Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Put this on the "No sh*t, Sherlock" list
Quote | Reply
I don't think this is a surprise to any of us, that women athletes have different needs then men. I'd love to see even more work in this area. Eventually we will have enough of a presence in endurance sports that scientists and nutrition companies will pay attention to what makes us different and consider products specific to our needs.

What Exercise Science Doesn’t Know About Women

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/...nt-know-about-women/

Several years ago, Dr. David Rowlands, a senior lecturer with the Institute of Food, Nutrition and Human Health at Massey University in New Zealand, set out to study the role of protein in recovery from hard exercise. He asked a group of male cyclists to ride intensely until their legs were aching and virtually all of their stored muscle fuel had been depleted. The cyclists then consumed bars and drinks that contained either mostly carbohydrates or both carbohydrates and protein. Then, over the next few days, they completed two sessions of hard intervals. One took place the following morning; the next, two days later.


Dr. Rowlands found that the cyclists showed little benefit during the first interval session. But during the second, the men who ingested protein had an overall performance gain of more than 4 percent, compared with the men who took only carbohydrates, “which is huge, in competitive terms,” Dr. Rowlands says. Other researchers’ earlier studies produced similar results. Protein seems to aid in the uptake of carbohydrates from the blood; muscles pack in more fuel after exercise if those calories are accompanied by protein. The protein is also thought to aid in the repair of muscle damage after hard exercise. Dr. Rowlands’s work, which was published in 2008, was right in line with conventional wisdom.

Not so his latest follow-up study, which was published online in May in the journal Medicine and Science in Sport and Exercise and should raise eyebrows, especially lightly plucked ones. After his original work was completed, Dr. Rowlands says, “we received inquiries from female cyclists,” asking to be part of any further research. So, almost as an afterthought, Dr. Rowlands and his colleagues repeated the entire experiment with experienced female riders.

This time, though, the results were quite different. The women showed no clear benefit from protein during recovery. They couldn’t ride harder or longer. In fact, the women who received protein said that their legs felt more tired and sore during the intervals than did women who downed only carbohydrates. The results, Dr. Rowlands says, were “something of a surprise.”

Scientists know, of course, that women are not men. But they often rely on male subjects exclusively, particularly in the exercise-science realm, where, numerically, fewer female athletes exist to be studied. But when sports scientists recreate classic men-only experiments with distaff subjects, the women often react quite differently. In a famous series of studies of carbo-loading (the practice of eating a high-carbohydrate diet before a race), researchers found that women did not pack carbohydrates into their muscles as men did. Even when the women upped their total calories as well as the percentage of their diet devoted to carbohydrates, they loaded only about half as much extra fuel into their muscles as the men did.

Why women respond differently seems obvious. Women are, after all, awash in the hormone estrogen, which, some new science suggests, has greater effects on metabolism and muscle health than was once imagined. Some studies have found that postmenopausal women who take estrogen replacement have healthier muscles than postmenopausal women who do not. Even more striking, in several experiments, researchers from McMaster University in Canada gave estrogen to male athletes and then had them complete strenuous bicycling sessions. The men seemed to have developed entirely new metabolisms. They burned more fat and a smaller percentage of protein or carbohydrates to fuel their exertions, just as women do.

What all of this emerging science means for women and the scientists who study (or ignore) them is not yet completely clear. “We need more research” into the differences between male and female athletes, Dr. Rowlands says. In his own study, a particularly intriguing and mysterious finding suggested that the female cyclists somehow sustained less muscle damage during the hard intervals than the men did. Their blood contained lower levels of creatine kinase, a biochemical marker of trauma in muscle tissue. Did estrogen protect the women’s muscles during the riding? And if so, why did the female cyclists who ingested protein complain of sore and tired muscles during the sessions? “Honestly, I don’t know,” Dr. Rowlands says, adding that he does not think that his findings suggest that women should skip protein after exercise. “It’s true that we didn’t see evidence for a benefit,” he says. But his study was one of a kind. The findings need to be replicated.

In the meantime, female athletes should view with skepticism the results from exercise studies that use only male subjects. As Dr. Rowlands says — echoing a chorus of men before him — when it comes to women, there’s a great deal that sports scientists “just don’t understand."


