## 4 Discussion
[14], from 25.2 \(\upmu\)g\(\cdot\)dL\({}^{-1}\) to 26.5 \(\upmu\)g\(\cdot\)dL\({}^{-1}\). In the present study, the data were similar, and specifically, cortisol increased from 21.3 \(\upmu\)g\(\cdot\)dL\({}^{-1}\) to 24.4 \(\upmu\)g\(\cdot\)dL\({}^{-1}\) throughout the preparation. During the diet, the strength training program, and the daily activities, hormone levels seemed to change, but in most cases, they remained within physiological ranges [9; 43]. Furthermore, FT3 and FT4 values increased in the middle of the preparation by 35.7% and 8.9%, respectively, before reverting to below their initial values at the end of the preparation. This contrasts with the athlete in the case study by [PERSON] et al. [9], where T3 levels decreased by 50% during preparation. Research indicates a link between body mass loss for bodybuilding contests and T3 levels [44; 45]; however, it remains uncertain whether there is a method to prevent the reduction in thyroid hormones and if thyroid function has a role in optimizing body composition. In the current study, the changes in hormone levels were more subtle, primarily because our athlete maintained a less severe energy deficit and remained within normal ranges at all times [46]. This approach may have supported overall metabolic health throughout the preparation phase. Although the assessment conditions were similar from measurement to measurement, CK showed a gradual increase, probably due to the prolonged presence of resistance exercise, including both concentric and eccentric muscle contractions [47; 48] and reduced recovery ability due to reduced energy intake [42; 49]. Creatine kinase values throughout the preparation were within the reference values of athletes, ranging from 82 to 1083U\(\cdot\)L\({}^{-1}\), which were elevated compared to non-exercising people [50], and there were no symptoms of rhabdomylysis. Examining the changes in SGOT and SGPT liver enzymes, an increase in the markers was observed in the last week before the competition, with the lowest value recorded in the middle of the preparation, possibly (a) due to the reduced recovery ability in the final training weeks and (b) due to the decreased energy availability. Intense exercise may increase liver enzyme markers without accompanying hepatic damage [44; 51]; therefore, further studies are needed to conclude the relationship between liver indicators and health. Additionally, creatinine showed a similar trend, with the highest value recorded in the last week. While the amount of creatinine is proportional to muscle mass [52], the athlete recorded the lowest muscle mass value in the last week. A possible explanation is the increased protein intake at relative rates, where the consumption at the beginning of preparation was 2.5 g\(\cdot\)bodymass\({}^{-1}\) and reached 2.9 g\(\cdot\)bodymass\({}^{-1}\) in the final week. [PERSON] et al. [53] related protein intake with increased renal function indicators, but it is not necessarily associated with kidney damage, as there is not sufficient evidence that high protein intake is harmful in healthy individuals [54]. Bone density is a parameter negatively affected by body mass loss in overweight individuals [41; 55; 56]. A decrease was observed in the athlete of the present study from 1.38 g\(\cdot\)cm\({}^{-2}\) to 1.35 g\(\cdot\)cm\({}^{-2}\) (\(-2.17\%\)), while bone mass decreased from 3620 g to 3450 g (\(-4.7\%\)). In contrast, athletes in the case studies of [PERSON] et al. [9] and [PERSON] et al. [8] increased their bone density from 1.06 g\(\cdot\)cm\({}^{-2}\) to 1.08 g\(\cdot\)cm\({}^{-2}\) (1.9%) and from 1.35 g\(\cdot\)cm\({}^{-2}\) to 1.38 g\(\cdot\)cm\({}^{-2}\) (2.2%), respectively [57; 58]. The findings of this study indicate that our athlete exhibited significantly higher bone mineral density, probably due to his training status, thus requiring a substantial amount of force to ensure a constant ratio of bone formation and absorption during periods of energy deficiency [59; 60; 61; 62].