Eur J Appl Physiol (2013) 113:775–783
DOI 10.1007/s00421-012-2487-5
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Different responses of selected hormones to three types of exercise
in young men
Keith A. Stokes • Kate L. Gilbert • George M. Hall
Robert C. Andrews • Dylan Thompson
Received: 24 April 2012 / Accepted: 29 August 2012 / Published online: 13 September 2012
Ó Springer-Verlag 2012
Abstract Exercise is a potent stimulus for release of
growth hormone (GH), cortisol, testosterone and prolactin,
and prolonged exercise inhibits insulin secretion. These
responses seem to be specific to the type of exercise but
this has been poorly characterised primarily because they
have not been compared during exercise performed by the
same individuals. We investigated hormone responses to
resistance, sprint and endurance exercise in young men
using a repeated measures design in which each subject
served as their own control. Eight healthy non-obese young
adults (18–25 years) were studied on four occasions in
random order: 30-s cycle ergometer sprint (Sprint), 30-min
resistance exercise bout (Resistance), 30-min cycle at 70 %
VO2max (Endurance), and seated rest in the laboratory
(Rest). Cortisol, GH, testosterone, prolactin, insulin and
glucose concentrations were measured for 60 min after the
four different interventions. Endurance and sprint exercise
significantly increased GH, cortisol, prolactin and testos-
terone. Sprint exercise also increased insulin concentra-
tions, whereas this decreased in response to endurance
exercise. Resistance exercise significantly increased only
Communicated by Fabio Fischetti.
K. A. Stokes (&)
K. L. Gilbert
D. Thompson
Department for Health, University of Bath,
Claverton Down, Bath BA2-7AY, UK
e-mail: k.stokes@bath.ac.uk
G. M. Hall
Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine,
St George’s, University of London, SW17-0RE, London, UK
R. C. Andrews
Diabetes and Metabolism, School of Clinical Sciences,
Learning and Research, Southmead Hospital,
University of Bristol, Bristol BS10-5NB, UK
•
testosterone and glucose. Sprint exercise elicited the largest
response per unit of work, but the smallest response rela-
tive to mean work rate in all hormones. In conclusion, the
nature and magnitude of the hormone response were
influenced by exercise type, perhaps reflecting the roles of
these hormones in regulating metabolism during and after
resistance, sprint and endurance exercise.
Keywords Exercise
Cortisol
Growth hormone