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jen

"In order to keep a true perspective on one's importance, everyone should have a dog that worships him and a cat that will ignore him." - Dereke Bruce
Quote Reply
Re: Put this on the "No sh*t, Sherlock" list [JenHS] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Women are, after all, awash in the hormone estrogen

That line just cracks me up!
Quote Reply
Re: Put this on the "No sh*t, Sherlock" list [JenHS] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
And no mention of men being washed in testosterone! Interesting they cite that there are fewer female athletes to study, yet when you look at triathlon entry lists there are about equal number of male to female, or actually more females.
Quote Reply
Re: Put this on the "No sh*t, Sherlock" list [pookie87] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
We are making a big dent in entry lists for all kinds of events. How is it no one is paying attention or are there studies we don't hear about?

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jen

"In order to keep a true perspective on one's importance, everyone should have a dog that worships him and a cat that will ignore him." - Dereke Bruce
Quote Reply
Re: Put this on the "No sh*t, Sherlock" list [JenHS] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
And by specific nutrition products, not just ones with fewer calories (have to buy more - no thanks) and pretty labels (crumbled up in the jersey pocket)!

It really shouldn't be much of a surprise - look at the number of women who place very well or even win overall at the ultramarathons - where burning what ya got makes a huge difference in the race.


Vale!
Tracy T
http://www.thelencoaching.com
Some light reading::: http://www.tracythelen.blogspot.com
Quote Reply
Re: Put this on the "No sh*t, Sherlock" list [JenHS] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It's not just the number of entrants, it's "do we care about women's athletic performance and watching women's sports" (we=the industry, the physiologists, the athletes, the community).

I think the answer is yes and no. The triathlon community of course loves Chrissie, and McQuaid, Corbin, Diebens, Jones, Snowsill, and many others make the headlines (Slowtwitch especially does a great job paying equal attention to men and women athletes) alongside or ahead of the men.

However, men (so far the dominate buyer of product) care more about what McCormack is riding, what Lieto is drinking and what Potts is wearing rather than what the girls are doing (makes sense), which in turn creates demand for products that appeal to the average consumer (mostly male, but certainly leveling out). At present, there is just more money to made in figuring out what makes men go fast. When there is demand, there is supply.

Our part is to create that demand, as the men before us have. We vote with our money and our voices; the way I see it, we have to demand the products and the studies, and put pressure on the industry and the science to make it happen.

Where to start ...... ??
Quote Reply
Re: Put this on the "No sh*t, Sherlock" list [mellorite] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
p.s. that line about raising lightly plucked eyebrows.... oh come on.

what's wrong with a unibrow? ;)
Quote Reply
Re: Put this on the "No sh*t, Sherlock" list [mellorite] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I totally agree on the creation of demand. What I've found interesting is there is a firm belief that biology is biology and gender doesn't matter WRT the fundamentals. If you are a woman athlete, most likely you already know that but can't get validation.

We've had multiple conversations on here on that specific topic. Every time I bring it up I get told there is no difference in how to eat after a workout and during a workout. I know there is a difference because what I'm told doesn't always work for me. The problem is I don't have the science to back it up so my instincts are dismissed.

Who here has a solid contact at one of the sports nutrition companies? Who can we harass? If I had the seed $$ I'd do it in a heartbeat.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jen

"In order to keep a true perspective on one's importance, everyone should have a dog that worships him and a cat that will ignore him." - Dereke Bruce
Quote Reply
Re: Put this on the "No sh*t, Sherlock" list [mellorite] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I agree that men are more likely to buy a product just to make themselves faster (supported by real data or not)... women may not be driven to purchase for results as quickly as men but they WILL purchase for other reasons just as quickly (or more so) and THEN........they tell their wide social network of friends and family about their good experiences with a product or service. Ex. They pick up the phone and call their running buds to tell them what they thought of something they just tried - men are less likely to do this.

From my perspective, women tend to be competitive in a supportive, communicative manner with other women around them - a marketing plus for any product. The power of female viral networking is sorely, sorely underestimated. Women also still tend to control the nutrition purchasing within a family - so if you convince a woman a nutrition product is good not only could she purchase for herself, she may purchase it as a gift or for a friend/spouse/offspring.

The first company to catch on is going to reap some serious benefits.
Quote Reply
Re: Put this on the "No sh*t, Sherlock" list [JenHS] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
there's the guy from infiniT who is always posting.

maybe she's born with it, maybe it's chlorine
If you're injured and need some sympathy, PM me and I'm very happy to write back.
disclaimer: PhD not MD
Quote Reply
Re: Put this on the "No sh*t, Sherlock" list [SusanH] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"Women also still tend to control the nutrition purchasing within a family - so if you convince a woman a nutrition product is good not only could she purchase for herself, she may purchase it as a gift or for a friend/spouse/offspring. "


I am a classic example of this. We have certain sports drinks, gels, and whatnot in our household because *I* like them, and I'm the one doing the purchasing, not my husband.
Quote Reply
Re: Put this on the "No sh*t, Sherlock" list [JenHS] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The saddest thing about this is that I truly don't think they are discriminating against women in their research. I believe it just NEVER OCCURS to them to do research on women.......

