Six months of exercise training was associated with decreased premenstrual symptoms in two groups of women. There was no change in symptoms in nontraining women. Eight sedentary (ST) women increased running from 0 to 76 +/- 26 km/cycle (mean +/- standard deviation) over 6 months and seven runners (MT) trained for a marathon (42.2 km). Six normally active, nontraining (C-NT) women kept their activity constant. Each subject completed monthly intensity-graded questionnaires or kept daily symptoms diaries concerning premenstrual symptoms. All monitored basal body temperature, weight, and exercise. Gonadal steroids were measured in ST women. For ST subjects, breast (P = 0.005), fluid (P = 0.01), and personal stress (P = 0.025) decreased. MT women experienced decreased fluid (P = 0.034) and depression (P = 0.014). Anxiety tended to decrease (P = 0.087). ST and MT subjects experienced decreases in premenstrual symptoms without documented hormonal, menstrual cycle, or weight changes. These symptom changes appear to be the earliest evidence of the effects of conditioning exercise on the reproductive system.
exercise training premenstrual symptoms reduction, Prior JC conditioning exercise premenstrual syndrome, running exercise PMS prospective controlled trial, aerobic exercise premenstrual breast tenderness fluid retention, marathon training premenstrual depression anxiety, non-pharmacological treatment premenstrual syndrome exercise, Prior Vigna exercise reproductive system effects, sedentary women exercise intervention PMS six month trial, basal body temperature exercise menstrual cycle, premenstrual symptom questionnaire conditioning exercise, exercise hormonal changes menstrual cycle gonadal steroids
PMID 3549364 3549364 DOI 10.1016/s0015-0282(16)59045-1 10.1016/s0015-0282(16)59045-1
Cite this article
Prior, J. C., Vigna, Y., Sciarretta, D., Alojado, N., & Schulzer, M. (1987). Conditioning exercise decreases premenstrual symptoms: a prospective, controlled 6-month trial. Fertility and sterility, 47(3), 402-408. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0015-0282(16)59045-1
Prior JC, Vigna Y, Sciarretta D, Alojado N, Schulzer M. Conditioning exercise decreases premenstrual symptoms: a prospective, controlled 6-month trial. Fertil Steril. 1987;47(3):402-408. doi:10.1016/s0015-0282(16)59045-1
Prior, J. C., et al. "Conditioning exercise decreases premenstrual symptoms: a prospective, controlled 6-month trial." Fertility and sterility, vol. 47, no. 3, 1987, pp. 402-408.
Prior JC et al., 1986·Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol
Conditioning exercise decreased premenstrual symptoms during 3 months of a prospective controlled training study. Eight women with normal ovulatory menstrual cycles began a running exercise training programme while completing intensity-graded questionnaires concerning molimina. Six sedentary control women followed the same protocol for 3 months but did not exercise. Oral basal temperatures evaluated by mean temperature analysis were obtained for all cycles. Exercise distance and time, average exercise heart rate, basal and maximal heart rate and body weights were recorded prospectively and evaluated during the control (0) and 3rd month of the study. Mid-luteal phase progesterone and estrogen levels were sampled during the analyzed cycles for the exercise group. Molimina did not change over 3 months time in the control group. The exercise group, after increasing distance run to 51.0 +/- 18.1 km/cycle at 3 months, showed decreases in overall molimina (scores on a 9-point scale) 6.5 +/- 1.8 to 3.5 +/- 0.9, p less than 0.01). Breast symptoms decreased from 8.3 +/- 0.7, p less than 0.005. Fluid symptoms also decreased from 7.3 +/- 1.8 to 5.5 +/- 0.9, p less than 0.025. Menstrual cycle intervals, luteal lengths, body weights and mid-luteal estrogen and progesterone levels were normal and unchanged. Moderate exercise training without major weight, hormonal or menstrual cycle alteration significantly decreased premenstrual symptoms.
Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, 2026·Fertility and Sterility
Current strategies for the assessment and treatment of recurrent pregnancy loss are discussed. This replaces the previous document, titled, "Evaluation and treatment a committee opinion," last published in 2012.
This narrative review examines the evidence for medical optimization of inflammatory conditions, vitamin deficiencies, endocrine disorders, immune dysregulation, oligo-ovulation, and luteal phase factors to improve fertility outcomes in women attempting to conceive through natural or timed intercourse. Overall, there is a paucity of data with respect to these categories among patients pursuing timed intercourse, precluding our ability to draw strong recommendations. However, there is strong evidence supporting treatment of endocrine disorders, specifically overt thyroid dysfunction and hyperprolactinemia, as well as oligo-ovulation. Conversely, treatment of subclinical hypothyroidism is not recommended. The current data are insufficient to support empiric use of antiinflammatory medications, corticosteroids, thyroid hormones, or vitamins or supplements to improve chances of pregnancy in a general infertility population.
Restorative Reproductive Medicine (RRM) aims to restore fertility by diagnosing and treating the underlying causes of infertility. RRM is frequently promoted as an alternative to assisted reproductive technology (ART), despite uncertainty regarding its comparative effectiveness and safety. Where delayed childbearing and infertility are becoming more common, reliance on optimization of natural physiology alone may delay effective treatment and compromise reproductive outcomes. A systematic review of the current evidence comparing RRM to either ART or unassisted conception is, therefore, essential to inform clinical practice, guideline development, and shared decision-making for patients experiencing infertility. To assess the effectiveness and safety of RRM approaches, evaluated as a whole, rather than as individual components, compared with ART and medically unassisted conception in couples experiencing infertility. A systematic literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL and the Journal of Restorative Reproductive Medicine from inception to 28 November 2025. We included randomized control trials (RCTs) or nonrandomized comparative studies evaluating reproductive and safety outcomes of RRM as a unified treatment, compared with either ART or expectant management (attempted medically unassisted conception). Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. We retrieved 724 records, of which 16 studies underwent full-text review. No RCTs or comparative observational studies were identified. All 16 full-text studies were excluded for an ineligible study design (no control group); most were cohort studies in which all participants underwent RRM. Ten studies reported reproductive outcomes; nine of these made claims regarding the benefits or effectiveness of RRM. None of these claims were supported by the study designs used, as the lack of a comparison group precludes reliable estimation of treatment effects. Consequently, these studies cannot provide valid estimates of RRM success rates, nor permit any meaningful inference about its effectiveness relative to unassisted conception or ART. Large-scale RCTs or prospective cohort studies reporting effectiveness and safety outcomes are required to inform evidence-based fertility guidelines. There are no comparative studies to support reliable estimates of the safety and effectiveness of RRM compared with ART or medically unassisted conception for couples experiencing infertility.