Game of Thrones: For Those Who Are Not Into Stretching (this just may be the perfect place…)

By Marlene Harris, NSCA-CSCS

     I never have never been a rabid pursuer of stretching, more like a casual advocate of the whole concept. I see its value and it makes perfect sense in many ways for warm-ups, cool-downs, and general movement when you’ve been still a bit too long. However, it can, (as most, if not all areas of fitness can be) over-used and outright abused. As such it has the capacity to cause as much harm as good. As with over-eating, over-training, over-working, or any other “over” thing you can name, “over-stretching” is also possible and has undesirable outcomes. If you over-stretch your structures, you can cause them to tighten up even more as opposed to release and loosen. This is because your body has a fine Goldilocks Zone sense of where your structures are supposed to be (according to your present context), and anything that pushes that boundary too far will cause your neurology to contract your tissues in protection of them. Overly-loose structures are no more favorable than overly tight ones from a functional point of view; you won’t move well or comfortably in either case.
     Many people don’t stretch regularly, myself included. It’s very easy not to because it’s very easy not to think about it, and being it’s not a high priority for most, it doesn’t make the “Gee.  I really want to/need to do that...” list. But, one day while I was in the, ahem, “throne room”, I mindlessly did a couple stretchy-type moves while in process of “throne room things” and thought “Eureka!”. Why not do a couple stretchy-type things when I visit the throne room? I have to be in there anyways, so why not optimize my time? I started doing this about a week or so ago, and I gotta tell ya, as it’s a very easy habit to acquire (because its not umpleasant), and again, you don’t have to spend a great deal of time devoted to it. Just a couple of moves done each or every other visit will do! Not sure what to do? Here’s a brief sampler. Bear in mind these all assume a seated position on the throne. For those of you who do more standing for throne room visits, feel free to make up your own position-appropriate versions!

1). Ragdoll stretch: while on the throne, drop your arms to your sides and bring your chest towards your knees and count to 10. This stretches your lower and mid-back. Do it twice if it so pleases you. For a more assertive version; place your hands on the front of your knees and pull your chest towards them (pull sensibly!).

2). Hammy stretch: straighten one leg and reach for your toes (or whatever), count to 10. Do the same for the other side. You can also place both feet out at once (be careful with this one!).   

3). Side-bend reach: place one arm at your side, and try to touch your fingers to the floor. You can either do this as a “hold” stretch or a “pulse” stretch where you do mini-touches. Again, go for that 10 count.

4). Cross-reach stretch: turn your torso to the right, and reach your left arm across your body towards the right. Hold or pulse for a 10 count. Do the same for the left side, turn towards your left, reach your right arm across your body in that direction, again for 10, hold or pulse.

5). Ceiling reach: raise one of your arms straight up overhead towards the ceiling, hold or pulse for 10, repeat with the other arm. To further lengthen the arm-up aide, do a bit of a side bend as well!

6). “IT Worker”/shoulder stretch: this one is a must for all office/IT workers. Reach both arms straight behind you and try to touch the tank of the throne. Can you touch it? Great! See if you can squeeze a bit for an enhanced effect! No hunching those shoulders allowed!   

7). Adductor (inner) & Abductor (outer) thigh stretch: place your hand on the inside of one knee and pull lightly towards the outside, stretching your inner thigh (adductor), then place your hand on outside of your knee and lightly pull towards your middle stretching your outer thigh (abductor). Repeat with the other side, 10 counts, hold or pulse, as you like.

      Pick and choose among the stretches, have fun with it, and above all, DO NOT make it a chore! Even if you pick just one here and there throughout the day you’ll be more productive than not doing any at all yes? As you’re likely aware, little efforts, done consistently, can add up to big results in the long term. The above are just a few ideas to get you started. Feel free to incorporate any favorite stretches you may know as best the positioning allows and invent your own variations! Again, you gotta be in there anyways, so…I’m just sayin’…

Alarming Rise in Obesity-Related Cancers in Young Adults

from the AICR Newsletter

A new analysis raises the alarm that the rates of obesity-related cancers are rising in younger and younger adults. Findings from a new study published in The Lancet Public Health indicate that six obesity-related cancers have significantly increased between 1995-2014 and the risk of these cancers is increasing in each successive younger age group. These cancers include colorectal, pancreatic, gallbladder, kidney cancer and multiple myeloma (a type of blood cancer). These cancer types are particularly concerning because they are very serious and account for over 150,000 deaths in the U.S. every year.

