As I’ve mentioned up to this point in this series on GLP-1 agonist medications and fitness, we’re in a new era of body recomposition.
The GLP-1 revolution—led by medications like semaglutide and tirzepatide—has shifted the conversation from willpower to physiology. For the first time in decades, people struggling with obesity have access to pharmaceutical tools that directly address their biology, not just their behavior. Nevertheless, as a former strength and conditioning coach and educator, I find myself asking a question that not nearly as many in popular culture seem to be talking about:
If your physiology changes, shouldn’t your training change too?
The short answer is yes, but not in the way most people think.
As a result, here’s what I’m seeing in the field, what I believe needs to change, and why the timeless fundamentals of resistance training still matter more than ever.
Myth #1: “More Cardio Is Better on the Shot”
Let’s get this one out of the way early. Many GLP-1 users, especially those who come from a “calories in, calories out” mindset, still seem to default to ramping up cardio when the scale starts to move. Look at the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) Guidelines over the years, and one can see a clear proclivity for favoring aerobic exercise over strength training. To be clear, this makes a lot of sense as walking, running, cycling, etc. generally require significantly less skill than resistance training activity, and if our goal is to get people moving and “get them on base” to start creating better health behaviors and habits, I’m all for it. And while cardiovascular exercise is critical, there’s one glaring problem with this strategy:
Cardio burns calories. Resistance training builds tissue.
Think of it this way: if you were to consult a CPA for advice on building generational wealth and achieving financial stability—provided you aren’t overwhelmed by debt—they would likely recommend monitoring your spending while emphasizing the importance of saving and investing. It is important to note that it is beyond my expertise to offer financial advice, but I can assert with confidence that maximizing contributions to employer-sponsored investment accounts, such as 401(k)s, 403(b)s, and employer-sponsored IRAs, would almost certainly be part of that conversation. Why? Because these accounts take advantage of the power of compound interest, and if the 7-year rule is accurate, they can double in value approximately every seven years. This means that wealth can grow exponentially, with the numbers doing much of the work for you.
Now, you might be wondering how this relates to exercise and GLP-1 agonists. In my view, I liken cardiorespiratory exercise to a checking or savings account. These activities are essential for everyday life (for instance, paying your bills, saving for emergencies, planning a nice vacation, or handling unexpected expenses) but may not be effective for building long-term wealth. Consequently, someone trying to lose weight and maintain their health while using GLP-1 agonists, who only relies on cardio, is similar to a person who ignores investing and solely depends on their checking and savings accounts to grow their wealth. They may achieve some results, but compared to incorporating strength training and muscle-oriented strategies—similar to making wise investments—they are missing out on significant compounding effects. If you believe that health is wealth, it becomes clear why this approach may not be ideal over time.
Additionally, in the context of an already reduced appetite, increasing cardio can further enhance the calorie deficit. This raises the risk of losing muscle instead of just fat. For individuals already at risk of sarcopenia, frailty, or impaired metabolic flexibility, this is a concerning trade-off. In contrast, resistance training helps maintain lean body mass, supports mitochondrial function, and preserves metabolic rate—factors that become increasingly critical when food intake is reduced. So, if you’re on GLP-1s and considering doubling your Peloton rides, I encourage you to pause and ask: What am I aiming to preserve, not just lose?
Myth #2: “I Don’t Need to Eat as Much… Right?”
Technically, yes, but context is everything.
GLP-1s curb appetite. That’s part of how they work. But appetite suppression doesn’t equal nutrient sufficiency—and this is where things get murky. Many users dramatically under-consume protein, amino acids, and critical micronutrients because they are simply not hungry.
This is a recipe for muscle loss. In my practice, I’ve seen clients on GLP-1s struggle to hit even 60 grams of protein per day—when the goal for most should be closer to 1.6–2.2g/kg of body weight, especially if they’re strength training. What we coach instead is something I call:
“Non-Hunger-Based Eating.”
This means fueling for function, not just fullness. We reframe protein shakes and meals as training tools, not just food. Because on GLP-1s, what you eat becomes just as important—if not more so—than how much you eat.
Myth #3: “I Can Train Just Like I Used To”
Maybe. Maybe not. Here’s what I’ve noticed anecdotally in the field:
Clients on GLP-1s often present with increased fatigue, lower training tolerance, and delayed recovery—especially during the first 4–8 weeks of medication. Some report lightheadedness, dizziness, or feeling “gassed” much sooner in their sessions than usual.
This doesn’t mean they’re lazy. It means their physiology is adjusting.
And as coaches, we need to meet them where they are without lowering the bar. That means adjusting:
- Tempo – slower eccentrics can drive intensity without needing heavy loads.
- Volume – fewer sets, more rest, and a focus on compound movements.
- Split structure – favor full-body 2–3x/week over high-frequency body part splits.
- Recovery protocols – emphasize sleep, hydration, and active recovery between sessions.
In other words, the training principles don’t change. But the delivery method might.
The Basics Still Work—They Just Need Refinement
There’s a temptation in both medicine and fitness to reinvent the wheel when something new enters the arena. But here’s the truth:
Progressive overload still works.
Protein still matters.
Sleep still reigns supreme.
What GLP-1s have changed is the starting point—and that’s where we, as strength coaches, can make the biggest difference.
Instead of burning clients out with unnecessary cardio, we anchor them in strength.
Instead of letting them waste away from under-nutrition, we coach them into strategic fueling.
Instead of treating their transformation like a sprint, we build habits that last for decades.
GLP-1s might open the door—but the fundamentals walk them through it.
Final Word: The Strength Coach’s Role in the Age of GLP-1s
Our industry is changing fast. We’re no longer just fighting against poor diets and sedentary lifestyles. We’re helping clients navigate pharmacological landscapes that alter hunger, metabolism, and cognition.
But in that chaos, one thing remains true:
In quoting Dr. Gabrielle Lyon, Muscle is still the “organ of longevity.”
And strength training—thoughtfully applied, progressively loaded, and intelligently coached—is still our best prescription for long-term health, confidence, and independence.
So yes, you should train differently on GLP-1s.
Not softer. Not easier. Smarter.
The real goal isn’t just to lose weight; it’s to become someone strong enough to carry the life they’ve built.
