The Stretching Verdict: International Experts Weigh-In With Practical Recommendations
20 leading researchers reach consensus on what stretching can and cannot do, destroying many popular fitness myths.
Twenty leading stretching researchers from around the world have reached consensus on what stretching can and cannot do for your health and fitness, settling some long-standing debates while challenging popular misconceptions. The consensus statement, published using a rigorous Delphi process requiring 80% expert agreement, analysed eight key areas where stretching is commonly used: range of motion, strength performance, muscle growth, tissue stiffness, injury prevention, recovery, posture correction, and cardiovascular health.
While stretching does improve flexibility and reduce muscle stiffness, the panel found it doesn’t work as an all-purpose injury prevention tool. It won’t significantly build muscle or strength, fails to improve posture on its own, and doesn’t enhance post-workout recovery. Surprisingly, emerging evidence suggests stretching may benefit cardiovascular health, though more research is needed.
Aim
The international expert panel set out to resolve contradictions in the stretching literature and provide evidence-based guidelines that practitioners, athletes, and health professionals can actually use. They aimed to create standardised definitions for different stretching types (static, dynamic, and PNF) and deliver clear recommendations based on systematic reviews rather than assumptions. The consensus process addressed both acute (immediate) and chronic (long-term) effects of stretching across eight application areas where conflicting evidence or misconceptions exist.
Methods
The research team assembled 20 experts from 12 countries across four continents, all with at least five published peer-reviewed articles on stretching and substantial practical experience coaching athletes or working in clinical settings. The panel included strength coaches, physical therapists, exercise physiologists, and researchers with backgrounds ranging from Olympic-level coaching to rehabilitation. Using the Delphi method, experts reviewed existing systematic reviews on stretching topics, then participated in multiple blinded rounds of voting on proposed recommendations until reaching at least 80% agreement. For stretching definitions, the process required three rounds with agreements of 90% for static stretching, 80% for dynamic stretching, and 85% for PNF stretching. The panel examined evidence on acute and chronic stretching effects on range of motion, strength, muscle hypertrophy, stiffness, injury risk, post-exercise recovery, posture, and cardiovascular health.
Results
The panel reached 95% consensus that stretching effectively increases range of motion both acutely (with as little as two bouts of 5-30 seconds) and chronically (with 2-3 sets of 30-120 seconds daily), though alternative methods like foam rolling or resistance training work equally well. However, they agreed at 95% consensus that prolonged static stretching over 60 seconds per muscle should be avoided before maximal or explosive exercises, as it temporarily reduces force production. For chronic strength gains, the panel reached 85% consensus that stretching is not a primary strategy, though high-volume stretching (at least 15 minutes per muscle, five times weekly for six weeks minimum) may produce small improvements for those unable to do resistance training. Similarly, 90% of experts agreed that stretching isn’t recommended for building muscle mass, though similar high volumes may yield small hypertrophy effects.