What year is this again?
Quote Reply
Re: Put this on the "No sh*t, Sherlock" list [Cassie] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
As a researcher in the field I thought I'd offer my 2 cents.
It's not at all that no one "thinks" of women--it's that women are more difficult to study. One, you have to synchronize the time of the month that women are in the study due to estrous cycle fluctuations in hormones. This can be fairly difficult in a random crossover design and greatly extends the timescale (and COST) involved. Secondly, if you're look at anything remotely related to substrate utilization (e.g fat/cho/pro), women are a whole different kettle of fish. They are a publication, a funding source, and sometimes even a grant unto themselves in some situations. This is not good or bad, it just represents a barrier to scientific inquiry that is not so obvious in male subjects. Third, if you are looking at anything remotely related to aging or with people of a later age, then women throw a loop with menopause. Male biology is just more consistent for science throughout life. Often the novel studies are done in men first for all of these reasons and then repeated later in females to confirm (or not) findings.

As a side note, when looking at the literature to date, it would seem prudent for women to "fat-load" before an endurance event for some advantage rather than carbo-load. I know, not an appealing phrase, but it has some solid foundation.
Last edited by: sleepy: Jul 5, 10 18:47
Quote Reply
Re: Put this on the "No sh*t, Sherlock" list [sleepy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
That's really helpful. Thanks for sharing. As an accountant, I would be totally unaware of ALL of that!

and yes, somebody needs to come up with a better term for "fat loading" for it to be embraced! :)
Quote Reply
Re: Put this on the "No sh*t, Sherlock" list [sleepy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
IMO, what makes it so difficult to study women is why it needs to be done. We are complex creatures and male rules don't always apply. I hear what you are saying and understand. Its just frustrating because we know some things don't work but we can't quantify it because there are no studies.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jen

"In order to keep a true perspective on one's importance, everyone should have a dog that worships him and a cat that will ignore him." - Dereke Bruce
Quote Reply
Re: Put this on the "No sh*t, Sherlock" list [JenHS] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
On somewhat of a tangent, Jen, you need to read The Female Brain by Louann Brizendine, M.D., if you haven't already. Not much about athletic performance in there, but the same theme of women being understudied is examined... and Brizendine enlightens. In my opinion a must read by anyone who is female, or is married or related to one.
Quote Reply
Re: Put this on the "No sh*t, Sherlock" list [sleepy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
It's not at all that no one "thinks" of women--it's that women are more difficult to study.

you have to synchronize the time of the month that women are in the study due to estrous cycle fluctuations in hormones.

These are good points, but there maybe more as well.

To generalize a bit, it is also easier to find male subjects, particularly with regard to aging. This trend is changing, but there tends to be a larger subject pool in the male population.

These investigations need to go through a human subjects review committee (consisting of individuals from different departments within the school and community), that tend to be overly sensitive about protecting participants, and because little is known about the menstrual cycle outside of the physical sciences, those individuals tend to be overtly cautious, making it more difficult to study females.

When not dealing with older populations, participants usually come from school sports or clubs, due to the ease of finding subjects. And there tends to be more male sports, and more males that participate in clubs. But this trend may be changing too.

I am actually in the process of publishing a study comparing college age to master level trained female runners. So I understand how difficult it is to find literature on females.

____________________________________________________
"The principle is competing against yourself. It's about self-improvement, about being better than you were the day before."
-Steve Young

Helios Racing
Last edited by: RPerkins: Jul 11, 10 17:58
Quote Reply
Re: Put this on the "No sh*t, Sherlock" list [Cassie] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
As a researcher (in exercise science), I have to support sleepy here. women present a lot of interesting research ideas, but it is difficult to get it done.

as an example, females thermoregulate differently then men, or at least, differently based on the menstrual cycle. so to study it, you need to study each part of the cycle, and compare several aspects of the same part of the cycle. so, to study three different situtations, you need each subject to visit 3 times, per piece of the cycle (with 4 parts, that's 12 visits, which may take 3 months. with men, a simlar study may take 3 weeks. that may be 1/4th the cost).


also remember, there's not a whole lot of funding in exercise science for human performance. sure, gatorade has a lot of grants, but thereal money is in diabetes/obesity/heart disease/etc. not much money for athletes (kinda like pro triathletes).



mckenzie
Quote Reply