Prolactin
Insulin
Introduction
There has been a great deal of interest in the impact of
different types of exercise on health, and beneficial roles of
sprint exercise (Richards et al. 2010; Whyte et al. 2010)
and resistance exercise (Breen et al. 2011) for metabolic
health have been identified alongside the traditionally
accepted benefits of sustained exercise (Garber et al. 2011).
This is important in the context of promoting physical
activity and exercise options that individuals enjoy and to
which they will adhere, since different types of exercise
appeal to different people. For example, high intensity
interval exercise has been reported to be preferred over
continuous exercise in recreationally active men (Bartlett
et al. 2011) and individuals with coronary heart disease
(Guiraud et al. 2011). Understanding the physiological
responses to different types of exercise is also important for
identifying ways to maximise their beneficial effects. In
addition, this knowledge will be helpful in determining
what changes should be made in hormones such as insulin
and cortisol in patients with conditions such as Type 1
diabetes and/or Addison’s disease to best mimic normal
responses to different forms of exercise.
123
776
Physical exertion can elicit marked elevations in growth
hormone (GH), prolactin, testosterone and cortisol, and
prolonged exercise results in a decrease in circulating
insulin concentrations (Galbo 1985). The magnitude of the
hormone response is influenced by factors such as duration,
intensity (Brandenberger and Follenius 1975; Felsing et al.
1992) and type (e.g. resistance, sprint, endurance) of
exercise (Kraemer et al. 1990; Pritzlaff et al. 1999; Few
1974). Hence, it is likely that the different and specific
metabolic demands of resistance, sprint and endurance
exercise influence the hormone responses to these exercise
bouts. Characterising these responses is an important step
in improving understanding of the roles of exercise-
induced hormone release.
There is a large degree of inter-individual variability in
hormone responses to exercise, even when individuals are
homogenous for age, gender, mass and physical fitness
(Stokes 2003; Galbo 1985). In this context, it is difficult to
know whether previous descriptions of hormone responses
to one specific type of exercise can be compared with
another, that is, whether any differences are genuine dif-
ferences in the hormone response, or an artefact of com-
paring different individuals between studies. To our
knowledge, no research has investigated the hormone
responses to sprint, resistance, and endurance exercise
within the same group of individuals to establish whether
the specific metabolic demands of these exercise types
impact upon hormone responses. The GH response to
resistance and endurance exercise within the same indi-
vidual has been studied, but the response to sprint exercise
was not addressed (Consitt et al. 2007; Kindermann et al.
1982) and the effect of these exercise bouts on other hor-
mones that might influence metabolism was not studied
(Consitt et al. 2007; Gilbert et al. 2008). The aim of this
study was to characterise the response of selected hor-
mones to three bouts of exercise with very different met-
abolic demands (resistance, sprint and endurance exercise)
performed by the same individuals.
Methods
Subjects
Eight healthy men aged 18–25 [mean (SD); 22 (1) year, mass
84 (15) kg, VO _ 2max 53 (6) ml kg-1 min-1], who were
recreationally active but not trained in any specific sport,
volunteered to participate in this study. Subjects were
excluded from the investigation if they smoked, took regular
prescribed medication, had ever received endocrine therapy,
had experienced recent weight gain/loss, or were shift
workers. All subjects gave informed consent after receiving
123
Eur J Appl Physiol (2013) 113:775–783
written and oral information about the protocol. The study
was approved by the NHS Local Research Ethics Committee
and was carried out according to the Declaration of Helsinki.
Design
The study was a repeated measures design with one study
group completing four trials (resistance, sprint, endurance,
rest). Trial order was randomised using a latin square, with
participants finding out on the day which trial they would
be performing. Each trial was separated by at least 7 days.
Preliminary testing
Subjects attended the laboratory on two separate occasions
for preliminary tests. Each subject’s one repetition maxi-
mum (1RM) was determined using a Concept-2 DYNO
(Nottingham, UK) for: seated bench press, leg press and
seated bench pull. On a second visit, subjects practised
working against a resistance equivalent to 75 % of their
1RM, during a set of 10 repetitions of each of the exercises.
In the second visit (prior to the resistance exercise),
subjects also completed an incremental submaximal exer-
cise test to determine the relationship between work rate
and oxygen uptake, followed by an incremental test to
exhaustion to determine each subject’s maximal oxygen
uptake (VO _ 2max). Both tests were carried out on a cycle
ergometer (Monark, 824 E, Sweden). In the submaximal
test, subjects cycled continuously at 60 pedal revolutions
per minute at four progressively higher exercise intensities
(applied resistance of 1.5, 2.0, 2.5 and 3.0 kg) with each
stage lasting 4 min. Expired gas samples were collected in
the final minute of each stage. In the maximal test, subjects
cycled continuously at 60 pedal revolutions per minute at
progressively higher exercise intensities with each stage
lasting 3 min. The starting load was based on heart rate
data from the submaximal test and the applied resistance
was increased by 0.5 kg every 3 min such that the test
lasted between 9 and 12 min. Expired gas samples were
taken in the last minute of each stage and for a final minute
when the subject signalled that they could only manage one
more minute. From these data (the work rate vs. VO _ 2
_
relationship from the submaximal test and VO2max from the
maximal test), the work rate required to obtain an exercise
intensity equivalent to 70 % VO _ 2maxwas calculated. During
this visit, subjects were also familiarised with a 30-s sprint
protocol on a cycle ergometer (Monark, 824 E, Sweden).
Experimental protocol
On the morning of each trial, subjects arrived following
an overnight fast. Subjects recorded their dietary intake in
Eur J Appl Physiol (2013) 113:775–783
rest, resistance,
sprint or
endurance
exercise
Time (min) Pre-ex 0 20 40 60
Insert cannula
Venous blood sample
Fig. 1 Schematic diagram of the protocol
the 48 h before the first trial and reproduced this diet
prior to subsequent trials. Participants refrained from
consuming alcohol for 24 h and performing strenuous
exercise in the 48 h before each trial. On arrival at the
laboratory, a cannula (BD Venflon Pro, Beckton Dickin-
son & Co., Sweden) was inserted into an antecubital
forearm vein for blood sampling. The cannula was kept
patent by periodic flushing with isotonic saline. A resting
blood sample was taken with the subject in a seated
position at least 30 min after cannula insertion, just before
the warm-up. Further blood samples were taken in a
seated position immediately post-exercise, and 20, 40 and
60 min post-exercise (Fig. 1).
In the resistance trial, subjects completed a warm-up
(4-min treadmill walk at 5 km h-1 and self-selected
stretches) before commencing the resistance exercise.
Resistance exercise lasted 30 min. Subjects completed five
sets, with each set comprising 10 repetitions at 75 % 1RM
for seated bench press, followed by leg press, followed by
seated bench pull, with a 60 s rest between exercises and
180 s of rest between sets. An estimate of total work
performed (kJ) during the trial was calculated by the sum
of the force exerted (N) multiplied by the distance (m) for
each repetition. Work rate (W) was calculated by dividing
total work performed by the time spent carrying out the
exercise (8 min). In the sprint trial, subjects performed a
warm-up (cycling for 4 min at 60 W, 30 s at 80 W, and
then 30 s at 100 W) on a friction-loaded cycle ergometer.
Following a 5-min rest period, an all-out 30-s sprint from
a rolling start was performed against an applied resistance
equivalent to 7.5 % (75 N/kN) of the subject’s body mass
as previously described (Stokes et al. 2008). In the
endurance trial, subjects cycled for 30 min at a pedal
cadence of 60 rpm against a resistance required to elicit a
work rate equivalent to 70 % VO _ 2max. Work performed
was calculated using the applied resistance and the ‘‘dis-
tance covered’’ (flywheel circumference multiplied by
flywheel revolutions). In the rest trial, subjects rested in
the laboratory in a seated position for the duration of the
trial.
777
Analytical methods
Whole blood glucose was immediately determined (YSI
2300 STAT plus, Yellow Springs, Ohio, USA), and the
remaining blood dispensed into serum tubes and refriger-
ated for 60 min before centrifugation (Heraeus Biofuge
Primo R, Kendro Laboratory Products Plc., Bishops’
Stortford, England) at 5,000g for 10 min at 4 °C. Serum
was frozen at -80 °C for subsequent analysis for con-
centrations of GH, cortisol, prolactin, insulin and testos-
terone by routine ELISA (Diagnostic System Laboratories
Inc., Webster, TX, USA): GH (DSL-10-1900; standards
and controls were calibrated to the World Health Organi-
sation International Reference Reagent for GH 88/624)
intra-assay precision coefficient of variation (CV)\4.3 %,
inter-assay precision CV \ 6.6 %; prolactin (DSL-10-
4500) intra-assay CV \ 8.2 % inter-assay CV \ 10.4 %;
testosterone (DSL-10-4000) intra-assay CV \ 6.8 %, inter-
assay CV \ 4.9 %; cortisol (DSL-10-2000) intra-assay
CV \ 6.2 %. Insulin concentrations were determined using
RIA (Diagnostic System Laboratories Inc., Webster, TX,
USA; DSL-1600), intra-assay CV \ 8.3 %.
Statistical analysis
All data are presented as mean (SD). Area under curve
(AUC) was calculated using the trapezoid method for
70-min from the pre-exercise sample. This time period
incorporated the exercise bout plus 40 min of recovery for
the resistance and endurance trials and the exercise bout
plus 60 min of recovery in the sprint trial. Due to the
disparity in exercise time and work done in the three
exercise trials, AUC was also adjusted for the total work
completed (kJ) in each trial and the work rate (W) in each
trial. Data were analysed using SPSS version 10 (SPSS
Inc., Chicago, USA). One-way analysis of variance
(ANOVA) with repeated measures was used to investigate
the differences in AUC and adjusted AUC between trials.
Two-way ANOVA was used to investigate differences in
pre-exercise to peak/nadir concentrations of hormones
between trials. Significant effects were followed up using
Bonferroni adjusted t tests. Significance was accepted at
P B 0.05.
Results
Serum hormones
Growth hormone concentrations were significantly differ-
ent between trials (P = 0.034) and over time (P = 0.002).
There was also a different pattern of GH concentrations
between trials (interaction; P = 0.050). Post hoc t tests
123
778 Eur J Appl Physiol (2013) 113:775–783

