In the 1940s, a University of Houston professor named William Sheldon coined 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 term a three sizes for everyone the classification system has never been supported by science. In fact, he was completely rejected almost from the moment of introduction. But that did little to slow the flow of misinformation, which Sheldon based mostly on personal observations.
Just in case you’ve forgotten or been mercifully spared this classic piece of junk science, a quick review might be in order.
What are the 3 different body types?
Like most of us, there’s a good chance you learned about the three somatotypes in health class. And, on the surface, they probably seemed pretty reasonable.
An ectomorph
Ectomorphs are described as tall and lean, with a thin waist and little body fat or muscle mass. Gaining weight can be difficult, but losing weight comes relatively easily. Think Zoe Saldana or Bruce Lee.
Endomorph
According to Sheldon, endomorphs carry abundant reserves of body fat and muscle, which makes gaining weight easy and losing weight difficult. Here, think of Serena Williams or Chris Pratt (approx Parks and recreation).
Mesomorph
Mesomorphs are characterized as athletic, tough and strong – day walkers 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 grossly oversimplify the human body.
“Few people fit perfectly into one of the classic body types,” says Trevor Thieme, CSCS. “Most people are a mess of them. For example, you may have an upper body as a “mesomorph” and a lower body as an “ectomorph”. But being able to classify your body type isn’t really important, because it won’t necessarily inform you of what it means: how your body will respond to training.”
So why is this? fitness myth hard to get rid of?
“I think it has a lot to do with the fact that most people want a simple solution when it comes to fitness and fat loss,” says Thieme. “And the idea that if you have X body type then you should focus on Y type of exercise provides that.”
But such thinking is backwards, says Thieme. “You should start with your goalbecause it will shape your training program, regardless of your ‘body type’.”
Can you change your body shape?
Somatotype doesn’t predict response to training, which means there’s only so much you can do change body composition. And starting with your goal (say, getting more muscular), then working backwards to determine your optimal training plan is actually quite liberating.
This means that if you are a classic ectomorph, you don’t have to favor long-distance running pumping iron. And if you’re an endomorph, there’s no reason why you shouldn’t train for a marathon if it’s on your bucket list.
The key point here is that you’ll never know what you’re capable of until you try it. But it is important to know what is and what is not in your control.
The role of genetics
To be clear, just because somatotypes don’t predict performance doesn’t mean the training ground is level. Regardless of your destination or the route you take to get there, chances are you’ll encounter others traveling faster or slower than you, because what’s written in your DNA still matters.
“There are many factors that we can manipulate to our advantage, depending on the goals — frequency of training, intensity of training, which exercises we prioritize, programming periodizationnutritional factors — but it’s also important to understand that some people chose the right parents,” he says Tony GentilcoreCSCS, owner of CORE, its training studio in Brookline, Massachusetts.
“Some people just look at a dumbbell and grow. Some people have to fight tooth and nail and exercise a lot in order to see the fruits of their work”, he adds.
The most important factors in choosing training
And this is the case regardless of your end goal. “But at the end of the day, what will ‘work’ is whatever you really love to do and stick with it consistently,” says Gentilcore.
So tailor your training to your goals, exercise preferences, time constraints, and strengths and weaknesses, advises Thieme. “Your training plan needs to be tailored to you as an individual, not based on a body type category that wasn’t even created with exercise in mind.”
History of somatotypes
Sheldon didn’t even catalog body types for fitness purposes. He was a psychologist who claimed that it was possible to bond personality traits every body type. He was more interested in how our bodies can shape our character than how they actually function.
Sheldon hypothesized that ectomorphs were introverted, artistic, and emotionally intense. Endomorphs are cheerful, relaxed and social. Mesomorphs are assertive, adventurous and competitive.
If that sounds like chicken, bullshit, or any other 1940s word for bull’s effluvium, it is: Sheldon’s entire motivation for his research is thoroughly debunked.
“Sheldon’s toxic eugenics views and equating of physique with fate made him increasingly unpopular in the years after World War II,” according to a 2015 article. Canadian Bulletin of Medical History. “The death of his career was brought about by his former assistant, Barbara Honeyman Heath. Publicly denouncing his methods as bogus and his somatotypes inaccurate, she went on to build a successful career modifying somatotyping techniques and participating in projects around the world.”
Why does the body type myth persist?
One would think that with such harsh criticism of the medical and fitness establishment, Sheldon’s idea of three primary body types would have gone like the Segway, the Zune, the New Coca-Cola and Cheetos lip balm (yes, it was a real product).
But the somatotype myth is surprisingly strong, as any quick Google search will tell you. For just one of too many examples, London Daily Mail the newspaper claimed: “Scientists say we all fit into three groups (and knowing your shape is key to choosing the right workout).”
The theory of three body types attracted so much attention so quickly that it soon became more or less conventional wisdom, where it remains to this day. Similar to the zodiac, somatotyping works because almost everyone can find characteristics of themselves in almost any “personalized” sign.
We’re sorry if we just ruined astrology for you too.
