Contemporary exercise physiology: fifty years after the closure of Harvard Fatigue Laboratory.

The relationships between the discipline of exercise physiology and the activities of the Harvard Fatigue Laboratory were examined. Even though 5 decades have elapsed since the Laboratory's closure, its existence, leaders, and accomplishments continue to be revered by exercise physiologists. The Laboratory was unique because it was the first research facility of its type and because no single exercise physiology laboratory in the United States since 1947 has been able to attract the stature of the national and international investigators that conducted the interdisciplinary research published by the Laboratory. Despite the inference from its name, the Laboratory's purpose was not to advance the discipline of exercise physiology; rather, it was to advance our understanding and interactions of applied physiology, physiology, and sociology. Consequently, its contributions to the critical mass of exercise physiology literature were limited even though may of the publications were seminal in nature. As documented by the Horvaths, the closure resulted in the establishment of many different research laboratories by former Laboratory staff members and associates (R.E. Johnson at Illinois, Horvath at Santa Barbara, and Dill at Nevada); however, their impact on exercise physiology was delayed because Keys and Robinson had left for Minnesota and Indiana, respectively, well in advance of closing. Unfortunately, the administrative structure and organization of the Laboratory was not conducive to the training of Ph.D candidates with an interest in exercise physiology. Consequently, only two individuals graduated during its existence. Since departments of physiology or biology had limited faculty or interest in preparing students for such a future before and after closure, departments of physical education with specialization graduate programs in exercise physiology assumed this responsibility, which was facilitated by post-World War II funding that supported mass education, graduate training, health related research, and facility development. Today, the majority of the leaders in exercise physiology are the "products" of the specialization movement. Although undergraduates were encouraged to participate in the research activities, the talented faculty of the Laboratory did not offer formal courses in exercise physiology. Thus, the development of an academic discipline in exercise physiology was left to institutions that required a science-oriented curriculum in their undergraduate and graduate degree programs in physical education, exercise science, or kinesiology. The emergence of exercise physiology as a discipline in the United States was enhanced by the publications of the Journal of Applied Physiology in 1948 and by Medicine and Science in Sports in 1969. These were peer-reviewed journals that were interested in publishing research studies on exercise topics. Two other reasons contributed to its development. The first was the creation of an Applied Physiology Study Section at the National Institute of Health in 1964, whose purpose was to evaluate grant proposals in subject matter area intrinsic to exercise physiology, while the second reason was the formation of the American College of Sports Medicine in 1954. ACSM was an important for the establishment of the discipline because it had an organizational structure that encouraged exercise physiologists to join, provided opportunities for members to present at regional and national meetings, and would publish their findings. Although the American Physiological Society had been established more than a 100 years ago, only a limited number of its members were interested and active in exercise physiology at the time of the Laboratory's closure or at the beginning of the specialization era (1963). However, in 1977, APS created a membership section that included exercise physiology in its title. Currently, both APS and ACSM are effectively representing the professional interests of exercise ph