The findings were built on the researchers’ previous work demonstrating that the incidence of colorectal cancer in the U.S. has increased in recent decades, especially among younger adults. Colorectal cancer is an obesity-related cancer. “We wanted to find out whether there was a similar increase in incidence of other cancers related to obesity,” says Ahmedin Jemal, DVM, PhD, the vice president of the Surveillance and Health Services Research Program at the American Cancer Society, and the senior author of the study.

The current study was based on cancer incidence data for people aged 25 to 84 years between January 1995 and December 2014. Data was obtained from the Cancer in North America database of the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. The researchers limited their analysis to data pooled from 25 state cancer registries, covering more than two-thirds of the population living in the U.S.

Statistical analysis revealed that during the 20-year period under study, incidence of six of the 12 known obesity-related cancers – colorectal, endometrial (also known as uterine corpus), gallbladder, kidney, multiple myeloma, and pancreatic – increased in the U.S., and the risk of developing these cancers increased within each successively younger age group.

Although the rates of obesity-related cancers also rose among older adults, the magnitude of change was greater among younger adults. The greatest annual percent change increases by age were observed among young adults between the ages of 25 and 29 years for kidney (6.23 percent), gallbladder (3.71 percent), endometrial (3.34 percent), and colorectal cancers (2.4 percent). The annual percent change for people between the ages of 30 and 34 years for multiple myeloma increased by 2.21 percent.

The analysis showed an escalating risk among younger generations for obesity-related cancers. For example, “The risk of developing endometrial cancer among millennials is twice as high as the risk among baby boomers of the same age,” says Jemal.

The authors of the study suggest that this shift in the trend toward increased younger adult cancer incidence may be due to the rapid rise in overweight or obesity prevalence. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, obesity rates among children and teens have more than tripled since the 1970s. A growing body of evidence from experimental studies suggests that having obesity or overweight can speed up the multistep processes involved in the development of cancer, potentially explaining the changes in cancer trends. In addition, people having overweight or obesity may engage in behaviors that increase cancer risk, such as a sedentary lifestyle, extensive screen time, or eating a diet high in processed or red meat and low in fruits and vegetables.

The findings from this study highlight the need for interventions that address the obesity epidemic. “If there is no intervention, the burden of obesity-related cancers in older adults is likely to be much higher in the future,” says Jemal. “This is a bellwether. We haven’t seen the full impact of the obesity epidemic on cancer burden.”

Source: Sung, Hyuna, et al. "Emerging cancer trends among young adults in the USA: analysis of a population-based cancer registry." The Lancet Public Health (2019).

 

The Case Against Sugar is Very Strong

from Brian Johnson’s” Optimizer” E-Zine

Gary Taubes wrote a great book called The Case Against Sugar.Basic idea: If you were a detective in charge of figuring out a series of crimes and you noticed a common pattern among those crimes, you'd be smart to put the pieces together and see if you could narrow your search down to a single suspect. Right?

Well... That's what Taubes does in his book. The crimes? All the chronic diseases wreaking havoc on our society—from diabetes and obesity to heart disease and cancer. Short story: All those chronic diseases are associated with metabolic dysfunction. And the fastest way to make your metabolism dysfunctional? Sugar. Enter: The case against it.

Remember our Nobel Prize winner Elizabeth Blackburn? She discovered telomerase—the stuff that replenishes telomeres.
     Here's how she puts it in The Telomere Effect: "When we want to spot the parties responsible for metabolic disease, we point a finger at the highly processed, sugary foods and sweetened drinks. (We're looking at you, packaged cakes, candies, cookies, and sodas.) These are the foods and drinks most associated with compulsive eating. They light up the reward system in your brain. They are almost immediately absorbed into the blood, and they trick the brain into thinking we are starving and need more food. While we used to think all nutrients had similar effects on weight and metabolism — a 'calorie is a calorie' — this is wrong. Simply reducing sugars, even if you eat the same number of calories, can lead to metabolic improvements. Simple carbs wreak more havoc on metabolism and control over appetite than other types of foods."

