The purpose of this study was to investigate the prevalence of self-reported restrictive eating, current or past eating disorder, and menstrual dysfunction and their relationships with injuries. Furthermore, we aimed to compare these prevalences and associations between younger (aged 15–24) and older (aged 25–45) athletes, between elite and non-elite athletes, and between athletes competing in lean and non-lean sports. Data were collected using a web-based questionnaire. Participants were 846 female athletes representing 67 different sports. Results showed that 25%, 18%, and 32% of the athletes reported restrictive eating, eating disorders, and menstrual dysfunction, respectively. Higher rates of lean sport athletes compared with non-lean sport athletes reported these symptoms, while no differences were found between elite and non-elite athletes. Younger athletes reported higher rates of menstrual dysfunction and lower lifetime prevalence of eating disorders. Both restrictive eating (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.02–1.94) and eating disorders (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.31–2.73) were associated with injuries, while menstrual dysfunction was associated with more missed participation days compared with a regular menstrual cycle (OR 1.79, 95% CI 1.05–3.07). Our findings indicate that eating disorder symptoms and menstrual dysfunction are common problems in athletes that should be managed properly as they are linked to injuries and missed training/competition days.

Sex hormones are suggested to influence energy intake (EI) and metabolic hormones. This study investigated the influence of menstrual cycle (MC) and hormonal contraceptive (HC) cycle phases on EI, energy availability (EA), and metabolic hormones in recreational athletes (eumenorrheic, NHC = 15 and monophasic HC-users, CHC = 9). In addition, 72-h dietary and training logs were collected in addition to blood samples, which were analyzed for 17β-estradiol (E2), progesterone (P4), leptin, total ghrelin, insulin, and tri-iodothyronine (T3). Measurements were completed at four time-points (phases): Bleeding, mid-follicular (FP)/active 1, ovulation (OVU)/active 2, mid-luteal (LP)/inactive in NHC/CHC, respectively. As expected, E2 and P4 fluctuated significantly in NHC (p < 0.05) and remained stable in CHC. In NHC, leptin increased significantly between bleeding and ovulation (p = 0.030) as well as between FP and OVU (p = 0.022). No group differences in other measured hormones were observed across the MC and HC cycle. The mean EI and EA were similar between phases, with no significant differences observed in macronutrient intake over either the MC or HC. While the MC phase might have a small, but statistically significant effect on leptin, the findings of the present study suggest that the MC or HC phase does not significantly alter ad libitum EI or EA in recreational athletes.

Purpose: To examine the influence of menstrual cycle (MC) and hormonal contraceptive (HC) cycle phases on physiological variables monitored during incremental treadmill testing in physically active women (eumenorrheic, EUM = 16 and monophasic HC-users, CHC = 12).Methods: Four running tests to exhaustion were performed at bleeding, mid follicular (mid FOL)/active 1, ovulation/active 2, and mid luteal (mid LUT)/inactive. HC and MC phases were confirmed from serum hormones. Heart rate (HR), blood lactate (Bla), and V˙O2 were monitored, while aerobic (AerT) and anaerobic (AnaT) thresholds were determined. V˙O2peak, maximal running speed (RUNpeak), and total running time (RUNtotal) were recorded.Results: No significant changes were observed in V˙O2 or Bla at AerT or AnaT across phases in either group. At maximal effort, absolute and relative V˙O2peak, RUNpeak, and RUNtotal remained stable across phases in both groups. No significant fluctuations in HRmax were observed across phases, but HR at both AerT and AnaT tended to be lower in EUM than in CHC across phases.Conclusion: Hormonal fluctuations over the MC and HC do not systematically influence physiological variables monitored during incremental treadmill testing. Between group differences in HR at AerT and AnaT underline why HR-based training should be prescribed individually, while recording of MC or HC use when testing should be encouraged as phase may explain minor, but possibly meaningful, changes in, e.g., Bla concentrations or differences in HR response.