Young athletes may be at risk for low energy availability (LEA) or dietary habits that are indicative of eating disorders. Thus, the purpose of the current study was to investigate the prevalence of LEA among high school athletes and examine those at risk for eating disorders. A secondary aim was to examine relationships between sport nutrition knowledge, body composition, and LEA. Methods: 94 male (n = 42) and female (n = 52) mean ± SD age: 18.09 ± 2.44 y; height: 172.6 ± 9.8 cm; body mass: 68.7 ± 14.5 kg; BMI: 22.91 ± 3.3 kg·m⁻²) athletes completed a body composition assessment and electronic versions of the abridged sports nutrition knowledge questionnaire (ASNK-Q), brief eating disorder in athletes questionnaire (BEDA-Q), and the low energy availability for females questionnaire (LEAF-Q; females only). Results: 52.1% of female athletes were classified as being at risk for LEA. Moderate inverse relationships existed for computed LEAF-Q scores and BMI (r = −0.394; p < 0.01). A total of 42.9% of males (n = 18) and 68.6% of females (n = 35) were at risk for eating disorders, with females being at greater risk (p < 0.01). Body fat percentage was a predictor (β = −0.095; p = −0.01) for eating disorder risk status. For every 1 unit increase in body fat percentage, athletes were 0.909 (95% CI: 0.845–0.977) times less likely to be classified as at risk for an eating disorder. Male (46.5 ± 13.9) and female (46.9 ± 11.4) athletes scored poorly on the ASNK-Q, with no differences between sex (p = 0.895). Conclusions: Female athletes were at a greater risk for eating disorders. No relationships existed between sport nutrition knowledge and %BF. Female athletes with a higher %BF had a lower risk for an eating disorder and risk for LEA.

Background/Objectives: Adherence to sports-specific nutritional guidelines can help optimize athlete performance and health. However, adolescent athletes may not have adequate nutrition knowledge and understanding of specific nutritional requirements. The objective of the current study was to examine the nutrition knowledge and perceived dietary requirements of adolescent athletes. Methods: Male (n = 29, age: 15.7 ± 1.3 yrs.; height: 178.9 ± 8.3 cm; body mass: 74.7 ± 17.2 kg; body fat %: 13.9 ± 7.9%) and female (n = 15, age: 16.5 ± 1.4 yrs.; height: 169.9 ± 6.5 cm; body mass: 63.3 ± 4.5 kg; body fat %: 23.7 ± 3.8%) secondary school student-athletes completed body composition testing (hydrostatic weighing) and electronic surveys (Abridged Sports Nutrition Knowledge Questionnaire (ASNKQ); self-perception of dietary energy and macronutrient requirements). Results: Athletes demonstrated poor sports nutrition knowledge, with no differences observed between sexes for the number of questions answered correctly (males: 45.1 ± 9.8% vs. females: 43.1 ± 12.7%; p = 0.57). No relationships were observed between ASNKQ scores and body composition parameters or between ASNKQ scores and self-reported perception of dietary energy and macronutrient requirements (p > 0.05). Athletes self-reported a lower perceived energy (−560 ± 1272 kcal/d; p = 0.014) and carbohydrate intake (−73 ± 376 g/d; p = 0.014) requirement compared to calculated nutritional recommendations. Athletes self-reported a higher perceived protein intake (263 ± 586 g/d; p = 0.026) requirement compared to calculated nutritional requirements. Conclusions: The current sample of adolescent athletes from the secondary school level appears to have a poor level of sports nutrition knowledge and understanding of energy and macronutrient requirements.

Blood flow restriction (BFR) is a popular resistance exercise technique purported to increase metabolic stress and augment training adaptations over time. However, short-term use may lead to acute neuromuscular fatigue and higher exertion ratings. Objective: The purpose of the current study was to examine acute physiological responses to low-load resistance exercise utilizing BFR compared to higher-load, non-BFR resistance exercise. Methods: Recreationally trained males (n = 6) and females (n = 7) (mean ± standard deviation, age: 20 ± 1 yrs.; height: 172 ± 8 cm; weight: 73 ± 11 kg; BMI: 24.4 ± 2.2 kg·m⁻²; training experience: 4 ± 2 yrs.) had limb occlusion pressure determined (50%; right leg: 118 ± 11 mmHg; left leg: 121 ± 13 mmHg) using an automated, self-inflating cuff system during baseline testing. In subsequent sessions, using a randomized, cross-over design, participants completed one of two experimental conditions: (1) Low-load + BFR and (2) High load + non-BFR. In both conditions, participants completed one set of back squats at either 30% (BFR) or 60% (non-BFR) of an estimated 1RM for a max of 30 repetitions, followed by three additional sets with the same loads and a target of 15 repetitions per set. Blood lactate and countermovement jump (CMJ) height were measured pre- and post-back squat. Ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) were assessed following each set. Results: When collapsed across all sets, participants completed significantly more total repetitions in the BFR condition compared to non-BFR (75.0 ± 0.0 vs. 68.23 ± 9.27 reps; p = 0.015; ES: 1.03), but a lower training load volume (2380 ± 728 vs. 4756 ± 1538 kg; p < 0.001; ES: 1.97). There was a significant time-by-condition interaction (p < 0.001), with a greater increase in blood lactate occurring from baseline to post-back squat in the non-BFR condition (11.61 mmol/L, 95%CI: 9.93, 13.28 mmol/L) compared to BFR (5.98 mmol/L, 95%CI: 4.30, 7.65 mmol/L). There was another significant time-by-condition interaction (p = 0.043), with a greater reduction in CMJ occurring in the non-BFR condition (−6.01, 95%CI: −9.14, −2.88 cm; p < 0.001) compared to BFR (−1.50, 95%CI: −1.50, 4.51 cm; p = 0.312). Conclusions: Utilizing a low-load BFR protocol may allow for a higher training volume, yet lower metabolic stress and reduce neuromuscular fatigue compared to lifting at a higher load without the use of BFR.