Blackburn is at UCSF. She references her colleague Robert Lustig when she makes the point above. As we discussed in our last +1, Lustig is one of the world's leading research endocrinologists. You know what he says about sugar? He tells us that sugar is the "Darth Vader" of the nutrition world. This little statistic (from his studies) might be THE most powerful one we'll ever read regarding just how dangerous sugar is:

"If you had any residual doubt about 'a calorie is not a calorie,' this analysis should remove it. Every additional 150 calories per person per day barely raised diabetes prevalence. But if those 150 calories were instead from a can of soda, increase in diabetes rose sevenfold. Sugar is more dangerous than its calories. Sugar is a toxin. Plain and simple."

That's crazy. 150 additional calories from any source? No big deal. 150 additional calories from a CAN OF SODA? DIABETES GOES UP SEVENFOLD. Know this: "Sugar is more dangerous than its calories. Sugar is a toxin. Plain and simple."

Please tattoo that on your consciousness. (Right after throwing away your sodas!) And... To be clear: This isn't just about risk for diabetes. It's a metabolic issue—which is all about how every cell in our bodies produce Energy—which means it affects EVERYTHING.

 

Eating processed food leads to weight gain

From Tom Venuto from the Burn the Fat E-zine 

"Eating processed food leads to weight gain; eating unprocessed food leads to weight loss? Duh. Of course. Common sense. Not news." But there is new news about ultra-processed food, from a study just completed at the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda.

Common sense may dictate that "processed foods are fattening," but how? Are they simply a delivery vehicle for excess calories or are they inherently fattening in some other way as well? If this seems like an odd question, consider that it's not unusual at all for people to believe that refined sugar simply turns right into body fat (false).
 
Only a controlled study can show a cause-effect relationship between food and fat gain and that's what this study did - the first study of its kind. The scientists admitted 10 men and 10 women who were weight-stable into their inpatient facility where they lived for 28 days and everything they did could be controlled and measured.

They were assigned randomly to the ultra-processed or unprocessed diet for 2 weeks, and then crossed over to the other diet for 2 weeks. Each participant was given 3 daily meals and instructed to eat as much or as little of them as they wanted (ad libitum). The results?

On the ultra-processed diets, subjects ate on average, 508 more calories per day. That's an ENORMOUS difference. It shouldn't be a surprise then, that on the ultra-processed diet, subjects gained weight (1.7 lbs in only 2 weeks) and lost weight on the unprocessed diet (2.4 lbs in only 2 weeks).

Before shrugging this off as, "Still just common sense," a key point to remember is that the subjects were not counting calories or tracking macros. Also, if this is common sense, then why are there still so many diet wars with factions arguing, sometimes aggressively, about whether the ideal weight loss diet is low carbohydrate, keto, paleo, grain-free, high protein, low fat, vegetarian, vegan,  and so on?

The question is not whether these diets work - all of them can work, and no single diet is going to be suitable for everyone's preferences and lifestyles. The more important question is why do they work? For some strange reason, there are still large numbers of people who don't believe weight loss is a calorie thing. Low carb dogma is usually dismissive of the role of calories. Low carb and keto advocates to this day will tell you that obesity is caused by carbs and insulin (wrong).

It really is an excess of calories that leads to fat gain. Ultra processed carbs can simply be a big part of that energy surplus in the average person's diet, and the call to cut carbs is simply one way to reduce calories. Also kind of strange if there's no specific health reason for it, the "reduce carbs" guideline often includes non processed carbs like sweet potatoes, brown rice, beans, oatmeal, 100% whole grains, even, believe it or not, fruit.

In a similar fashion, all kinds of specific foods, from wheat to dairy to potatoes and more, have been demonized and implicated in fat gain by an endless parade of popular diets, with no cause and effect evidence. It's never advertised as "too many calories" because that's not sexy enough to sell.

Popular diet recommendations are diverse, but the ones that work all share a common piece of advice: avoid or minimize ultra-processed foods. The scientific evidence points to obesity and associated diseases like type 2 diabetes rising in parallel with an increasingly industrial food system and the easy availability of cheap processed food.

We may still be talking common sense here, but there were more "uncommon" findings that popped up in this study as well. Some previous research theorized that ultra processed foods are hyper-palatable, have "supernormal appetitive properties," or may disrupt gut-brain signaling and influence food reinforcement and overall calorie intake through pathways distinct from energy density or palatability of the food.

