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 notion of a three-size-fits-all classification system has never been supported by science. In fact, it has been abandoned almost since its introduction. But that has done little to slow the flow of misinformation, which Sheldon based largely on personal observation.
Just in case you’ve forgotten or have been mercifully spared awareness of this classic junk science, a brief review may be in order.
What are the 3 different body types?
Like many of us, there’s a good chance you learned about the three somatotypes in a senior health class. And, on the surface, they probably seemed quite reasonable.
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. Imagine Zoe Saldana or Bruce Lee.
endomorphs
According to Sheldon, endomorphs hold large reserves of body fat and muscle, making weight gain easy and thus weight loss more difficult. Here, think Serena Williams or Chris Pratt (approx Parks and Recreation).
Mesomorph
Mesomorphs are characterized as athletic, rigid and strong – day travelers 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 mixture of them. For example, you may have the upper body of a ‘mesomorph’ and the lower body of an ‘ectomorph’. But being able to classify your body type doesn’t really matter because it won’t necessarily tell you what it does: how your body will respond to exercise.”
So why is it so hard to dispel this fitness myth?
“I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that most people want an easy fix when it comes to fitness and fat loss,” says Thieme. “And the idea that if you have body type X, then you should focus on type Y exercise, ensures that.”
But such thinking is backward, says Thieme. “You have to start with your goal, because that will shape your training program, regardless of your ‘body type’.”
Can you change your body shape?
Somatotype doesn’t predict exercise response, which means you can do a lot to change your body composition. And starting with your goal (say, getting more muscular), then working backwards to determine your optimal training plan is actually very liberating.
This means that if you’re a classic ectomorph, you don’t have to favor distance running over pumping iron. And if you’re an endomorph, there’s no reason why you shouldn’t train for a marathon if that’s on your bucket list.
The bottom line here is that you’ll never know what you’re capable of until you try. But it is important to know what is and what is not under your control.
The role of genetics
To be clear, just because somatotypes do not predict performance does not mean that the training field is level. Regardless of your goal or the path you take to get there, chances are you’ll encounter others traveling it faster or slower than you, because what’s written in your DNA is still important.
“There are many factors we can manipulate to our advantage depending on the goals—training frequency, training intensity, what exercises we prioritize, periodization of programming, nutritional factors—but it’s also important to understand that some people chose to parent right,” says Tony Gentilcore. CSCS, owner of CORE, his training studio in Brookline, Massachusetts.
“Some people just look at a dumbbell and they grow. Some people have to fight tooth and nail and work LOT to see the fruits of their labor,” he adds.
The most important factors in choosing a workout
And this is the case regardless of your end goal. “But at the end of the day, what’s going to ‘work’ is whatever you love to do and stick with it consistently,” says Gentilcore.
So tailor your training to your goals, training preferences, time constraints, and strengths and weaknesses, advises Thieme. “Your exercise plan should 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 become attached personality features for every body type. He was more interested in how our bodies could shape our character than how they actually functioned.
Sheldon hypothesized that ectomorphs are introverted, artistic, and emotionally intense. Endomorphs are cheerful, relaxed and sociable. Mesomorphs are confident, adventurous and competitive.
If this sounds like poppycock, balderdash, or some other 1940s word for bull’s-eye, then it is: Sheldon’s entire motivation for his study is completely invalidated.
“Sheldon’s toxic eugenic views and equation of physics with fate in the years after World War II made him increasingly unpopular,” according to a 2015 article in Canadian Bulletin of Medical History. “The death knell of his career was delivered by his former female assistant, Barbara Honeyman Heath. Publicly denouncing his methods as fraudulent 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?
You’d think that with that kind of backlash from the medical and fitness establishment, Sheldon’s idea of three main body types would have gone the way of the Segway, Zune, New Coke, and Cheetos Lip Balm (yes, that was a product true ).
But the myth of somatotypes is surprisingly strong, as any quick Google search will tell you. For just one of many examples, that of London Daily Mail The paper claimed, “Scientists say we all fall into three groups (and knowing your shape is key to choosing the right workout).
The theory of the three body types gained so much attention so quickly that it quickly passed more or less into conventional wisdom, where it has remained ever since. Like the zodiac, somatotyping works because almost everyone can find their characteristics in almost any “custom” label.
Sorry if we just ruined astrology for you too.
