, Volume 43, Issue 10, pp 909-917
Date: 20 Aug 2013

Do Olympic Athletes Train as in the Paleolithic Era?

Rent the article at a discount

Rent now

* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.

Get Access

Abstract

Every 4 years, approximately 10,000 athletes participate in the Olympic Games. These athletes have dedicated several years of physical training to achieve the best possible performance on a given day. Their preparation has been supported by expert coaches and an army of sport scientists, whose overall responsibility is to ensure that the athletes are in peak condition for their event. Although every athlete prepares specifically for the unique physiological challenges of their event, all athletes have one common characteristic: they are Homo sapiens. They share a unique genome, which is the result of evolutionary forces beyond their individual control. Although studies on the influence of different genetic polymorphisms on selected athletic events have been proven to be of limited utility, a body of evidence—from molecular biology to whole-body measures—suggests that training adaptations are enhanced when the stimulus closely resembles the activity pattern of human ancestors. Because genetic evolutionary changes occur slowly in Homo sapiens, and the traditional physical activity and dietary patterns of Homo sapiens have undergone rapid and dramatic changes in previous centuries, we propose that modern humans are physiologically better adapted to training modes and nutritional strategies similar to the ones that their hominid ancestors evolved on, rather than those supported by modern societies. Such an ancestral pattern was mainly characterized by the prevalence of daily bouts of prolonged, low-intensity, aerobic-based activities interspersed with periodic, short-duration, high-intensity bursts of activity. On some occasions, such activity patterns were undertaken with low carbohydrate availability. Specific activities that enhanced strength and power were typically performed after aerobic activities. We present scientific evidence to support the appropriateness of this model, and we propose that future studies should address this hypothesis in a multitude of different sporting activities, by assessing the genetic responses to and performance-based outcomes of different training stimuli. Such information would provide data on which sport scientists and coaches could better prepare athletes and manage their training process.