The competitive season in long-distance triathlon is characterized by increases in training load and volume from off- to peak-season, when athletes enter their primary competition. When athletes fail to meet the increased energy demand through the diet, either unintentionally or in attempts to improve their performance by means of weight loss, they are at an increased risk for low energy availability (LEA), which can negatively impact their health and performance.
PURPOSE: To analyze changes in body composition over the course of the competitive season and investigate indicators of LEA in long-distance triathletes.
METHODS: Study I consisted of a longitudinal analysis of changes in body composition (10-point skinfolds) over the course of a full competitive season in 29 triathletes (90% males, 44 ± 8 yrs, 75.9 ± 8.2 kg). Study II consisted of an analysis of surrogate markers of LEA in 13 triathletes (77% males, 36 ± 11 yrs, 73.3 ± 8.9 kg) and involved measures of resting metabolic rate (RMR) and triiodothyronine (T3). In male athletes, testosterone (TES) and reproductive function (Aging Males’ Symptoms scale; AMS) were analyzed additionally. All measurements in study II were conducted prior to the peak competition, the time point at which LEA risk was presumed to be highest.
RESULTS: In study I, we observed significant reductions in body weight (−2.6 ± 3.8%), fat mass (−11.2 ± 14.9%), and fat-free mass (−1.2 ± 2.5%) from off- to peak-season (p < 0.05). Body composition returned to baseline at the end of the season. In study II, RMR was reduced (RMRratio < 0.9) in 2 athletes (15%). TES was below the clinical range in 1 athlete (10%) and in the lower quartile in 3 additional athletes (30%). TES was correlated with T3 (r = 0.77, p = 0.01), but neither TES nor T3 was correlated with RMRratio. Males with low TES had higher AMS scores than athletes with normal TES (9.25 ± 7.2 vs. 7.1 ± 3.0, p = 0.33).
CONCLUSION: In triathlon, the competitive season is associated with weight loss and represents a period of increased risk for LEA. Nonetheless, the detection of LEA remains challenging and the analysis of several surrogate markers is recommended.