Dataset Information

Physiological differences between advanced CrossFit athletes, recreational CrossFit participants, and physically-active adults.

ABSTRACT: This investigation examined anthropometric, hormonal, and physiological differences between advanced (ADV; n = 8, 27.8 ± 4.2 years, 170 ± 11 cm, 79.8 ± 13.3 kg) and recreational (REC; n = 8, 33.5 ± 8.1 years, 172 ± 14 cm, 76.3 ± 19.5 kg) CrossFit (CF) trained participants in comparison to physically-active controls (CON; n = 7, 27.5 ± 6.7 years, 171 ± 14 cm, 74.5 ± 14.3 kg). ADV and REC were distinguished by their past competitive success. REC and CON were resistance-trained (>2 years) and exercised on 3-5 days·wk-1 for the past year, but CON utilized traditional resistance and cardiovascular exercise. All participants provided a fasted, resting blood sample and completed assessments of resting metabolic rate, body composition, muscle morphology, isometric mid-thigh pull strength, peak aerobic capacity, and a 3-minute maximal cycle ergometer sprint across two separate occasions (separated by 3-7 days). Blood samples were analyzed for testosterone, cortisol, and insulin-like growth factor-1. Compared to both REC and CON, one-way analysis of variance revealed ADV to possess lower body fat percentage (6.7-8.3%, p = 0.007), greater bone and non-bone lean mass (12.5-26.8%, p ? 0.028), muscle morphology characteristics (14.2-59.9%, p < 0.05), isometric strength characteristics (15.4-41.8%, p < 0.05), peak aerobic capacity (18.8-19.1%, p = 0.002), and 3-minute cycling performance (15.4-51.1%, p ? 0.023). No differences were seen between REC and CON, or between all groups for resting metabolic rate or hormone concentrations. These data suggest ADV possess several physiological advantages over REC and CON, whereas similar physiological characteristics were present in individuals who have been regularly participating in either CF or resistance and cardiovascular training for the past year.

SUBMITTER: Mangine GT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7138313 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Physiological differences between advanced CrossFit athletes, recreational CrossFit participants, and physically-active adults.

Mangine Gerald T GT Stratton Matthew T MT Almeda Christian G CG Roberts Michael D MD Esmat Tiffany A TA VanDusseldorp Trisha A TA Feito Yuri Y

PloS one 20200407 4

This investigation examined anthropometric, hormonal, and physiological differences between advanced (ADV; n = 8, 27.8 ± 4.2 years, 170 ± 11 cm, 79.8 ± 13.3 kg) and recreational (REC; n = 8, 33.5 ± 8.1 years, 172 ± 14 cm, 76.3 ± 19.5 kg) CrossFit (CF) trained participants in comparison to physically-active controls (CON; n = 7, 27.5 ± 6.7 years, 171 ± 14 cm, 74.5 ± 14.3 kg). ADV and REC were distinguished by their past competitive success. REC and CON were resistance-trained (>2 years) and exerc ...[more]

PMID: 32255792

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCrossFit is a type of competitive exercise program that has gained widespread recognition. To date, there have been no studies that have formally examined injury rates among CrossFit participants or factors that may contribute to injury rates.PurposeTo establish an injury rate among CrossFit participants and to identify trends and associations between injury rates and demographic categories, gym characteristics, and athletic abilities among CrossFit participants.Study designDescriptive epidemiology study.MethodsA survey was conducted, based on validated epidemiologic injury surveillance methods, to identify patterns of injury among CrossFit participants. It was sent to CrossFit gyms in Rochester, New York; New York City, New York; and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and made available via a posting on the main CrossFit website. Participants were encouraged to distribute it further, and as such, there were responses from a wide geographical location. Inclusion criteria included participating in CrossFit training at a CrossFit gym in the United States. Data were collected from October 2012 to February 2013. Data analysis was performed using Fisher exact tests and chi-square tests.ResultsA total of 486 CrossFit participants completed the survey, and 386 met the inclusion criteria. The overall injury rate was determined to be 19.4% (75/386). Males (53/231) were injured more frequently than females (21/150; P = .03). Across all exercises, injury rates were significantly different (P < .001), with shoulder (21/84), low back (12/84), and knee (11/84) being the most commonly injured overall. The shoulder was most commonly injured in gymnastic movements, and the low back was most commonly injured in power lifting movements. Most participants did not report prior injury (72/89; P < .001) or discomfort in the area (58/88; P < .001). Last, the injury rate was significantly decreased with trainer involvement (P = .028).ConclusionThe injury rate in CrossFit was approximately 20%. Males were more likely to sustain an injury than females. The involvement of trainers in coaching participants on their form and guiding them through the workout correlates with a decreased injury rate. The shoulder and lower back were the most commonly injured in gymnastic and power lifting movements, respectively. Participants reported primarily acute and fairly mild injuries.

Project description:BackgroundCrossFit® is a popular high-intensity functional training program. CrossFit® participants may practice popular diets or consume dietary and sports supplements to support their health or physical pursuits, but the specific dietary and supplement practices of CrossFit® participants remain unknown.MethodsAn electronic questionnaire was developed to collect data on practice of popular diets (i.e. Paleo and The Zone Diet®), dietary and sports supplement use, reasons for practicing a diet or using supplements, sources of information on diets and supplements, and various beliefs associated with nutrition among CrossFit® participants.ResultsOf the 2,576 complete responses (female 51.9%, male 48.1%, age 39.4 ± 11.1 years, body mass index 26.1 ± 3.9 kg/m2), 695 (27%) reported being a CrossFit® trainer or coach and 1,392 (54%) reported competing, or planning to compete, in CrossFit® or other fitness competitions. The average years of CrossFit® experience were 5.3 ± 3.1 years, and the average frequency of CrossFit® participation was 4.5 ± 1.1 days/week. Most participants (60.1%) reported practicing a particular diet. Macro Counting (18.6%), Intermittent Fasting (7.7%), and Paleo (6.1%) were the most frequently reported diets. The top reasons for practicing a diet were to improve overall health (45.6%), decrease body fat (29.2%), and improve CrossFit® performance (25.2%). The top sources of dietary information were the Internet (47.5%), coach/trainer (28.7%), and nutritionist/dietitian (26.2%). Most participants (67.3%) reported "Urine Color" as the best method to assess hydration. Additionally, most participants (82.2%) consumed at least one supplement, with protein (51.2%), creatine (22.9%), and pre-workout/energy (20.7%) being most popular. The top reasons for consuming supplements were to improve recovery (52.6%), improve overall health (51.4%), and increase muscle mass/strength (41.7%). The top sources of information on supplements were the Internet (53.1%), coach/trainer (27.0%), and peer-reviewed research (23.0%).ConclusionsA large proportion of CrossFit® participants may practice popular diets or consume supplements with the intention of improving health or performance. These findings may support future research on the effects of various dietary patterns and supplements on CrossFit® performance.

Dataset Information

Physiological differences between advanced CrossFit athletes, recreational CrossFit participants, and physically-active adults.

Publications

Physiological differences between advanced CrossFit athletes, recreational CrossFit participants, and physically-active adults.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure