The results of the cardiovascular testing of the Nautilus-only group were, according to Dr. Peterson, conclusive:

On NONE of the 60 indices purporting to evaluate the effects of the training on the cardiovascular function was the control group better on the final testing period (or on the change from initial to final) than the whole body [Nautilus-only] group. The following significant differences (.05 level*) were caused by the training afforded to the whole body group: Lower HR at 360, 1080, 1260, 1620, and 1800 kpm/min; lower STTI at 360 and RPE at 1260; a higher amount of work necessary before the subject achieved a heart rate of 170; a longer ride time; and a lower time required to run 2 miles. These calculations mean that the training caused the players [subjects] to work more efficiently (lower HR) at light, moderate and near maximal levels. They could also do more work before reaching a heart rate of 170, as well as more total work. Their improvement in their 2-mile run performances also indicates that they were less stressed at a maximal levels. For the coach and athlete, the implication is clear: these subjects could perform at a more efficient rate for a longer period of time. In the athletic arena, where contests are frequently decided by inches or other fractions, such training could play an important role.

While conventional strength training practices have precluded cardiovascular improvement owing to the long, arbitrary rest periods between sets--which prevents maintenance of an elevated pulse rate, in Project Total Conditioning the Nautilus-only group kept their rest periods as brief as possible, ultimately reducing their rest time to only several seconds.

Those supervising Project Total Conditioning were keenly aware of the importance of flexibility in human performance, and used four measures here as well: trunk flexion, trunk extension, shoulder flexion, and shoulder extension. The actual subjects achieved a much higher degree of improvement than did the control group. In fact, they averaged an 11% increase in flexibility, while the control group members averaged less than a 1% increase (.85).

And, finally, with regard to body composition, the supervised subjects performing the brief, infrequent Nautilus-only workouts lost more bodyfat than the control group.

Doctors from Kenneth Cooper's Aerobic Institute in Dallas were present to conduct the cardiovascular tests, with doctors from West Point doing the strength testing, and with Nautilus involved in NONE of the testing. Here is the conclusion, drawn by Dr. James E. Peterson, the man who conducted this experiment on behalf of West Point:

Contrary to most commonly held beliefs on the subject of strength training, the training also significantly improved the cardiovascular condition of the subjects. By maintaining the intensity of the workouts at a high level and by limiting the amount of rest between exercises, the training resulted in improvements on each of 60 separate measures of cardiovascular fitness. Contrary to widespread opinion, not only will a properly conducted strength training program produce increases in muscular strength, but will also significantly improve an individual's level of cardiovascular conditioning. The data suggests that some of these cardiovascular benefits apparently cannot be achieved by any other type of training.

In the present study, by maintaining the intensity of the training at a high level, substantial improvement was achieved in both the level of muscular fitness and the cardiovascular condition of the experimental subjects. In addition to enabling the subjects to accommodate more resistance in a shorter period of time, the level of aerobic capacity of the experimental subjects was significantly increased. These results are contrary to the traditional viewpoint that weight training does not affect the cardiovascular efficiency of the individual trainee. Obviously, however, the consequences of a weight-training program are dependent upon the methods and equipment used in the program. Utilizing the mechanical and design advantages of Nautilus weight training equipment, a high intensity workout of relatively short duration resulted in improvement in more than merely the level of muscular fitness. Unfortunately, the misinformation and speculation attendant to many traditional practices in weight training have hampered the search for insight and clarification into the proper ways to train and the benefits of such training. Hopefully, the results of "Project Total Conditioning" provide, not only a partial solution to many of the enigmas associated with weight training, but also the impetus for additional scientific inquiry into this area. 1

After Project Total Conditioning other independent scientists and researchers found that this “total fitness” training effect could be replicated with Nautilus-only training. Drs. Stephen P. Messier and Mary Elizabeth Dill, of Wake Forest University wrote:

In terms of improvement in V02 Max: These results suggest that for a training period of short duration, Nautilus circuit weight training appears to be an effective means of enhancing cardio respiratory fitness and an equally effective alternative to running programs. 2

Seeing the potential medical value of the above data, additional testing was performed to better contrast the value of traditional aerobic exercise as against the new strength training circuit model (pioneered by Nautilus) as preventative medicine for middle-aged men considered to be medically at risk for coronary heart disease. This study, performed by the doctors at the University of Maryland, concluded that:

The results of this study suggest that Strength Training and Aerobic Training have comparable effects on risk factors for Coronary Heart Disease. In Summary, 20 weeks of Strength training had the same effect as 20 weeks of Aerobic Training on risk factors for Coronary Heart Disease. 3

And the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, along with the Union Memorial Hospital in Baltimore, Maryland further corroborated the benefit of circuit weight training for cardiac rehabilitation patients, concluding that:

Circuit weight training appears to be safe, and to result in significant increases in aerobic endurance and musculoskeletel strength compared with traditional exercise (aerobic only) used in cardiac rehabilitation programs. In fact a control group of cardiac patients engaged in only a walk/jog program did not improve. 4

LOWER BACK PAIN RESEARCH AT THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA

In the mid 1980s Nautilus funded a ten-year research project with the School of Medicine at the University of Florida to look into the best rehabilitative means of treating patients with lower back pain. The purpose of the study was to help determine the effects of exercise for the purpose of preventing osteoporosis or for the rehabilitation of people suffering the effects of osteoporosis.

The findings were that high intensity Nautilus exercise (featuring the Nautilus Lower Back machine, which provides non-supportive resistance to the erector spinae muscles of the lower back) dramatically helped seniors, younger patients and athletes alleviate these problems. 5

Nautilus – the world fitness leader in research and development for more efficient and effective ways to total fitness.

Notes on text:

1. Excerpted from: Project Total Conditioning, Conducted at the United States Military Academy at West Point, NY. James A. Peterson, Ph.D. Paper presented to the Pre-Montreal Olympic Conference of the International Congress of Physical Activity Sciences, Quebec City, Canada, and July 15, 1976.

2. Consequent to Nautilus Weight Training, by Stephen P. Messier and Mary Elizabeth Dill, Wake Forest University.

3. Excerpted from: Aerobic Versus Strength Training for Risk factor Intervention in Middle-Aged Men at Risk for Coronary Heart Disease, M.A. Smutok, C. Reece, P.F. Kokkinos, C. Farmer, P. Dawson, R. Shulman, J. DeVane-Bell, J. Patterson, C. Charabogos, A. P. Goldberg, and B.F. Hurley, University of Maryland.

4. Excerpted from: Circuit Weight Training in Cardiac Patients, M. Kelemen, MD, FACC, K.J. Stewart, EdD, R. E. Gillian, MD, C.K. Ewart, PhD., S.A. Valenti, MD, J.D. Manley, BS, M.D. Kelemen, John Hopkins School of Medicine, Union Memorial Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland.

5. Jones, A., Pollock, M. Graves, J., Fulton, M., Jones, W., MacMillan, M., Baldwin, D., and J.Cirulli (1988). Safe, specific testing and rehabilitative exercise for muscles of the lumbar spine. Santa Barbara, California: Sequoia Communications.