This paper compares the methods for prescribing exercise according to various contemporary authorities. The programs are compared as to their goals, the testing modalities and physiological parameters used for prescription of the initial training session, and the methods and the progression of training. Regarding goals, there is a general agreement that aerobic capacity is the most important component. There is much variance with regard to the pretesting session, especially regarding the benefits of the exercise electrocardiogram and who should give the stress test. The widest discrepancies between authors are found in the criteria for prescription of the initial training session. Some authors recommend interval training, others continuous training, while others avoid any strict regimen for training. The question of both the optimal and the minimal number of days per week to elicit the training effect is still open to question. While some commonality was found among the authors sampled, it would appear that further research is warranted in the field of exercise prescription. (Author/JA)