier to handle more training volume as you advance. You don't need to "earn" the right to do concurrent training. Start with mixed modalities from day one, just keep the volume reasonable while you're learning movement patterns.

This isn't just theoretical. Think about what fitness looks like in practice. Shovel the driveway without your lower back giving out. Move furniture without needing a two-hour recovery. Hike with a loaded pack without feeling destroyed the next day. Help someone move, then do your own workout that evening.

Pure specialization doesn't prepare you for that. A mix of qualities does.

The Research on Work Capacity

There's another benefit to concurrent training that doesn't get enough attention. Over time, it improves your work capacity.

When you regularly combine strength and conditioning, your body adapts to handle more total work. Your heart gets more efficient at delivering oxygen. Your muscles get better at clearing metabolic waste.

This shows up in practical ways. You can do more total work per session without feeling wrecked and recover faster between sets. The cumulative effect is that you can train more consistently, which matters more for long-term progress than any single session.

The interference effect studies focus on acute performance: what happens in a given training block. But fitness is a long game. The person who can train consistently four days a week for years will outpace the person who trains intensely for three months and then burns out.

Mixed-modal training supports consistency. It's less monotonous than doing the same movement patterns every session. It distributes stress across different systems, reducing overuse injuries. It keeps training interesting, which matters for adherence.

"What about muscle fiber type conflicts? Doesn't endurance work convert fast-twitch to slow-twitch?" This is overstated. While extreme endurance training can shift fiber type characteristics toward a more oxidative phenotype, the volume required is very high (well beyond typical concurrent training protocols). At normal concurrent training volumes (3-5 sessions per week mixing strength and cardio), fiber type shifts are minimal and don't meaningfully impact strength or power development. Your fast-twitch fibers aren't going anywhere from a 15-minute conditioning finisher.

Why Same-Session Training Works

Here's what the research actually supports for recreational trainees: you can do strength and conditioning in the same workout and get excellent results in both. No need to split them across the day or worry about interference.

The modest interference effect on explosive power that shows up in research? It applies to competitive power athletes chasing maximum vertical jump or sprint performance. If you're training for general fitness, strength, and conditioning, it's irrelevant. You're not leaving gains on the table by doing a conditioning finisher after your strength work.

Keep total volume reasonable. Two to three strength movements plus a conditioning piece is plenty. You don't need hour-long sessions for each modality. Thirty to sixty minutes of mixed training, done consistently, beats elaborate split routines you abandon after six weeks.

Let autoregulation guide intensity. Some days you'll be fresh and can push hard on both strength and conditioning. Other days you'll be beat up and need to dial it back. Fixed percentages and prescribed intensities don't account for daily fluctuation. Listening to your body does.

"Won't this compromise my explosive power for sports?" Only if you're a competitive athlete peaking for performance. For everyone else training for general fitness, same-session mixed training works great. The Schumann meta-analysis found the interference effect on power was modest to begin with, and for recreational trainees, the practical impact is negligible.

This is exactly why BringHIIT uses mixed-modal training by design. Each workout combines strength, conditioning, and sometimes cardio in a single session. The app doesn't make you choose between getting strong and building conditioning. It assumes you want both and structures training accordingly.

The strength portions use rate of perceived exertion (RIR) rather than fixed percentages. You tell the app you hit your target at RIR 2, and it knows that weight worked for you that day. Next time, it adjusts based on your performance. The conditioning work uses RPE for the same reason: intensity is relative to how you feel, not what a spreadsheet says you should do.

Everything is randomized where it creates novelty but structured where it matters. You're not repeating the same workout every week, but you're also not flailing randomly. Exercises rotate, rep schemes vary, but progression is tracked per movement over time. The result is training that stays interesting while still driving adaptation.

It's concurrent training done right. Enough variety to stay engaged, enough structure to make progress, and autoregulated intensity so you're pushing when you can and backing off when you need to.

What About Elite Athletes?

The interference effect is real for people at the edge of their capacity. If you're a competitive powerlifter peaking for a meet, adding a bunch of running probably isn't smart. If you're training for an ultramarathon, maximal strength work might compromise your recovery.

But that's a tiny percentage of people. Most recreational lifters are nowhere near the genetic limits of strength development. Most recreational runners are nowhere near elite endurance performance. For everyone in that middle ground (which is almost everyone), concurrent training works great.

Even for people with specific goals, the interference effect is overstated. CrossFit athletes are both strong and conditioned. Combat athletes lift heavy and do high-intensity intervals. Tactical athletes need to be capable across multiple domains.

The idea that you must specialize to make any progress is a myth that benefits nobody except people selling you specialized programming. For most people, being generally capable beats being extremely specialized in one thing.

The Bottom Line

The interference effect is real in extreme cases. If you're training 11 sessions per week at high volumes, yes, combining modalities will compromise each one. But if you're a regular person doing three to five workouts per week, mixing strength and cardio produces excellent results in both.

Modern research shows no meaningful interference for strength gains or muscle growth. Explosive power shows modest interference, but only at levels that matter for competitive athletes. For recreational trainees doing same-session mixed training, the benefits (improved work capacity, better recovery, more well-rounded fitness, and efficient use of your time) far outweigh any theoretical downsides.

You don't need to choose between getting strong and building conditioning. You can do both. The science supports it, and the practical results speak for themselves.

Stop avoiding cardio because you think it kills gains. Stop skipping strength work because you think it will slow you down. Train like a capable human who needs to be good at multiple things. Your body will adapt just fine.

References