Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 4 of 4 items for

  • Author: Anna K. Melin x
Clear All Modify Search
Open access

Anna K. Melin, Ida A. Heikura, Adam Tenforde and Margo Mountjoy

The reported prevalence of low energy availability (LEA) in female and male track and field athletes is between 18% and 58% with the highest prevalence among athletes in endurance and jump events. In male athletes, LEA may result in reduced testosterone levels and libido along with impaired training capacity. In female track and field athletes, functional hypothalamic amenorrhea as consequence of LEA has been reported among 60% of elite middle- and long-distance athletes and 23% among elite sprinters. Health concerns with functional hypothalamic amenorrhea include impaired bone health, elevated risk for bone stress injury, and cardiovascular disease. Furthermore, LEA negatively affects recovery, muscle mass, neuromuscular function, and increases the risk of injuries and illness that may affect performance negatively. LEA in track and field athletes may occur due to intentional alterations in body mass or body composition, appetite changes, time constraints, or disordered eating behavior. Long-term LEA causes metabolic and physiological adaptations to prevent further weight loss, and athletes may therefore be weight stable yet have impaired physiological function secondary to LEA. Achieving or maintaining a lower body mass or fat levels through long-term LEA may therefore result in impaired health and performance as proposed in the Relative Energy Deficiency in Sport model. Preventive educational programs and screening to identify athletes with LEA are important for early intervention to prevent long-term secondary health consequences. Treatment for athletes is primarily to increase energy availability and often requires a team approach including a sport physician, sports dietitian, physiologist, and psychologist.

Restricted access

Louise M. Burke, Bronwen Lundy, Ida L. Fahrenholtz and Anna K. Melin

The human body requires energy for numerous functions including, growth, thermogenesis, reproduction, cellular maintenance, and movement. In sports nutrition, energy availability (EA) is defined as the energy available to support these basic physiological functions and good health once the energy cost of exercise is deducted from energy intake (EI), relative to an athlete’s fat-free mass (FFM). Low EA provides a unifying theory to link numerous disorders seen in both female and male athletes, described by the syndrome Relative Energy Deficiency in Sport, and related to restricted energy intake, excessive exercise or a combination of both. These outcomes are incurred in different dose–response patterns relative to the reduction in EA below a “healthy” level of ∼45 kcal·kg FFM−1·day−1. Although EA estimates are being used to guide and monitor athletic practices, as well as support a diagnosis of Relative Energy Deficiency in Sport, problems associated with the measurement and interpretation of EA in the field should be explored. These include the lack of a universal protocol for the calculation of EA, the resources needed to achieve estimates of each of the components of the equation, and the residual errors in these estimates. The lack of a clear definition of the value for EA that is considered “low” reflects problems around its measurement, as well as differences between individuals and individual components of “normal”/“healthy” function. Finally, further investigation of nutrition and exercise behavior including within- and between-day energy spread and dietary characteristics is warranted since it may directly contribute to low EA or its secondary problems.

Restricted access

Helen G. Hanstock, Andrew D. Govus, Thomas B. Stenqvist, Anna K. Melin, Øystein Sylta and Monica K. Torstveit

Intensive training periods may negatively influence immune function, but the immunological consequences of specific high-intensity training (HIT) prescriptions are not well defined.

Purpose:

This study explored whether three different HIT prescriptions influence multiple health-related biomarkers and whether biomarker responses to HIT were associated with upper respiratory illness (URI) risk.

Methods:

Twenty-five male cyclists and triathletes were randomised to three HIT groups and completed twelve HIT sessions over four weeks. Peak oxygen consumption (V̇O2peak) was determined using an incremental cycling protocol, while resting serum biomarkers (cortisol, testosterone, 25(OH)D and ferritin), salivary immunoglobulin-A (s-IgA) and energy availability (EA) were assessed before and after the training intervention. Participants self-reported upper respiratory symptoms during the intervention and episodes of URI were identified retrospectively.

Results:

Fourteen athletes reported URIs, but there were no differences in incidence, duration or severity between groups. Increased risk of URI was associated with higher s-IgA secretion rates (odds ratio=0.90, 90% CI:0.83-0.97). Lower pre-intervention cortisol and higher EA predicted a 4% increase in URI duration. Participants with higher V̇O2peak reported higher total symptom scores (incidence rate ratio=1.07, 90% CI:1.01-1.13).

Conclusions:

Although multiple biomarkers were weakly associated with risk of URI, the direction of associations between s-IgA, cortisol, EA and URI risk were inverse to previous observations and physiological rationale. There was a cluster of URIs within the first week of the training intervention, but no samples were collected at this time-point. Future studies should incorporate more frequent sample time-points, especially around the onset of new training regimes, and include athletes with suspected or known nutritional deficiencies.

Open access

Louise M. Burke, Linda M. Castell, Douglas J. Casa, Graeme L. Close, Ricardo J. S. Costa, Ben Desbrow, Shona L. Halson, Dana M. Lis, Anna K. Melin, Peter Peeling, Philo U. Saunders, Gary J. Slater, Jennifer Sygo, Oliver C. Witard, Stéphane Bermon and Trent Stellingwerff

The International Association of Athletics Federations recognizes the importance of nutritional practices in optimizing an Athlete’s well-being and performance. Although Athletics encompasses a diverse range of track-and-field events with different performance determinants, there are common goals around nutritional support for adaptation to training, optimal performance for key events, and reducing the risk of injury and illness. Periodized guidelines can be provided for the appropriate type, amount, and timing of intake of food and fluids to promote optimal health and performance across different scenarios of training and competition. Some Athletes are at risk of relative energy deficiency in sport arising from a mismatch between energy intake and exercise energy expenditure. Competition nutrition strategies may involve pre-event, within-event, and between-event eating to address requirements for carbohydrate and fluid replacement. Although a “food first” policy should underpin an Athlete’s nutrition plan, there may be occasions for the judicious use of medical supplements to address nutrient deficiencies or sports foods that help the athlete to meet nutritional goals when it is impractical to eat food. Evidence-based supplements include caffeine, bicarbonate, beta-alanine, nitrate, and creatine; however, their value is specific to the characteristics of the event. Special considerations are needed for travel, challenging environments (e.g., heat and altitude); special populations (e.g., females, young and masters athletes); and restricted dietary choice (e.g., vegetarian). Ideally, each Athlete should develop a personalized, periodized, and practical nutrition plan via collaboration with their coach and accredited sports nutrition experts, to optimize their performance.