Erickson, Jacob

Sport nutrition knowledge has been shown to influence dietary habits of athletes. The purpose of the current study was to examine relationships between sport nutrition knowledge and body composition and examine potential predictors of body weight goals in collegiate athletes. Participants included National Collegiate Athletic Association Division III women (n = 42, height: 169.9 ± 6.9 cm; body mass: 67.1 ± 8.6 kg; fat-free mass: 51.3 ± 6.6 kg; body fat percent: 24.2 ± 5.3%) and men (n = 25, height: 180.8 ± 7.2 cm; body mass: 89.2 ± 20.5 kg; fat-free mass: 75.9 ± 12.2 kg; body fat percent: 13.5 ± 8.9%) athletes. Body composition was assessed via air displacement plethysmography. Athletes completed a validated questionnaire designed to assess sport nutrition knowledge and were asked questions about their perceived dietary energy and macronutrient requirements, as well as their body weight goal (i.e., lose, maintain, gain weight). Athletes answered 47.98 ± 11.29% of questions correctly on the nutrition questionnaire with no differences observed between sexes (men: 49.52 ± 11.76% vs. women: 47.03 ± 11.04%; p = 0.40). An inverse relationship between sport nutrition knowledge scores and body fat percentage (BF%) (r = −0.330; p = 0.008), and fat mass (r = −0.268; p = 0.032) was observed for all athletes. Fat mass (β = 0.224), BF% (β = 0.217), and body mass index (BMI) (β = 0.421) were all significant (p < 0.05) predictors of body weight goal in women. All athletes significantly (p < 0.001) underestimated daily energy (−1360 ± 610.2 kcal/day), carbohydrate (−301.6 ± 149.2 grams/day [g/day]), and fat (−41.4 ± 34.5 g/day) requirements. Division III collegiate athletes have a low level of sport nutrition knowledge, which was associated with a higher BF%. Women athletes with a higher body weight, BF% and BMI were more likely to select weight loss as a body weight goal. Athletes also significantly underestimated their energy and carbohydrate requirements based upon the demands of their sport, independent of sex.

This case study examined changes in body composition, resting metabolic rate (RMR), aerobic capacity, and daily physical activity in a patient who had ulcerative colitis and underwent ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) surgery. Body composition, RMR, and peak oxygen consumption (VO2peak) were assessed prior to surgery and four, eight, and 16 weeks after IPAA surgery. Daily physical activity data were extracted from a wrist-worn activity tracker preoperatively and 16 months postoperatively. At baseline, total body mass was 95.3 kg; body fat, 11.6%; lean body mass, 81.1 kg; RMR, 2416 kcal/d; and VO2peak, 42.7 mL/kg/min. All values decreased from baseline at four weeks postoperatively, body mass was 85.2 kg (−10.5%); body fat, 10.9% (−6.0%); lean body mass, 73.1 kg (−9.9%); RMR 2210 kcal/d (−8.5%) and VO2peak, 25.5 mL/kg/min (−40.3%). At 16 weeks postoperatively, most parameters were near their baseline levels (within 1–7%), exceptions were VO2peak, which was 20.4% below baseline, and RMR, which increased to nearly 20% above baseline. After the patient had IPAA surgery, his total and lean body masses, RMR, and aerobic capacity were markedly decreased. Daily physical activity decreased postoperatively and likely contributed to the decreased aerobic capacity, which may take longer to recover compared to body composition and RMR parameters.

Abstract Jagim, AR, Camic, CL, Askow, A, Luedke, J, Erickson, J, Kerksick, CM, Jones, MT, and Oliver, JM. Sex differences in resting metabolic rate among athletes. J Strength Cond Res 33(11): 3008–3014, 2019—The purpose of this study was to compare differences in resting metabolic rate (RMR) between sexes in Division III National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) collegiate athletes and to identify predictors of RMR. Sixty-eight male (M) (age: 20.1 ± 1.5 years; height: 181.8 ± 5.9 cm; body mass (BM): 93.7 ± 16.3 kg; and body fat%: 16.3 ± 8.6%) and 48 female (F) athletes (age: 19.4 ± 1.3 years; height: 166.5 ± 6.0 cm; BM: 63.4 ± 12.7 kg; and body fat%: 21.5 ± 6.3%) participated in a single day of testing, which included determination of RMR using indirect calorimetry and air displacement plethysmography to measure fat mass and fat-free mass (FFM). An independent-samples t -test was used to compare differences in body composition and RMR between sexes, and regression analysis was used to identify predictors of RMR. Men had a significantly higher absolute RMR (M: 2,481 ± 209 vs. F: 1,553 ± 193 kcals·d −1 ; p < 0.001), but when adjusted for BM (M: 25.6 ± 8.3 vs. F: 25.9 ± 2.5 kcals·kg −1 BM per day; p = 0.82) and FFM (M: 31.1 ± 10.6 vs. F: 33.6 ± 3.8 kcals·kg −1 FFM per day; p = 0.12), these differences became nonsignificant. Regression analysis indicated that BM in both men (β = 0.73) and women (β = 0.88) was the strongest predictor of RMR. The results of the current study indicate minimal differences in RMR between sexes among athletic populations when adjusted for BM and FFM. In the current group of athletes, BM seems to account for the largest variability in RMR.

Abstract Jagim, AR, Camic, CL, Kisiolek, J, Luedke, J, Erickson, J, Jones, MT, and Oliver, JM. Accuracy of resting metabolic rate prediction equations in athletes. J Strength Cond Res 32(7): 1875–1881, 2018—The purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy of 5 different resting metabolic rate (RMR) prediction equations in male and female athletes. Twenty-two female (19.7 ± 1.4 years; 166.2 ± 5.5 cm; 63.5 ± 7.3 kg; 49.2 ± 4.3 kg of fat-free mass (FFM); 23.4 ± 4.4 body fat (BF) percent) and 28 male (20.2 ± 1.6 years; 181.9 ± 6.1 cm; 94.5 ± 16.2 kg; 79.1 ± 7.2 kg of FFM; 15.1 ± 8.5% BF) athletes were recruited to participate in 1 day of metabolic testing. Assessments comprised RMR measurements using indirect calorimetry, and body composition analyses using air displacement plethysmography. One-way repeated-measures analysis of variance with follow-up paired t tests were selected to determine differences between indirect calorimetry and 5 RMR prediction equations. Linear regression analysis was used to assess the accuracy of each RMR prediction method. An alpha level of p ≤ 0.05 was used to determine statistical significance. All the prediction equations significantly underestimated RMR while the Cunningham equation had the smallest mean difference (−165 kcals). In men, the Harris-Benedict equation was found to be the best prediction formula with the lowest root-mean-square prediction error value of 284 kcals. In women, the Cunningham equation was found to be the best prediction equation with the lowest root-mean-squared error value of 110 kcals. Resting metabolic rate prediction equations consistently seem to underestimate RMR in male and female athletes. The Harris-Benedict equation seems to be most accurate for male athletes, whereas the Cunningham equation may be better suited for female athletes.