GLOSSARY

Sex-Specific Nutrition Nutrition that considers relevant biological sex-related factors without turning average differences into fixed rules for every individual.

For example, two athletes of the same age can differ in disease, impairment, food access and training. Identify the factor that changes care instead of assigning both an identical special-population diet. Agree on a workable plan and review the individual response without assuming that a group label explains every need.

Choose a dietary assessment method according to the question, population and resources. A recent intake record can explore meal timing around training; a frequency questionnaire can describe longer-term patterns. Neither automatically establishes exact habitual intake. Combine food details with training, access, symptoms, medication and relevant measurements. Explain uncertainties and what the method cannot answer. Good assessment produces a decision that can be reviewed, rather than an impressive nutrient report whose apparent precision exceeds the quality of the information collected.

Nutrient status reflects intake, absorption, distribution, stores, losses and physiological demand. A normal blood concentration may not exclude depleted stores, while an abnormal result can have non-nutritional causes. Calcium in blood, for example, does not directly measure dietary calcium adequacy or skeletal reserves. Different nutrients require different assessment strategies. Select tests for a defined clinical question and interpret them with symptoms, diet, relevant disease and sampling conditions instead of ordering a broad panel and assuming every number is a performance target.

An adequate diet provides sufficient energy and essential nutrients while fitting health needs. A high score for variety or a healthy food label cannot independently demonstrate adequacy. Review what is actually eaten, including foods excluded and suitable replacements. Athletes can consume many vegetables yet still lack enough energy or carbohydrate for training. Assess the overall pattern, distribution and relevant nutrient risks rather than assuming that a single food or supplement makes the entire diet balanced.

Food practices reflect culture, family, religion, identity and personal preference as well as nutrient composition. Ask what the person actually eats and values rather than assigning a stereotyped pattern. Adapt food examples, preparation methods and meal timing while preserving nutritional adequacy and relevant safety requirements. Cultural restrictions may require suitable replacements, but unfamiliar foods are not inherently inferior. In team travel and clinical care, discuss acceptable options directly so that a well-intended prescription does not leave the person without enough food they can use.

Food availability describes what is present, whereas accessibility includes whether a person can obtain and use it. Cost, transport, opening hours, kitchen facilities, disability and team arrangements can all affect intake. Food insecurity concerns unreliable access to sufficient suitable food and is not resolved by telling someone to make better choices. Ask respectfully about constraints and identify practical support. A technically ideal sports menu is ineffective if the athlete cannot afford, prepare, store or reach the foods at the required time.

Personalization combines established nutrition principles with the person's training, health, food access, preferences and measured response. Genetics can influence nutrient metabolism, but a commercial gene report rarely determines a complete optimal diet or proves a performance benefit from a specific supplement. Distinguish a reproducible clinical finding from exploratory associations. Nutrigenetics examines variation between people, while nutrigenomics examines interactions between nutrition and genomic function. Use relevant validated information with informed consent and privacy, and avoid replacing ordinary assessment with an attractive but unproven personalized score.