Introduction: Limited studies have examined the dietary intake pattern of Malaysian endurance athletes. Differences in the types of foods consumed between Malaysian and Western population leads to varying nutritional intake values. This study aimed to characterise the dietary intake of Malaysian endurance athletes as compared to sports nutrition recommendations, and to determine the associations between participants’ backgrounds and macronutrients intake status. Methods: A total of 85 endurance-trained Malaysian athletes participated in a cross-sectional study. Dietary intake for three days throughout the training season was evaluated using 24-hour dietary recall. The macronutrients and micronutrients intakes were compared to the nutritional recommendation for athletes and the Recommended Nutrient Intakes (RNI), respectively. The food serving size was compared to the Malaysian Food Pyramid 2020. Results: Of all participants, 51% met the minimum recommendations for carbohydrate (CHO) intake (6g/ kg/day). For protein intake, 88% of participants had surpassed the lower limit of 1.2g/kg/day. The lower limit of fat intake (20% of total daily energy intake) was met by 99% of the participants. Most of the participants had a suboptimal intake of calcium, vitamin A, and vitamin E, while all had inadequate vitamin D intake. The athletes’ institution was significantly associated with the CHO intake status. Also, the athletes’ institution and the highest education level were significantly associated with the protein intake status. Conclusion: Athletes who practised Asian-based diets were able to achieve the energy, protein, and fat intake recommendations. However, there was a suboptimal intake of the CHO and micronutrients as compared to the recommendations.

Introduction: Accurate yet inexpensive methods for measuring free-living energy expenditure (EE) are much needed. The aim of this study was to determine the feasibility of heart-rate monitoring method (HRM) in measuring EE as compared to the established activity diary (AD) were used simultaneously in 34 young adults (18 females, 16 males, mean age 21.5 ± 1.5 years). Estimates of the EE from HRM were based on individually measured and published energy cost of various activities. Total daily energy expenditure (TDEE) and its components (EE during sleep, during rest and during physical activity) were compared using Student paired-t tests. Results: TDEE from HRM method averaged 8.17 ± 2.00 MJ/day compared to 8.50 ± 1.28 MJ/day from AD method. Although large intra-individual differences were found (ranging from -36.9% to 47.4%), there was no significant difference between the two methods (mean difference -3.6 ± 19.4%). The limits of agreement (mean ± 2SD) were -3.77 and 3.11 MJ/day. There were no significant differences for any of the TDEE components between the two methods, except for EE during sleep (p<0.05). Conclusion: HRM method was found to be a feasible method for assessment of EE, and was comparable to AD for group assessment of TDEE and its components