A 35 B 800 b
c
30 700

serum prolactin (mIU/l)

600
25
Serum GH (mg/l)

500
20
c
b 400
15
300
10
200

5 100

0 0
pre- end 10 20 30 40 50 60 pre- end 10 20 30 40 50 60
time (min) time (min)

C 35 a,b,c D 800
b
c
30 700
serum testosterone (nmol/l)

serum cortisol (nmol/L)

600
25
500
20
400
15
300
10
200

5 100

0 0
pre- end 10 20 30 40 50 60 pre- end 10 20 30 40 50 60
time (min) time (min)

E 20 b F 6
18 a,b
5
16
blood glucose (mmol/l)
serum insulin (mIU/l)

14
4
12
d
10 3
8
2
6

4 c
1
2

0 0
pre- end 10 20 30 40 50 60 pre- end 10 20 30 40 50 60
time (min) time (min)

Fig. 2 Serum GH (a), prolactin (b), testosterone (c), cortisol (d) and differences between pre-exercise and maximum change from pre-
insulin (e) and blood glucose (f) concentrations during the rest (open exercise in the resistance (a), sprint (b), endurance (c) trials and from
diamonds), resistance (filled diamonds), sprint (filled squares) and peak to nadir values in the sprint trial (d)
endurance (filled triangles) trials. Letters identify significant

revealed a significant increase from pre-exercise to peak revealed significantly greater GH AUC in the endurance
GH concentrations in response to both sprint (P = 0.014) trial compared to both resistance (P = 0.014) and rest
and endurance (P = 0.009) exercise (Fig. 2a). There was a (P = 0.024) trials (Table 1), but no significant difference
significant trial effect for GH AUC, and post hoc t tests between sprint and endurance trials.

123
Eur J Appl Physiol (2013) 113:775–783 779

Table 1 Hormone responses to different exercise bouts. Data displayed as AUC (units per 70 min), AUC/kJ (hormone response per unit of work
performed in trial) and AUC/W (hormone response relative to mean work rate in each trial)
Rest Resistance Sprint Endurance

