A response to letter to the editor: A genetic-based algorithm for personalized resistance training

COMMENT Following the recent publication of our paper, “A genetic-based algorithm for personalized resistance training” [1], we read with interest the recent Letter from Karanikolou et al. [2] discussing the proposed limitations within our study. First, to clarify a point; the Authors of the Letter say: “Based on this derived power/endurance score, subjects were assigned to either an endurance or power genotype training group involving lowintensity or high-intensity resistance training, respectively”. This is incorrect, the subjects were assigned the power or endurance training protocol randomly in a double blind study, so that neither athletes nor trainers knew the outcome of the ‘power/endurance’ (P/E) algorithm until they were revealed after all the training and tests were complete. It is apparent that there is some confusion in the Letter as to what the aim of this study was. It was a training intervention study; the intervention in this case being the use of a specific algorithm. This was not a genetic association (observational) study and we tested only one hypothesis; that is, genetically matched athletes (i.e. high-intensity trained with power genotype or low-intensity trained with endurance genotype) show greater improvements in performance tests in response to highor low-intensity resistance training compared to genetically mismatched athletes (i.e. high-intensity trained with endurance genotype or low-intensity trained with power genotype). The genetic associations for five specific genetic markers listed in our paper were for information only and they were not the main results, since we used a panel of 15 gene polymorphisms previously reported to be individually associated with A response to letter to the editor: A genetic-based algorithm for personalized resistance training