As many scientists have suspected, appetite hormones are involved. The high processed food group saw an increase in the hunger hormone ghrelin, while the unprocessed food group saw an increase in the appetite suppressing hormone PYY (peptide YY).

Yet another interesting finding was that the processed food group ate faster - 17 calories per minute faster. This eating rate was directly correlated to higher total calorie intake. Previous studies found that a 20% change in eating rate can impact energy intake by 10 to 13%.

And an even more notable finding for the few remaining who still don't believe in calories in vs calories out: This was a metabolic ward study, so calorie balance could be directly tracked. The amount of weight gain experienced by eating the processed food correlated highly with the amount of surplus calories consumed. This gives us more confirmation about the role of energy balance in weight gain or loss.

Like many pieces of the body transformation puzzle, this is simple stuff, but not easy to apply, especially when you consider how cheap, convenient and ubiquitous junk food is.  Be prepared to flex some discipline and put in some effort, because eating for healthy fat loss is not always easy in our modern environment.

"Eat less processed food" is sound advice, for health as well as weight loss, but it may not be useful enough to stop there. Meal planning and more specific strategies on controlling excess calories from processed food will help even more.

Pressured Apologies, False Confessions, Witch Hunts

BY STEWART JUSTMAN

Someone makes a public comment out of line with progressive opinion. Enforcers of such opinion promptly descend on the offender online, pelting him or her with abusive slogans in the name of Justice. The offender buckles, offers submission — even while protesting that he or she didn’t really mean any harm — and promises, perhaps, to become a better person. Over recent months we have become all too familiar with this sequence, which by now constitutes virtually a genre.

For example, answering a question about the possibility of a transgender player competing against women on the tennis court, the former champion Martina Navratilova tweeted on Dec. 20, 2018:

Clearly that can’t be right. You can’t just proclaim yourself a female and be able to compete against women. There must be some standards, and having a penis and competing as a woman would not fit that standard [sic].

Given her history in tennis, Navratilova must have felt she was on solid ground in commenting on the principles of competition. Nevertheless, when the transgender cyclist Rachel McKinnon reviled her (a lesbian) as “transphobic,” she apologized, placed herself under a sort of gag order, and deleted the original tweet, in effect withdrawing her argument.

I am sorry if I said anything anywhere near transphobic — certainly I meant no harm — I will educate myself better on this issue but meantime I will be quiet about it. Thank you.

The story goes on from there, but the two tweets in and of themselves are enough to suggest an analogy between the extraction of an apology for an ideological offense and the extraction of a false confession in a criminal case. Both Martina Navratilova and an innocent suspect who confesses under pressure disown a position that originally seemed to them self-evident — that it “clearly” can’t be appropriate for a biological male to compete against women, and that one didn’t commit a crime one knows nothing about. Of course, a person who confesses to a murder faces penalties that go well beyond the shaming suffered by someone who apologizes for a comment.

Here, though, I am concerned with a larger point suggested by both the extracted apology and the extracted confession: that our certainties may not be as immune to coercion as we would like to think. […]

Read the complete article.

 

Everything You Need To Know About Greens Supplements

Mike Roussell, Ph.D. 

Greens supplements are one of the fastest-growing supplement categories on the market. Who wouldn't want a day's worth of fruits and veggies in a convenient pill or powder? It is a fact that greens supplements allow you to consume a concentrated version of several fruits, vegetables, and herbs, but their purpose and effectiveness in a hard-training, clean-eating diet are often accompanied by fictional claims.

If used correctly, greens supplements can aid your dietary health but, if used incorrectly, they can potentially sabotage insulin sensitivity and future muscle growth. Green doesn't always mean good. Before you surge through the green light, let's go behind the scenes and separate fact from fiction when it comes to everything green.

1. Fiction: Greens Can Replace Your Multivitamin: Why eat four daily servings of veggies when you can just pop a few pills to get the same nutritional benefits? Well, because you can't. Greens supplements might be full of concentrated fruits and vegetables, but most companies don't formulate their products to meet essential vitamin and mineral levels. This is especially true for hard-training lifters, who require an increased intake of minerals like zinc and magnesium. Unless your greens supplement lists out all the vitamins and minerals it contains in their total amounts—or at least in percentages relative to the recommended daily value—don't look for them to become your new daily multi.