GH (ug/L/70 min)
AUC 90 (167) 232 (332) 401 (264) 758 (498)b,d
a
AUC/kJ – 4.3 (6.9) 19.7 (14.1) 2.3 (1.7)
AUC/W – 2.1 (3.3) 0.6 (0.4) 4.1 (3.0)c
Prolactin (mIU/L/70 min)
AUC 13,363 (5,760) 15,782 (6049) 24,204 (9,948)b,d 17,720 (5,627)
a a,b
AUC/kJ – 262 (137) 1191 (527) 52 (17)
AUC/W – 126 (66)c 36 (15) 94 (31)c
Insulin (mU/L/70 min)
AUC No data 582 (385)a 537 (323)a 261 (157)
a
AUC/kJ – 9.9 (7.7) 26.7 (18)a,b 0.8 (0.5)
ac
AUC/W – 4.8 (3.7) 0.8 (0.5) 1.4 (0.9)c
Testosterone (nmol/L/70 min)
AUC 1,729 (256) 1,709 (346) 1,626 (287) 1807 (304)
AUC/kJ – 27.9 (9.7)a 78.5 (19.2)a,b 5.3 (1.4)
AUC/W – 13.4 (4.6)a,c 2.4 (0.6) 9.5 (2.5)c
Cortisol (nmol/L/70 min)
AUC 26,964 (6,071) 28,485 (8,381) 34,459 (10,223)d 35,979 (7,081)b,d
a a,b
AUC/kJ – 467 (209) 1,681 (642) 104 (29)
AUC/W – 224 (100)c 50 (19) 188 (52)c
a
Significantly greater than endurance trial (P \ 0.05)
b
Significantly greater than resistance trial (P \ 0.05)
c
Significantly greater than sprint trial (P \ 0.05)
d
Significantly greater than rest trial (P \ 0.05)

Prolactin concentrations were significantly different
between trials (P = 0.004), but there was no main effect of
time (P = 0.076). There was a different pattern of pro-
lactin concentrations between trials (interaction;
P = 0.007) and post hoc t tests revealed a significant ele-
vation from pre-exercise to peak prolactin concentrations
in response to both sprint (P = 0.050) and endurance
(P = 0.003) exercise (Fig. 2b). There was a significant
trial effect for prolactin AUC, and post hoc t tests revealed
significantly greater prolactin AUC in the sprint trial
compared to the rest (P = 0.035) and resistance
(P = 0.032) trials (Table 1). Prolactin AUC was not sig-
nificantly different in sprint and endurance trials.
Testosterone concentrations were not different between
trials (P = 0.373), but there was a change over time
(P \ 0.001) and this change was different between trials
(interaction; P = 0.002). Post hoc t tests revealed a sig-
nificant elevation from pre-exercise to peak testosterone
concentrations in response to resistance (P = 0.020), sprint
(P = 0.001) and endurance (P = 0.002) exercise (Fig. 2c).
There were no significant differences in testosterone AUC
between trials (Table 1).
Cortisol concentrations were significantly different
between trials (P = 0.006) and there was a change over
time (P = 0.003). There was also a different pattern of
response between trials (interaction; P \ 0.001), and post
hoc tests revealed a significant elevation from pre-exercise
to peak cortisol concentration in response to sprint
(P = 0.004) and endurance (P = 0.001) exercise (Fig. 2d).
There was a significant trial effect cortisol AUC, and post
hoc t tests revealed a significantly greater cortisol AUC in
the endurance trial compared to both rest (P \ 0.001) and
resistance (P = 0.022) trials. The sprint trial also resulted
in significantly greater cortisol AUC than rest (P \ 0.001;
Table 1), but the response to sprint exercise was not sig-
nificantly different from responses to resistance or endur-
ance exercise.
Insulin concentrations were significantly different
between trials (P = 0.001) and there was a change over
time (P = 0.001). There was also a different pattern of
response between trials (interaction; P = 0.001), and post
hoc tests revealed a significant elevation from pre-exercise
to peak insulin concentrations in response to sprint
(P = 0.051) exercise, and a significant decrease from

