Sometimes the average person must feel as if it is impossible to do right for doing wrong.
Nowhere does this seem more the case than with diet and exercise. We are bombarded with mixed messages, fickle fads, conflicting or updated research results, differing opinions from some in the health and fitness industries. How do we separate impartial advice from agendas? Is alcohol in or out? Is butter or margarine better? Two eggs every day? Not if you are worried about high cholesterol, a view that once did the rounds. Lots of fruit? Not if you are worried about your teeth. Red meat for iron? No, stop, it’s carcinogenic!
Add in social, cultural and personal pressures and expectations, and this can be a recipe for confusion — and failure.
Most know the sorts of things they should generally be doing in order to live healthy lives; many actively try their best to get it right. That is why it seems particularly cruel when new evidence emerges that shows the positive actions people have been undertaking to better their health could in fact be doing harm.
The latest such example to stop people in their tracks? LEA, or low energy availability. The concern is that women who exercise regularly could be running into serious health problems by not eating enough to replenish the energy they expend.
The findings were the result of a University of Otago study, conducted by researchers in the department of human nutrition. The researchers found almost half the participants they interviewed were at risk of LEA. The problem was not what might be expected — short-term fatigue — but a long-term health concern, namely a substantial risk to women’s reproductive and bone health. This is because if the body does not have enough energy it tries to conserve it through hormonal adaptations. The researchers also found there was a strong link between LEA and injuries.
The findings had reportedly even surprised the researchers.They are undoubtedly a wake-up call. For the participants in the study were not elite athletes, but recreational ones — those doing at least 150 minutes of moderate intensity activity per week, 75 minutes’ vigorous intensity exercise, or a combination of the two. As recreational athletes they are less likely to be well schooled about nutrition, and may be focused on activity to lose weight. They may well be thinking they are doing the right thing.
Yet again it seems, the overriding message is one of moderation and balance. The researchers said it was important women found a balance between exercise and diet. The issues around diet — and dieting — were highlighted. Exercising to lose weight was fine but not if women were losing significant amounts in a short period. A varied diet is essential, as are carbohydrates before and after exercise. And significantly, skipping meals — what women sometimes do thinking it might help them drop a few unwanted kilos — is a no-no. It seems less is definitely not more.
The findings consolidate well-known risks about women and osteoporosis. But the findings about reproductive health are significant, particularly given what appears to be an increase in infertility rates in many developed countries. While there are many factors at play in that area, lifestyle problems are certainly part of the mix. Few women would think they could be doing more harm than good through exercising — something encouraged for those actively trying to conceive.
The findings, while worrying, can only be positive because it means women can educate themselves about a more holistic approach to diet and exercise and make the necessary changes.
