Dietary Intake of Amateur Bodybuilding Athletes Around Polokwane Municipality in Limpopo Province, South Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the dietary intake of amateur bodybuilding athletes around Polokwane municipality in Limpopo Province, South Africa. DESIGN: This was a descriptive cross-sectional study in which purposive sampling was used to recruit 51 participants out of 65 registered part-time competitive bodybuilders at three training gyms around Polokwane. Dietary information was collected using a modified 24-hour-recall questionnaire on three different days, which was validated by the modified Food Frequency Questionnaire. SETTINGS: The study took place at three gyms that enrolled these part-time athletes, all of whom were registered with the International Federation of Bodybuilding in South Africa (IFBBSA). Data were collected during the off-season period. RESULTS: Macronutrients: All the athletes consumed energy and carbohydrates below the daily recommendations of the International Society for Sports Nutrition (ISSN) with mean values of 129 ± 36.7 KJ/kg and 3.9 ± 0.9 g/kg respectively. Furthermore, 78% and 94% of the athletes consumed protein (1.3 ± 0.5 g/kg) and fat (0.8 ± 0.4 g/kg) below the daily recommendations, respectively. Vitamins: Most of the athletes took vitamins C (53%); B1 (82%) and B6 (82%) within the Estimated Average Requirements (EAR) while the intake of vitamins A (69%) and E (72%) were below the recommendations. While 88% of the athletes consumed above the EAR for vitamin B12, only 41% and 17% took vitamins B2 and B6 above the Upper Tolerable Limit (UL). Minerals: Most of the athletes consumed phosphorus (94%), iron (88%), zinc (78%), magnesium (71%) and selenium (61%) within the EAR. The proportions of bodybuilders who consumed minerals below the EAR were 86% for calcium, 4% for phosphorus, 10% for iron, 19% for zinc, 23% for magnesium and 37% for selenium. CONCLUSION: The macronutrient intake of bodybuilders around Polokwane is mostly below recommendations, but consumption of micronutrients is mostly within the recommendations. Therefore, the dietary intake of these bodybuilders especially for macronutrient intake is sub-optimal to support their competitive activity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".