123
780
pre-exercise insulin to nadir (P = 0.031) in the endurance
trial (Fig. 2e). There was a significant trial effect for insulin
AUC, and post hoc t tests revealed that both sprint and
resistance exercise elicited a significantly greater insulin
response than endurance exercise (P = 0.016 and
P = 0.03, respectively; Table 1). Due to limited sample
volume, no insulin data are available for the rest trial.
When data were presented per unit of work completed in
each trial, the sprint trial elicited the greatest response for
all hormones measured, and the endurance trial elicited the
smallest response for all hormones measured (Table 1).
When data were corrected for work rate within the three
exercise bouts, sprint exercise elicited the smallest
response in all hormones measured. Resistance exercise
elicited the greatest response per Watt for prolactin, tes-
tosterone, insulin and cortisol with endurance eliciting the
largest GH response (Table 1).
Blood glucose
Glucose concentrations were not different between trials
(P = 0.135), but there was a change over time (P \ 0.001)
and the pattern of change was different between trials
(interaction; P = 0.001). Post hoc tests revealed a signifi-
cant elevation from pre-exercise to peak glucose concen-
trations in response to sprint (P \ 0.001) and resistance
exercise (both P = 0.026) and a significant decrease from
peak to nadir glucose concentrations in response to sprint
(P = 0.016) exercise (Fig. 2f). There were no significant
differences in glucose AUC between trials.
Work performed, work rate and intensity
Total work performed during the endurance trial [351 (39)
kJ] was significantly greater than that performed during both
the resistance [64 (11) kJ; P \ 0.001] and sprint [21 (3) kJ;
P \ 0.001] trials, and the resistance trial involved signifi-
cantly more work than the sprint trial (P \ 0.001). Mean
work rate during the sprint trial [706 (96) W] was signifi-
cantly greater than during both the resistance [133 (24) W;
P \ 0.001] and endurance [195 (21); P \ 0.001] trials, and
the endurance trial was also performed at a significantly
higher intensity than the resistance trial (P = 0.001).
Plasma volume changes
Data were not corrected for changes in plasma volume. The
greatest changes were observed between pre-exercise and
30 min after the start of exercise (-16, -16, -18 and -4 % in
resistance, sprint, endurance, and rest trials, respectively). By
60 min after the start of exercise, plasma volume had returned
to approximate values seen pre-exercise (0, 0, -1 and -2 % in
resistance, sprint, endurance, and rest trials, respectively).
123
Eur J Appl Physiol (2013) 113:775–783
Discussion
The aim of this study was to investigate the hormone
responses induced by resistance, sprint and endurance
exercise in the same individuals. The main finding was that
sprint and endurance exercise elicited a significant
response in all of the hormones studied, whereas resistance
exercise only elicited changes in testosterone concentra-
tions. The different types of exercise employed in this
study were designed to have very different characteristics
in terms of the amount of work done and work rate and
they elicited different hormone responses, pointing towards
the hormone response to exercise being specific to the
metabolic demands of the exercise stimulus. The findings
also suggest that approaches to hormone administration in
patients with Type 1 Diabetes and/or Addison’s disease
should be considered with reference to the specific exercise
being undertaken.
The starkest difference in any response to the different
types of exercise is for insulin. A single 30-s sprint elicited
an increase in insulin concentrations, whereas 30 min of
sub-maximal cycling resulted in a decrease in insulin
concentrations. This supports previous reports that exercise
stimulates either an increase or decrease in insulin con-
centrations depending on the metabolic demands of the
exercise bout (Kindermann et al. 1982). During sub-
maximal exercise with stable or decreasing blood glucose
concentrations, as seen in the endurance trial in the present
study, insulin concentrations decrease probably as a result
of elevated catecholamine concentrations (Wasserman and
Cherrington 1991) to ensure that the body preserves
enough glycogen to maintain function beyond the demands
of exercise. Increased insulin concentrations as seen fol-
lowing the sprint trial, and in a previous study (Stokes et al.
2002), might facilitate muscle glycogen synthesis during
recovery through insulin’s actions on both glucose trans-
port and on glycogen synthase activity. The significant
increase in insulin concentrations following sprint exercise
in the present study is followed by a suppression of blood
glucose concentrations to levels below pre-exercise. This
finding might have implications for individuals who have
difficulty regulating blood glucose concentrations, such as
individuals with impaired glucose tolerance. In this con-
text, it is of note that as little as 2 weeks of sprint training
has been shown to improve insulin sensitivity in healthy
(Richards et al. 2010) as well as sedentary overweight/
obese (Whyte et al. 2010) individuals. Similarly, a role for
sprint exercise in protecting against a fall in blood glucose
concentrations during subsequent endurance exercise in
those with Type I diabetes has been proposed (Bussau et al.
2007).
Cortisol and growth hormone responses to exercise
have been reported to be related to exercise intensity
Eur J Appl Physiol (2013) 113:775–783
(Kindermann et al. 1982; Wahl et al. 2010). The present
study was designed to harness the large differences in
factors such as total work done, work rate and the meta-
bolic demand between resistance, sprint and endurance
exercise. Our findings suggest that the hormone response is