2. Fact: Greens Might Restore Your pH Balance: The human body likes to maintain balance, aka, homeostasis. Your acid-base balance, or pH balance, is no different. What you eat may influence the body's pH. This is where green supplements can be beneficial. Grains, dairy, and protein are acidic, while green leafy vegetables are alkaline, or basic. Greens supplements are alkaline, and one of their main benefits is their ability to improve your body's acid-base balance.
Some people design entire diets solely around optimizing pH. This seems a little extreme—and is based on fluctuating research—but there is some logic behind it. An unbalanced pH may lead to decreased bone health, excessive cortisol, and slightly impaired thyroid function. Eating more alkaline foods, like fruits and vegetables, isn't a bad idea from a pH perspective.

Since greens supplements are vegetable powerhouses, it's been proposed that they're a good way to optimize your body's pH. They might actually work that way. A study published in the "Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition" found that two weeks of daily supplementation with greens led to significant improvements in urinary pH, moving subjects from an acidic pH to one considered optimal. The results from this pilot-type study suggest that a daily greens supplement may improve an acid-base balance that is out of the optimal range.

3. Fiction: All Greens Are Created Equal:  It's important to look for ingredients you can quantify in a greens product. You wouldn't use a creatine supplement without knowing how much creatine was in it, right? While the dose-to-effect relationship with greens supplements isn't as clearly defined as creatine, it's still important to be as informed as possible. If a greens supplement advertises that it has green tea extract, it would be good to know how much green tea extract the product contains. Don't take everything at face value. The company might just be sprinkling in enough of the supplement to say that it's there instead of adding the amount necessary for you to experience a quantifiable effect.

4. Fiction: Buy greens based on their oxygen radical absorption capacity (ORAC): Oxygen radical absorption capacity (ORAC) was developed by a group of USDA scientists in an effort to quantify the antioxidant capacity of foods. In theory, it was designed to create a level playing field in which we could know how well one food ranks in antioxidant capacity compared to another. Since greens supplements are concentrated fruits and vegetables, their ORAC values have always been very high. This is the main reason greens supplements can be touted as "equivalent to X servings of fruits and vegetables."
The downside: Despite the excitement surrounding it, the use of ORAC isn't as relevant as initially expected. The USDA has even gone as far as removing ORAC ratings from its database. While many products use a high ORAC rating as padding for their main selling point, don't let that be the driver behind your buying decision.

5. Fiction: Greens Supplement Timing Isn’t Important: This is one case where timing does matter—sort of. But, as long as you don't take a greens supplement immediately post-workout, you can take it any time. Exercise is a physiologically disruptive process. It promotes inflammation and oxidation. At first glance this would seem like the perfect time to take a supplement loaded with anti-oxidants ... but it isn't. Training is all about recovery and adaption. The inflammation and oxidation that occur as a result of hard training are part of the natural process your body undergoes to create lasting change. Research shows that dosing your body with high amounts of antioxidants post-workout can put the brakes on your capacity to build muscle.

How? Intense exercise leads to the production of compounds called reactive oxygen species (ROS). In other areas of healthcare, those are considered bad. When you hear people talk about oxidative stress, that's ROS at work. However, with intense exercise, ROS may promote the growth of muscle by enhancing the activity of cells in your muscles that are responsible for rebuilding and repairing muscle tissue.

Increased insulin sensitivity is one of the biggest benefits of exercise, but supplementing with antioxidants after exercise can also decrease insulin sensitivity. This means potential gains may go down the drain. To avoid this, don't take your greens supplement within three hours of training.

6. Fiction: Greens Override the Need For Whole Fruits & Vegetables: Greens supplements are not a replacement for eating fruits and vegetables and, if you're already eating 10 or more servings of fruits and vegetables per day, they're probably unnecessary. The additional antioxidants, phytochemicals, vitamins, and minerals won't provide much more of a benefit compared to the fruits and vegetables you're currently eating. However, if you eat a low-carbohydrate diet or a small amount of fruits and veggies, then a greens supplement can be a beneficial addition to your supplement regimen.

