In the 1940s, William Sheldon, a professor at the University of Houston, proposed the concept that all people fall into one of three body types, or somatotypes.
It was brave. It was revolutionary. It was complete nonsense.
The whole concept is a three sizes-one-size-fits-all classification systems have never been supported by science. In fact, it has been rejected almost since its introduction. But that’s not enough to slow down the flow of misinformation Sheldon relies on personal observation.
If you’ve forgotten or are mercifully ignorant of this classic piece of junk science, a quick recap might be in order.
What are the 3 different body types?
Like many of us, chances are you learned about the three somatotypes in high school health class. And on the surface, they probably looked pretty reasonable.
Ectomorph
An ectomorph is defined as being tall, thin, with a thin waist and low body fat or muscle mass. Gaining weight can be difficult, but losing weight is relatively easy. Think Zoe Saldana or Bruce Lee.
Endomorph
According to Sheldon, endomorphs have large reserves of body fat and muscle, making it easier to gain weight and harder to lose. Here Serena Williams or Chris Pratt (approx Parks and Recreation).
Mesomorph
Mesomorphs are athletic, tough and strong – a day walker between the other two somatotypes. Let’s go with Mark Wahlberg or Alex Morgan.
Are body types real?
Again, Sheldon’s somatotypes are inaccurate and oversimplify the human body.
“Few people fit perfectly into one of the classic body types,” says Trevor Thiem of CSCS. “Most people have a mix of them. For example, you can be a ‘mesomorph’ in the upper body and an ‘ectomorph’ in the lower body. But being able to categorize your body type is not important because of what it does for you: your body in training inform how to respond not necessarily.”
So why is this fitness myth so hard to break?
“I think it’s because most people want an easy solution to fitness and fat loss,” says Thiem. “The idea that if you have X body type, you should focus on Y type of exercise shows that.”
But that way of thinking is outdated, Thieme said. “You need to start with your goals, because that will determine your training program regardless of your ‘body type’.”
Can you change your body shape?
Somatotype doesn’t predict training response, which means there’s only so much you can do to change your body composition. It’s really freeing to start with a goal (like getting more muscular) and then work backwards to determine the optimal workout plan.
If you’re a classic ectomorph, that means you don’t need to run the distance pumping iron. If you’re an endomorph and you’ve made your marathon list, there’s no reason not to train.
The point here is that you never know what you’re capable of until you try it. But it’s important to know what’s in your control and what’s not.
The role of genetics
To be clear, the fact that somatotypes do not predict performance does not mean that learning domains are equal. Regardless of your goals or the path to get there, what’s written in your DNA is still important, so you’re more likely to meet people who travel faster or slower than you.
“There are many factors we can use to our advantage depending on our goals, such as frequency of training, intensity of training, what exercises to prioritize, length of time in the program, nutritional factors, etc., but it’s also important to understand that some people make the right parenting choices.” said. Tony GentilcoreCSCS, owner of CORE, his training studio in Brooklyn, Massachusetts.
“Some people grow up just looking at dumbbells. Some people struggle tooth and nail and need to exercise a lot To see the fruits of their labor,” he added.
The most important factors in choosing an exercise
This is regardless of your end goal. “But at the end of the day, what ‘works’ is what you love to do and stick with,” Gentilcore said.
So tailor your training to your goals, exercise preferences, time constraints, strengths and weaknesses, advises Thieme. “Your training plan should be tailored to your individuality, not based on your non-exercising body type.”
History of somatotypes
Sheldon didn’t even catalog body types for fitness purposes. He was a psychologist who believed attachment was possible personality features for every body type. He was more interested in how our bodies could shape our character than how they functioned.
Sheldon assumed that ectomorphs were introverted, artistic, and emotionally acute. Endomorphs are cheerful, calm and sociable. Mesomorphs are brave, adventurous and competitive.
If that sounds like a 1940s word for bull poop, like poppycock, bald, or some other word, it is: Sheldon’s entire motivation for doing research has been dismissed.
“During the post-World War II years, Sheldon’s toxic views of Eugenics and his equating of physicality with fate further discredited him,” according to a 2015 article. Canadian Medical History Bulletin. “The death blow to his career was delivered by his female assistant, Barbara Honeyman Heath. Publicly denouncing his methods as fraud and somatotyping as wrong, she changed somatotyping techniques and went on to a successful career participating in projects all over the world.”
Why do body style myths persist?
With such a hard knock from the medical and fitness establishment, Sheldon’s idea of three basic body types is the Segway, the Zune, the New Cox, and Cheetos lip balm (yes, it was a real product).
But as a quick Google search will tell you, the myth of somatotypes is incredibly powerful. London is just one of many examples Daily mail “Scientists say we all fall into three groups (and knowing your shape is important for choosing the right exercises).”
The three-body theory quickly gained traction and soon became more or less conventional wisdom, where it has remained ever since. Somatotype, like astrology, is effective, because almost everyone can find their own characteristics in almost any “personal” sign.
Sorry if we spoiled the horoscope for you.