associated with the specific demands of a given exercise
bout, and in order to try to account for the differences in
total work performed and work rate in the exercise bouts,
AUC was adjusted for these factors. Differences between
trials remained when these adjustments were made, sug-
gesting that although work done and work rate are
important in regulating exercise-induced hormone release,
there are other factors that play a role. In this context, it is
notable that peak concentrations of both cortisol and
growth hormone were observed at the end of endurance
exercise, when insulin was lower than pre-exercise and
blood glucose concentrations were stable. These combined
responses likely promote the availability of free fatty acids
toward the end of exercise and into recovery via increased
lipolysis. In contrast, peak cortisol and growth hormone
concentrations occurred 30–40 min after sprint exercise,
when insulin had returned to pre-exercise concentrations
but glucose concentrations were falling. These findings
support the notion of co-ordinated primary counter-regu-
latory roles against insulin for both cortisol and growth
hormone in the exercise context, and it is possible that
these hormones have important roles to play in the regu-
lation of post-exercise substrate utilisation (Pritzlaff et al.
2000).
The present findings also suggest that the pituitary
hormones respond to a specific demand induced by the
exercise bout rather than exercise acting as a stimulus for a
global hypothalamic-pituitary stress response. The evi-
dence for this is that endurance exercise stimulated the
greatest release of GH while sprint exercise stimulated the
greatest release of prolactin. Prolactin has previously been
reported to have a pronounced response to short duration
high intensity exercise, but not to endurance exercise
unless it is of long duration (Rojas Vega et al. 2012). It
would be interesting to carry out an investigation similar to
the present study in untrained and highly trained individ-
uals, since it is possible that a generalised stress response
would be observed in untrained individuals, and a response
that is more specific to the demands of the exercise in
athletes (Crewther et al. 2011).
Resistance exercise resulted in a small but significant
testosterone response, but not a significant GH, prolactin or
cortisol response. In contrast, previous studies have
reported significant GH and cortisol responses to resistance
exercise (Kraemer et al. 1999; Kraemer and Ratamess
2005). In the present study, the cortisol response showed a
gradual decline more similar to the pattern observed in the
rest trial. A possible reason for these findings might be that
781
the protocol employed did not include eccentric muscle
actions. However, concentric contractions appear to be
primarily responsible for the GH response to resistance
exercise as the addition of eccentric contractions did not
alter the GH response (Yarrow et al. 2007). This suggests
another explanation for the lack of a GH, prolactin and
cortisol response in the present study; possibly that the
protocol employed was not sufficiently demanding. As
alluded to above, the hormone response to exercise
depends on factors such as the exercise intensity, volume
and duration of exercise and rest periods (Kraemer et al.
1990; Davis et al. 1981; Few 1974), and testosterone
concentrations have been reported to either increase
(Hakkinen and Pakarinen 1995; Kraemer et al. 1991) or
decrease (McCall et al. 1999) in response to resistance
exercise in young men depending on the protocol
employed. In the present study, although testosterone
concentrations were significantly elevated in response to all
exercise trials, the percent increases were very similar to
the decreases seen in plasma volume, suggesting that
exercise might not have caused significant secretion of
testosterone, but rather altered concentrations might be due
to a reduction in plasma volume (Kindermann et al. 1982).
Notwithstanding the possibility that the resistance
training protocol employed in the present study was not
sufficiently demanding, the fact that there was no differ-
ence in the testosterone response in the three exercise trials
and that there was a large GH response to endurance
exercise brings into question the purported anabolic role of
the GH and testosterone response to resistance exercise.
This adds to the growing debate regarding the contribution
of exercise-induced hormone secretion to training adapta-
tion (West et al. 2010) and indicates that concepts of
anabolic (e.g. testosterone and growth hormone) and cat-
abolic (e.g. cortisol) hormones might be over-simplistic. In
this context, it is likely that hormones are permissive
within a physiological range, with excess or deficit of
hormones impacting on performance and health; however,
we have reported an association between overnight tes-
tosterone (but not growth hormone or cortisol) concentra-
tions and overnight protein synthesis (Betts et al. 2011),
suggesting an effect of elevated testosterone, particularly at
the upper end of the physiological range. Overall, it is
difficult to identify specific physiological roles in adapta-
tion for either the individual hormone or overall hormone
response to exercise. However, the growth hormone
response might impact upon tendon collagen synthesis
(Doessing et al. 2010), while the prolactin response to
exercise has been proposed to have a role in neurogenesis
(Rojas Vega et al. 2012). Studies that selectively and
specifically block the secretion and/or action of these
hormones will be helpful in uncovering the roles of the
hormone response to exercise.
123
782
If area under the curve is taken as a reflection of the
overall response of each of these hormones to the exercise
