OBJECTIVE: To determine anthropometric and body composition changes in female bodybuilders during preparation for competition. DESIGN: There was an attempt to match subjects in the control and experimental groups for height and percentage body fat (%BF) for the initial test of this longitudinal study. SUBJECTS: Five competitive bodybuilders (-X +/- s.d.: 35.3 +/- 5.7 y; 167.3 +/- 3.7 cm; 66.38 +/- 6.30 kg; 18.3 +/- 3.5 %BF) and five athletic females (-X +/- s.d.: 30.9 +/- 13.0 y; 166.9 +/- 3.9 cm; 55.94 +/- 3.59 kg; 19.1 +/- 3.3 %BF) were recruited from advertisements in a bodybuilding newsletter and placed on sports centre noticeboards. INTERVENTIONS: The following measurements were conducted 12 weeks, 6 weeks and 3-5 d before the bodybuilders' competitions: anthropometric profile, body density by underwater weighing, total body water via deuterium dilution and bone mineral mass from a dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scan. A combination of the last three measurements enabled the %BF to the determined by a four compartment model. RESULTS: A significant (P < or = 0.001) 5.80 kg body mass loss by the bodybuilders as they prepared for competition was primarily due to a reduction in fat mass (FM; -4.42 kg; 76.2%) as opposed to fat-free mass (FFM; -1.38 kg; 23.8%). The decreases in body mass and FM over the final 6 weeks were greater than those over the first 6 weeks. Their %BF decreased (P < 0.001) from 18.3 to 12.7, whereas the values for the control group remained essentially unchanged at 19.1-19.6 %BF. These body composition changes by the bodybuilders were accompanied by a significant decline (P < 0.001) of 25.5 mm (76.3-50.8 mm) in the sum of eight skinfold thicknesses (triceps + subscapular + biceps + iliac crest + supraspinale + abdominal + front thigh + medial calf). CONCLUSIONS: Although the bodybuilders presented with low %BFs at the start of the experiment, they still significantly decreased their body mass during the 12 week preparation for competition and most of this loss was due to a reduction in FM as opposed to FFM.
OBJECTIVE: To determine anthropometric and body composition changes in female bodybuilders during preparation for competition. DESIGN: There was an attempt to match subjects in the control and experimental groups for height and percentage body fat (%BF) for the initial test of this longitudinal study. SUBJECTS: Five competitive bodybuilders (-X +/- s.d.: 35.3 +/- 5.7 y; 167.3 +/- 3.7 cm; 66.38 +/- 6.30 kg; 18.3 +/- 3.5 %BF) and five athletic females (-X +/- s.d.: 30.9 +/- 13.0 y; 166.9 +/- 3.9 cm; 55.94 +/- 3.59 kg; 19.1 +/- 3.3 %BF) were recruited from advertisements in a bodybuilding newsletter and placed on sports centre noticeboards. INTERVENTIONS: The following measurements were conducted 12 weeks, 6 weeks and 3-5 d before the bodybuilders' competitions: anthropometric profile, body density by underwater weighing, total body water via deuterium dilution and bone mineral mass from a dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scan. A combination of the last three measurements enabled the %BF to the determined by a four compartment model. RESULTS: A significant (P < or = 0.001) 5.80 kg body mass loss by the bodybuilders as they prepared for competition was primarily due to a reduction in fat mass (FM; -4.42 kg; 76.2%) as opposed to fat-free mass (FFM; -1.38 kg; 23.8%). The decreases in body mass and FM over the final 6 weeks were greater than those over the first 6 weeks. Their %BF decreased (P < 0.001) from 18.3 to 12.7, whereas the values for the control group remained essentially unchanged at 19.1-19.6 %BF. These body composition changes by the bodybuilders were accompanied by a significant decline (P < 0.001) of 25.5 mm (76.3-50.8 mm) in the sum of eight skinfold thicknesses (triceps + subscapular + biceps + iliac crest + supraspinale + abdominal + front thigh + medial calf). CONCLUSIONS: Although the bodybuilders presented with low %BFs at the start of the experiment, they still significantly decreased their body mass during the 12 week preparation for competition and most of this loss was due to a reduction in FM as opposed to FFM.
Authors: Paula Sammarone Turocy; Bernard F DePalma; Craig A Horswill; Kathleen M Laquale; Thomas J Martin; Arlette C Perry; Marla J Somova; Alan C Utter Journal: J Athl Train Date: 2011 May-Jun Impact factor: 2.860
Authors: Lachlan Mitchell; Stuart B Murray; Stephen Cobley; Daniel Hackett; Janelle Gifford; Louise Capling; Helen O'Connor Journal: Sports Med Date: 2017-02 Impact factor: 11.136
Authors: A K Mahon; M G Flynn; H B Iglay; L K Stewart; C A Johnson; B K McFarlin; W W Campbell Journal: J Nutr Health Aging Date: 2007 May-Jun Impact factor: 4.075
Authors: Juha J Hulmi; Ville Isola; Marianna Suonpää; Neea J Järvinen; Marja Kokkonen; Annika Wennerström; Kai Nyman; Markus Perola; Juha P Ahtiainen; Keijo Häkkinen Journal: Front Physiol Date: 2017-01-10 Impact factor: 4.566