3.8 Article

Use of Nutritional Supplementation Among University Recreation Users

Journal

RECREATIONAL SPORTS JOURNAL
Volume 34, Issue 1, Pages 2-8

Publisher

HUMAN KINETICS PUBL INC
DOI: 10.1123/rsj.34.1.2

Keywords

patron education; risk reduction

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Use of nutritional supplements and ergogenic aids among various user groups has been well documented over the years. One area that is lacking in current research is the use of these nutritional supplements among campus recreation facility users. This population is a prime target market for those in the sport supplement industry. There are many reasons people participate in campus recreation facilities and most would benefit from the use of nutritional supplementation if the claims made by the manufacturers of these supplements is true. However, the nutritional supplement industry is not very strictly regulated and the potential for risk to users is ever present. Obviously the risks vary among manufacturers and also with the type of supplement being taken. It is in the best interest of anyone contemplating taking a nutritional supplement to research the risks, benefits and potential side-effects. It would be beneficial for campus recreation administrators to have an understanding of what types of nutritional supplements their patrons are taking and the risks involved with such. It would also be of benefit to have an understanding of where the patrons obtain information regarding nutritional supplements so that nonbiased educational interventions can be developed with the goal of reducing risks associated with patron of these products. 200 users of a campus recreation facility were surveyed using an instrument designed by Scofield & Unruh (2006) to assess the prevalence of use of nutritional supplements, the types of supplements being used, and where they obtain their information regarding these supplements.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available