bout, it is interesting to note the effect that calculating this
in relation to the amount of work performed (AUC/kJ) and
the mean work rate (AUC/W) in each exercise (Table 1).
When reported without any adjustment for these variables,
the endurance exercise trial resulted in the greatest growth
hormone, testosterone and cortisol concentrations, but
when expressed as area under the curve per unit of work,
sprint exercise resulted in the greatest values for all hor-
mones and endurance exercise resulted in the smallest.
Furthermore, when expressing values relative to mean
work rate, resistance exercise resulted in the greatest values
for prolactin, insulin, testosterone and cortisol, although
this must be considered in the context that resistance
exercise did not elicit a significant response in any hor-
mone other than testosterone, and this interpretation is
therefore a function of low work rate. If the hormone
response to exercise is considered to be important, under-
standing how different ways of expressing the hormone
response to exercise can change the interpretation of the
data is important. That said, the total response of a hor-
mone (in addition to factors such as pattern of secretion,
presence of binding proteins/globulins and tissue receptor
levels) is key to the biological action and so inferences
must always be made with reference to the absolute (not
adjusted) hormone concentrations. Nevertheless, under-
standing how the amount of work performed and the work
rate influence hormone responses to exercise might be
useful in terms of exercise prescription. This is particularly
important in the context of evolving physical activity rec-
ommendations that include a variety of exercise options
(Chief Medical Officers of England W, Scotland, Northern
Ireland 2011). For example, the responses to sprint exercise
observed in the present study were achieved by completing
a relatively small total amount of work in a short period of
time. These robust responses might contribute to the
apparent health benefits reported following brief periods of
sprint training (Richards et al. 2010; Whyte et al. 2010).
The findings of this study also have implications for
specific patient groups. For example, it appears that in
patients with Addison’s disease an increase in cortisol
might not be needed to mimic a normal response to resis-
tance exercise, although this is likely to depend on the
intensity and duration of the resistance exercise bout. In
addition, it appears that in patients with Type 1 diabetes,
insulin doses only need to be reduced with endurance
exercise and perhaps not with sprint and resistance exercise
where they might even need to be increased. However,
since we investigated hormone responses in healthy indi-
viduals in the present study, further studies in these specific
patient groups are required to confirm the translation of our
results.
123
Eur J Appl Physiol (2013) 113:775–783
Conclusion
This study has shown that selected hormones respond
differently to the exercise models investigated in the same
individuals, indicating a specific response to the demands
of the exercise, rather than a global exercise-induced hor-
mone response. These variations in the nature and magni-
tude of the hormone responses might reflect the specific
roles of these hormones in regulating metabolism in the
face of differing demands during and after resistance, sprint
and endurance exercise, which might, in turn, impact upon
adaptation to training.
Acknowledgments The authors would like to acknowledge Con-
cept-2 for the loan of the DYNO resistance exercise machine used in
this study.
Conflict of interest The authors do not have any conflicts of interest
to declare.
References
Bartlett JD, Close GL, MacLaren DPM, Gregson W, Drust B, Morton
JP (2011) High-intensity interval running is perceived to be more
enjoyable than moderate-intensity continuous exercise: implica-
tions for exercise adherence. J Sports Sci 29(6):547–553. doi:
10.1080/02640414.2010.545427
Betts JA, Beelen M, Stokes KA, Saris WHM, van Loon LJC (2011)
Endocrine responses during overnight recovery from exercise:
impact of nutrition and relationships with muscle protein
synthesis. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab 21(5):398–409
Brandenberger G, Follenius M (1975) Influence of timing and
intensity of muscular exercise on temporal patterns of plasma
cortisol levels. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 40(5):845–849
Breen L, Philp A, Shaw CS, Jeukendrup AE, Baar K, Tipton KD
(2011) Beneficial effects of resistance exercise on glycemic
control are not further improved by protein ingestion. PLoS One
6 (6). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0020613
Bussau VA, Ferreira LD, Jones TW, Fournier PA (2007) A 10-s sprint
performed prior to moderate-intensity exercise prevents early
post-exercise fall in glycaemia in individuals with type 1
diabetes. Diabetologia 50(9):1815–1818. doi:10.1007/s00125-
007-0727-8
Chief Medical Officers of England W, Scotland, Northern Ireland
(2011) Start active, stay active: a report on physical activity from
the four home countries’ Chief Medical Officers. doi:
http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/
PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_128209
Consitt LA, Bloomer RJ, Wideman L (2007) The effect of exercise
type on immunofunctional and traditional growth hormone. Eur J
Appl Physiol 100(3):321–330. doi:10.1007/s00421-007-0431-x
Crewther BT, Cook C, Cardinale M, Weatherby RP, Lowe T (2011)
Two emerging concepts for elite athletes the short-term effects
of testosterone and cortisol on the neuromuscular system and the
dose-response training role of these endogenous hormones.
Sports Med 41(2):103–123. doi:10.2165/11539170-000000000-
00000
