While resistance exercise should be a logical choice for prevention of strength loss during unloading, the principle of training specificity cannot be overlooked. Our purpose was to explore training specificity in describing the effect of our constant load exercise countermeasure on isokinetic strength performance. Twelve healthy men (mean ± SD: 28.0 ± 5.2 years, 179.4 ± 3.9 cm, 77.5 ± 13.6 kg) were randomly assigned to no exercise or resistance exercise (REX) during 14 days of bed rest. REX performed five sets of leg press exercise to volitional fatigue (6-10 repetitions) every other day. Unilateral isokinetic concentric-eccentric knee extension testing performed before and on day 15 prior to reambulation included torque-velocity and power-velocity relationships at four velocities (0.52, 1.75, 2.97, and 4.19 rad·s-1), torque-position relationship, and contractile work capacity (10 repetitions at 1.05 rad·S-1). Two (group) X 2 (time) ANOVA revealed no group X time interactions; thus, groups were combined. Across velocities, angle-specific torque fell 18% and average power fell 20% (p < 0.05). No velocity X time or mode (concentric/eccentric) X time interactions were noted. Torque X position decreased on average 24% (p < 0.05). Total contractile work dropped 27% (p < 0.05). Results indicate bed rest induces rapid and marked reductions in strength and our constant load resistance training protocol did not prevent isokinetic strength losses. Differences between closed-chain training and open-chain testing may explain the lack of protection.