Home/Physical/Andy Galpin/Female Training Myths: What the Research Actually Shows

Female Training Myths: What the Research Actually Shows

A myth-busting look at female-specific training claims, grounded in a peer-reviewed RCT, showing several popular train-around-your-cycle rules are not supported by rigorous data.

StrengthWomen's Health
Not endorsed · based on the published work of Andy Galpin
At a glance
Time
Reference / evidence review
Type
Physical
Colenso-Semple's RCT used gold-standard methods (urinary ovulation tests plus blood-hormone confirmation of cycle phase, muscle biopsies, deuterium-oxide tracing) in women across follicular and luteal phases with a within-subject unilateral design.
What the evidence says
Track for information
Track your cycle for information, not for training rules Log cycle day and phase; do not assume you must shift training around it

Knowing your phase is useful context, but the RCT found no reason to build your training plan around it.

Perform with Dr. Andy Galpin, Ep. 27
Train hard year-round
Train hard year-round regardless of cycle phase Heavy compound lifts and standard progressive overload, unchanged week to week

The RCT found no phase effect on the anabolic response to resistance exercise.

Colenso-Semple et al., J Physiol 2025
Testosterone myth
Do not assume low testosterone limits your gains Train for relative strength and size the same way regardless of sex-hormone differences

Women build relative strength and size at rates comparable to men, including through menopause; testosterone differences do not explain a training-response gap.

Perform with Dr. Andy Galpin, Ep. 27
Watch fueling, not phase
Watch low energy availability, not cycle phase, as the real risk Prioritize eating enough to support training load, especially around hard sessions

Under-fueling (RED-S), not which week you train in, is what disrupts hormones and performance.

Perform with Dr. Andy Galpin, Ep. 27
Be a skeptical consumer
Be a skeptical consumer of cycle-syncing content Ask whether a claim comes from a controlled study with confirmed cycle-phase testing, not just a popular framework

Much popular cycle-syncing advice outruns what the controlled research actually shows.

Perform with Dr. Andy Galpin, Ep. 27
The evidence 4

Colenso-Semple's RCT used gold-standard methods (urinary ovulation tests plus blood-hormone confirmation of cycle phase, muscle biopsies, deuterium-oxide tracing) in women across follicular and luteal phases with a within-subject unilateral design.

View sources
Perform with Dr. Andy Galpin, Ep. 27: Female Training, Hormones & Nutrition, Fact vs Fiction Listen open.spotify.com Plays here
Female Training, Hormones & Nutrition: Fact vs Fiction | Perform with Dr. Andy Galpin Watch youtube.com
Female Training, Hormones & Nutrition: Fact vs Fiction (show notes) Read performpodcast.com
Colenso-Semple et al., Menstrual cycle phase and muscle protein synthesis, J Physiol 2025 Read physoc.onlinelibrary.wiley.com

Not medical advice. This page is for education only and is not a substitute for professional medical care. Consult a qualified clinician before changing your health routine.
Independent curation. YourProtocol is an independent platform. This protocol is based on the publicly available work of Andy Galpin and is not created, reviewed, endorsed by, or affiliated with Andy Galpin or Exercise Physiologist · Parker University.

Is this for you
  • Women who lift and want evidence over hype
  • Coaches programming for female athletes
  • Anyone confused by cycle-syncing training claims
  • Readers of Sims' cycle-based protocols who want the contrasting RCT evidence
Cautions
  • This is an evidence-review / training-literacy protocol, not individualized medical advice
  • It reviews one RCT's mechanistic muscle-protein-synthesis findings and does not contradict fueling or periodization guidance elsewhere on this site
  • Individual response varies; persistent cycle-related symptoms that affect training deserve a conversation with a physician
  • Educational only, not medical advice
Get the next protocol first
Evidence updates, cited to the source. No spam.