Davis HA, Gass GC, Bassett JR (1981) Serum cortisol response to
incremental work in experienced and naive subjects. Psychosom
Med 43(2):127–132
Eur J Appl Physiol (2013) 113:775–783
Doessing S, Heinemeier KM, Holm L, Mackey AL, Schjerling P,
Rennie M, Smith K, Reitelseder S, Kappelgaard AM, Rasmussen
MH, Flyvbjerg A, Kjaer M (2010) Growth hormone stimulates
the collagen synthesis in human tendon and skeletal muscle
without affecting myofibrillar protein synthesis. J Physiol (Lond)
588(2):341–351. doi:10.1113/jphysiol.2009.179325
Felsing NE, Brasel JA, Cooper DM (1992) Effect of low and high-
intensity exercise on circulating growth-hormone in men. J Clin
Endocrinol Metab 75(1):157–162
Few JD (1974) Effect of exercise on secretion and metabolism of
cortisol in man. J Endocrinol 62(2):341–353
Galbo H (1985) The hormonal response to exercise. Proc Nutr Soc
44(2):257–266
Garber CE, Blissmer B, Deschenes MR, Franklin BA, Lamonte MJ,
Lee IM, Nieman DC, Swain DP, Amer Coll Sports M (2011)
Quantity and quality of exercise for developing and maintaining
cardiorespiratory, musculoskeletal, and neuromotor fitness in
apparently healthy adults: guidance for prescribing exercise.
Med Sci Sports Exerc 43(7):1334–1359. doi:10.1249/MSS.
0b013e318213fefb
Gilbert KL, Stokes KA, Hall GM, Thompson D (2008) Growth
hormone responses to 3 different exercise bouts in 18-to 25-and
40-to 50-year-old men. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab 33(4):706–712.
doi:10.1139/h08-034
Guiraud T, Nigam A, Juneau M, Meyer P, Gayda M, Bosquet L
(2011) Acute responses to high-intensity intermittent exercise in
CHD patients. Med Sci Sports Exerc 43(2):211–217. doi:10.1249/
MSS.0b013e3181ebc5de
Hakkinen K, Pakarinen A (1995) Acute hormonal responses to heavy
resistance exercise in men and women at different ages. Int J
Sports Med 16(8):507–513
Kindermann W, Schnabel A, Schmitt WM, Biro G, Cassens J, Weber
F (1982) Catecholamines, growth-hormone, cortisol, insulin, and
sex-hormones in anaerobic and aerobic exercise. Eur J Appl
Physiol Occ Med 49(3):389–399
Kraemer WJ, Ratamess NA (2005) Hormonal responses and adap-
tations to resistance exercise and training. Sports Med
35(4):339–361
Kraemer WJ, Marchitelli L, Gordon SE, Harman E, Dziados JE,
Mello R, Frykman P, McCurry D, Fleck SJ (1990) Hormonal and
growth-factor responses to heavy resistance exercise protocols.
J Appl Physiol 69(4):1442–1450
Kraemer WJ, Gordon SE, Fleck SJ, Marchitelli LJ, Mello R, Dziados
JE, Friedl K, Harman E, Maresh C, Fry AC (1991) Endogenous
anabolic hormonal and growth-factor responses to heavy resis-
tance exercise in males and females. Int J Sports Med
12(2):228–235
Kraemer WJ, Hakkinen K, Newton RU, Nindl BC, Volek JS,
McCormick M, Gotshalk LA, Gordon SE, Fleck SJ, Campbell
WW, Putukian M, Evans WJ (1999) Effects of heavy-resistance
training on hormonal response patterns in younger vs. older men.
J Appl Physiol 87(3):982–992
783
McCall GE, Byrnes WC, Fleck SJ, Dickinson A, Kraemer WJ (1999)
Acute and chronic hormonal responses to resistance training
designed to promote muscle hypertrophy. Can J Appl Physiol
24(1):96–107
Pritzlaff CJ, Wideman L, Weltman JY, Abbott RD, Gutgesell ME,
Hartman ML, Veldhuis JD, Weltman A (1999) Impact of acute
exercise intensity on pulsatile growth hormone release in men.
J Appl Physiol 87(2):498–504
Pritzlaff CJ, Wideman L, Blumer J, Jensen M, Abbott RD, Gaesser
GA, Veldhuis JD, Weltman A (2000) Catecholamine release,
growth hormone secretion, and energy expenditure during
exercise vs. recovery in men. J Appl Physiol 89(3):937–946
Richards JC, Johnson TK, Kuzma JN, Lonac MC, Schweder MM,
Voyles WF, Bell C (2010) Short-term sprint interval training
increases insulin sensitivity in healthy adults but does not affect
the thermogenic response to beta-adrenergic stimulation. J Phys-
iol (Lond) 588(15):2961–2972. doi:10.1113/jphysiol.2010.
189886
Rojas Vega S, Hollmann W, Struder HK (2012) Influences of exercise
and training on the circulating concentration of prolactin in
humans. J Neuroendocrinol 24(3):395–402. doi:10.1111/j.1365-
2826.2011.02266.x
Stokes K (2003) Growth hormone responses to sub-maximal and
sprint exercise. Growth Horm IGF Res 13(5):225–238
Stokes KA, Nevill ME, Hall GM, Lakomy HKA (2002) Growth
hormone responses to repeated maximal cycle ergometer exer-
cise at different pedaling rates. J Appl Physiol 92(2):602–608
Stokes KA, Tyler C, Gilbert KL (2008) The growth hormone response
to repeated bouts of sprint exercise with and without suppression
of lipolysis in men. J Appl Physiol 104(3):724–728. doi:
10.1152/japplphysiol.00534.2007
Wahl P, Zinner C, Achtzehn S, Bloch W, Mester J (2010) Effect of
high- and low-intensity exercise and metabolic acidosis on levels
of GH, IGF-I, IGFBP-3 and cortisol. Growth Horm IGF Res
20(5):380–385. doi:10.1016/j.ghir.2010.08.001
Wasserman DH, Cherrington AD (1991) Hepatic fuel metabolism
during muscular work: role and regulation. Am J Physiol
260(6):E811–E824
West DWD, Burd NA, Tang JE, Moore DR, Staples AW, Holwerda
AM, Baker SK, Phillips SM (2010) Elevations in ostensibly
anabolic hormones with resistance exercise enhance neither
training-induced muscle hypertrophy nor strength of the elbow
flexors. J Appl Physiol 108(1):60–67. doi:10.1152/japplphysiol.
01147.2009
Whyte LJ, Gill JMR, Cathcart AJ (2010) Effect of 2 weeks of sprint
interval training on health-related outcomes in sedentary over-
weight/obese men. Metabol Clin Exp 59(10):1421–1428. doi:
10.1016/j.metabol.2010.01.002
Yarrow JF, Borsa PA, Borst SE, Sitren HS, Stevens BR, White LJ
(2007) Neuroendocrine responses to an acute bout of eccentric-
enhanced resistance exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc 39(6):
941–947. doi:10.1097/mss.0b013e318043a249
123
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without
permission.