The present study examined the impact of breakfast and exercise on postprandial metabolism, appetite and macronutrient balance. A sample of twelve (blood variables n 11) physically active males completed four trials in a randomised, crossover design comprising a continued overnight fast followed by: (1) rest without breakfast (FR); (2) exercise without breakfast (FE); (3) breakfast consumption (1859 kJ) followed by rest (BR); (4) breakfast consumption followed by exercise (BE). Exercise was continuous, moderate-intensity running (expending approximately 2·9 MJ of energy). The equivalent time was spent sitting during resting trials. A test drink (1500 kJ) was ingested on all trials followed 90 min later by an ad libitum lunch. The difference between the BR and FR trials in blood glucose time-averaged AUC following test drink consumption approached significance (BR: 4·33 (sem 0·14) v. FR: 4·75 (sem 0·16) mmol/l; P= 0·08); but it was not different between FR and FE (FE: 4·77 (sem 0·14) mmol/l; P= 0·65); and was greater in BE (BE: 4·97 (sem 0·13) mmol/l) v. BR (P= 0·012). Appetite following the test drink was reduced in BR v. FR (P= 0·006) and in BE v. FE (P= 0·029). Following lunch, the most positive energy balance was observed in BR and least positive in FE. Regardless of breakfast, acute exercise produced a less positive energy balance following ad libitum lunch consumption. Energy and fat balance is further reduced with breakfast omission. Breakfast improved the overall appetite responses to foods consumed later in the day, but abrogated the appetite-suppressive effect of exercise.

This study investigated the energy intake and expenditure of professional adolescent academy-level soccer players during a competitive week. Over a seven day period that included four training days, two rest days and a match day, energy intake (self-reported weighed food diary and 24-h recall) and expenditure (tri-axial accelerometry) were recorded in 10 male players from a professional English Premier League club. The mean macronutrient composition of the dietary intake was 318 ± 24 g·day⁻¹ (5.6 ± 0.4 g·kg⁻¹ BM) carbohydrate, 86 ± 10 g·day⁻¹ (1.5 ± 0.2 g·kg⁻¹ BM) protein and 70 ± 7 g·day⁻¹ (1.2 ± 0.1 g·kg⁻¹ BM) fats, representing 55% ± 3%, 16% ± 1%, and 29% ± 2% of mean daily energy intake respectively. A mean daily energy deficit of −1302 ± 1662 kJ (p = 0.035) was observed between energy intake (9395 ± 1344 kJ) and energy expenditure (10679 ± 1026 kJ). Match days (−2278 ± 2307 kJ, p = 0.012) and heavy training days (−2114 ± 2257 kJ, p = 0.016) elicited the greatest deficits between intake and expenditure. In conclusion, the mean daily energy intake of professional adolescent academy-level soccer players was lower than the energy expended during a competitive week. The magnitudes of these deficits were greatest on match and heavy training days. These findings may have both short and long term implications on the performance and physical development of adolescent soccer players.

Athletes obtain nutritional information from their coaches, yet their competency in this area is lacking. Currently, no research exists in the UK which has a different coach education system to many other countries. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the sports nutrition knowledge of UK coaching certificate (UKCC) level 2 and 3, hockey and netball qualified coaches. All coaches (n = 163) completed a sports nutrition questionnaire to identify: (a) if they provided nutritional advice; (b) their level of sport nutrition knowledge; and (c) factors that may have contributed to their level of knowledge. Over half the coaches provided advice to their athletes (n = 93, 57.1%), even though they were not competent to do so. Coaches responded correctly to 60.3 ± 10.5% of all knowledge questions with no differences between those providing advice and those who did not (p > 0.05). Those coaches who had undertaken formal nutrition training achieved higher scores than those who had not (p < 0.05). In conclusion, UK sports coaches would benefit from continued professional development in sports nutrition to enhance their coaching practice.

Post‐exercise recovery is a multi‐facetted process that will vary depending on the nature of the exercise, the time between exercise sessions and the goals of the exerciser. From a nutritional perspective, the main considerations are: (1) optimisation of muscle protein turnover; (2) glycogen resynthesis; (3) rehydration; (4) management of muscle soreness; (5) appropriate management of energy balance. Milk is approximately isotonic (osmolality of 280–290 mosmol/kg), and the mixture of high quality protein, carbohydrate, water and micronutrients (particularly sodium) make it uniquely suitable as a post‐exercise recovery drink in many exercise scenarios. Research has shown that ingestion of milk post‐exercise has the potential to beneficially impact both acute recovery and chronic training adaptation. Milk augments post‐exercise muscle protein synthesis and rehydration, can contribute to post‐exercise glycogen resynthesis, and attenuates post‐exercise muscle soreness/function losses. For these aspects of recovery, milk is at least comparable and often out performs most commercially available recovery drinks, but is available at a fraction of the cost, making it a cheap and easy option to facilitate post‐exercise recovery. Milk ingestion post‐exercise has also been shown to attenuate subsequent energy intake and may lead to more favourable body composition changes with exercise training. This means that those exercising for weight management purposes might be able to beneficially influence post‐exercise recovery, whilst maintaining the energy deficit created by exercise.