Radio 4 at half 9 today - Inside Health: Sport and the female body

[nauticant]

As an era-defining summer of women’s sport kicks off, Inside Health looks at the science of sport and the female body.

What do we know about how female physiology affects sporting performance?
James visits Manchester to meet elite athletes and the scientists who are at the forefront of investigating the impact of periods on athletic performance and why women are more prone to certain injuries than men. He also hears about breast movement and why the right sports bra really matters.
...
This episode is produced in partnership with The Open University. Curious to know more? Try The Open University’s ‘Menstruation Myths’ quiz by following the links to The Open University.

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m002fvhn

Ballet is a discipline developed around women. It’s quite different from women doing football training that was developed for men and adapted for women.

I was wondering about that. Women's gymnastics is so different from the men's event. Does that mean women are less likely to get injured than in, say, football?

there is minimal difference in the incidence of ACL injury between teenage boys and girls training in ballet at elite level, which he puts down to the fact that both sexes get intensive training and support aimed at keeping them in top condition and preventing injury

I didn't catch the program but I'm thinking

1. minimal sex difference = fewer ACL injuries in the women, or more in the men?

2. ballerinas are pretty light - I bet there's a difference between dropping 50kg through your knee at the wrong angle, and 70kg

3. ballet has fewer unexpected direction changes and collisions (I presume) so less of the ACL-risking conditions?

@BellaAmorosa I agree with your reservations about preventing menstruation but it would have been interesting to hear them talk about it. I subscribe to Inside Health on Sounds. It’s one of many very good programmes the BBC do on the radio

I thought that ACL injuries in sports like football were due to the foot being relatively immobile, because of studs which are supposed to stop your feet slipping about, combined with a sudden change of direction or external force such as a tackle.
Ballet shoes don't grip the floor in the same way.

I have recently subscribed too as it’s always interesting.

also Dr Margaret McCartney is a medical advisor for it, is often on, and part of for women Scotland 💪

Here she is talking about the lack of evidence for “gender affirming medicine”

Hmm has my link shown up?

battle of ideas 4 months ago

Sorry, the ideas that female ballerinas get the support etc is laughable so there must be other reasons. Female ballerinas are expendable, there are already too many of them and the training reflects that.

(Mum of an ex professional dancer who went to vocational school/college and is now studying sports science) .

dd is very interested in this area. She hopes to learn from the world of sport to then be able to work with dancers on injury prevention etc.

I think the difference is because men play best of 5 and women best of 3 so the men who proceed through the competition have to have performed well for longer during a match e.g. the results will be less affected by a player having a dip in performance or a “lucky” streak. I think that the women should be playing 5 sets as they’re obviously capable.

You should direct her to this programme, then! The academic talking about this is on from around 12 minutes in for three or four minutes, I think. I was repeating from memory what he said and I may not have got it quite right but he definitely didn't think there was a higher incidence of ACL injury in ballet for either sex over the other. I'm sure the other poster is right that the very low bodyweight of dancers must help.

I had a slightly uneasy feeling, which I don't know if I'm being unreasonable about, about the contributor's interests.

Listening to it now; I’ve been reminded that a lot of Stacy Sims work was around REDS and LEA - where athletes loose their periods due to over training. Which leads to early onset osteoporosis and infertility.

one of the Xmas today programmes was presented by an ex athlete who’d experienced this and later infertility.

im wondering if women are choosing not to stop periods in order to be sure they’re still getting healthy levels of oestrogen and regular periods?

I listened to one of the what's up doc BBC iPlayer programmes about core strength and there was lots of chat about 'women who have given birth', not any other type of person who gives birth, was a nice change to hear about the specific issues women have being discussed.
Oh and I've heard a talk about Blair Hamilton's 'scientific research '. It was utter twaddle.

I will list to the article tomorrow but I do like the poster on here
https://powertoplayperiod.com/resources/

I know some of the people who work there. V much a broad church of views across the dept with sex realists vs TWAW. The academics featured today are definitely from the former group, let's just say.

Thank you - it’s good to get context, and the contributors all came across as very focussed on facts (not feelings).

It's always been the case that men play 5 sets and women 3, so why would that mean that one woman has stopped dominating since Serena Williams left? And more recently, fewer of the men's tournaments require 5 sets - really only the top events, and there are often tie-breakers in the 5th. So the men play 5 sets less often than they did 10 years ago, when Serena was dominant. There's always been one or two male players who win the big slams as far back as I can remember. The Djokovic/Federer/Nadal triad was unusual. Sinner-Alcaraz is back to normal.

ETA: I do agree that the women should be playing five sets, though. No reason not to. Playing best of three puts so much pressure on the first set in a big championship. Lose the first set, and it's like being 2 sets to love down in a five-setter.

@puffyisgood
I'm really not sure what the answer is. We have had short periods of dominance (Ash Barty), or dominance of a particular surface (Iga Swiatek on clay) but no one woman winning everything, I agree. I like it as a change, because it's more open, there are more surprise winners. I loved Serena but it was a bit dull always knowing that she was going to win. In the past, people regarded that as evidence that women's tennis was not as competitive, so you can't win, really. The downside is that I think the standard has gone down - players on the whole are fitter, faster and mentally stronger but somehow not a patch on Serena. I still feel like she or Graf in their prime would defeat any of today's top players. But maybe that's just nostalgia talking.

I only hope Swiatek's win is not the start of a long period of dominance because I can't stand her.

I will, she's away this week at Formula Student but I think she will be very interested.

Yep. My dd trained professionally in classical ballet, and although the training itself is structured to increase strength, endurance and flexibility, if you get broken, they chuck you out. Easily replaced, plenty to choose from, no point in trying to mend the nasty injury on that one, just get another one in.

There is a trail of broken bodies littering the ground behind the stately progress of every full-time vocational ballet school. The schools pay lip service to pastoral support and all that, but lip service is all it is.

Do I speak from experience? Unfortunately, yes. DD was on the career scrap heap at 18.

Are there enough medical professionals / physios with any kind of knowledge of the needs of the injured professional / elite dancer? Nowhere near enough. Woefully inadequate really, although it is starting to improve now that the penny is beginning to drop in medical circles. Dancers are world-class athletes. They just do it on stage, in character, and without the Herculean effort showing.

Has anyone seen that documentary about Royal Ballet dancer Steven McRae and his long recovery back from a snapped achilles tendon?