Search

Background: Aerobic exercise and its effect on fertility status, as measured by increased salivary progesterone to estradiol ratio (Pg/E2) on the 14th day of the menstrual cycle, has been studied in recent years. Much of the literature has focused on the positive effects of aerobic exercise on fertility in the overweight/obese population, with few studies conducted using females of a normal weight. The studies that have been conducted among normal weight females have elicited a negative association between taking part in vigorous aerobic exercise for over four hours per week and fertility status. To our knowledge, no research has been conducted involving fertility markers in health females following periodized resistance training. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to analyze the effects of resistance training on fertility status in apparently healthy, college-aged females. The secondary purpose was to determine the relationship between changes in body composition and strength on fertility status. Methods: Participants (n=5) reported to the lab on their self-reported day 14 of their menstrual cycle for the intake session. The informed consent was signed by the participant and then Health History Questionnaire (HHQ) and Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire (PARQ) were filled out and reviewed. Height, weight, 7-site skinfold, and baseline salivary samples were collected. Participants went through a series of five repetition maximum (5RM) tests for the hex bar deadlift, bench press, leg press, machine overhead press, machine knee extension, seated cable row, machine knee flexion, and machine lat pull down. The next day, the participant started the prescribed resistance training program which consisted of 4 sessions per week which were about 1 hour each spanning 3 of the participant’s menstrual cycles. Following 3 menstrual cycles, the participant returned to the lab for the final session where height, weight, 7-site skinfold, post-intervention salivary samples, and 5RM values were collected again. Results: A paired samples t-test with a trivial effect size did not find significance between pre-intervention Pg/E2 ratio (M = 92.6, SD = 50.1) and post-intervention Pg/E2 ratio (M=93.8, SD = 40.8); t(4) = -0.03, p = 0.97, D = 0.03. A strong positive correlation was found between percent change in body weight and percent change in Pg/E2 (r = 0.65, p = 0.23). A moderate positive correlation was found between post-intervention relative strength and percent change in Pg/E2 (r = 0.59, p = 0.29). A weak negative correlation was found between post-intervention absolute strength and percent change in Pg/E2 (r = -0.22, p = 0.73). Conclusion: Absolute strength may not be as reliable of a predictor of fertility status changes as relative strength. This is because higher absolute strength may be tied to higher body fat percentage or higher BMI which both can decrease fertility status. More research is needed to fully decide the impact of periodized resistance training on fertility status. Future studies should be conducted using larger sample sizes and focusing on changes in relative strength or percent change in absolute strength and their impact on fertility status.