I especially recommend greens supplements to clients when they travel. Even if you try your best, eating on the road is never as clean as eating at home. The major deficient generally comes in the limited amounts of fruits and vegetables you have access to. Traveling is also stressful on your system, and the added antioxidant power in a greens supplement is a welcomed ally.

Caffeine For Performance

by Stacey Penney, MS, NASM-CPT

Caffeine has become a regular part of our daily diets, found in items such as chocolate, coffee, tea, and soda, even over-the-counter medications, supplements and cosmetics. It stimulates the central nervous system, heart, and musculoskeletal system. Part of the appeal of caffeine is that it has minimal health consequences for generally healthy individuals when taken in low-to-moderate amounts. Typical side effects include sleep disturbances, headaches, tremors, or increased anxiety, but overall benefits include improved concentration, alertness and mood.

Many athletes turn to caffeine not only for this stimulating buzz, but also to 
enhance sports performance. Between 1984 and 2004, caffeine was on the World Anti-Doping Agency’s (WADA) list of banned substances as evidence implicated caffeine as an ergogenic aid. It was eventually removed from the list as violation threshold levels were well beyond doses giving athletes a competitive edge. Though not currently banned, it is still a substance being monitored by WADA. Along these same lines, the NCCA bans caffeine at urine concentration levels of 15 ug/mL or higher for student-athletes to test positive, so it is still important to monitor just how much caffeine could be ingested from different sources (which will be listed later).

In the Body: Caffeine is absorbed in the gastrointestinal tract and quickly metabolized by the liver. It begins circulating in the blood stream within 15-45 minutes, with peak concentration appearing an hour after consumption. Caffeine research, overall, finds that it effects both the central and peripheral systems. It easily crosses the membranes of nerve and muscle cells, and even the blood-brain barrier. Caffeine can also enhance fat oxidation and spare muscle glycogen. When combined with a carbohydrate source during recovery, caffeine is also shown to improve glycogen repletion, but timing becomes a factor so that it does not negatively impact sleep patterns.

Health Benefits and Cautions of Caffeine: Just about every week a new piece of research on caffeine and its health benefits makes the headlines. Caffeine consumption (especially coffee) has been correlated with a reduced risk of Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s disease, various cancers, diabetes, and also improvements in cognitive functioning and asthma relief. If you are a regular caffeine consumer, you are probably aware of the dependence you may have on caffeine. Withdrawal can make you cranky, cause headaches, drowsiness, and even nausea. Caffeine beyond small amounts is not recommended during pregnancy, and those with high blood pressure, anxiety, sleep problems, heart issues, and stomach concerns may want to avoid caffeine. Caffeine may interact with prescription or over-the-counter medications, so consulting with a health care provider is advised.

Benefits for Performance: Need to improve ball-passing accuracy in a field sport? Caffeine may be able to improve that by 10%. Caffeine has been shown to improve performance by decreasing reaction time, sustaining maximal endurance and intermittent high-intensity long-duration exercise by extending the time to exhaustion. Caffeine may offer benefits for strength-power and sprint activities, and potentially reduce RPE, but research in these areas has been equivocal. Recent research has also shown that caffeine ingestion an hour prior to resistance training increased total repetitions that could be performed, but more importantly, significantly decreased DOMS in the days following compared to placebo. These researchers left us with an interesting question to ponder- would caffeine allow for more training sessions to be completed because of decreased soreness?

Caffeine Dosing and Sources: Optimal dosing for improving performance is between 3-6mg/2.2 lbs body weight, where lower amounts do not offer a significant benefit and higher doses offer no additional benefits, and can even have negative performance consequences. As an example, for a 150 pound athlete this would equate to 204 to 409 mg caffeine. Some common caffeine sources include:
Cola (12 oz.): 30-47 mg
Green tea (8 oz.): 24-40 mg
Black tea (8 oz.): 14-61 mg
Chocolate (bittersweet 1 oz.): 25mg
Coffee (8 oz.): 95-200 mg
Espresso (1 oz.): 40-75 mg

Over-the-counter medications are another source of caffeine to be aware of. As you can see, caffeine concentrations can vary widely, especially in coffees and teas due to brewing or even bean roasting methods. For those seeking a more controlled dosing using caffeine anhydrous, a dry powder form, can provide that.
For the regular caffeine consumer, a cup or two of coffee an hour before training doesn’t seem that extreme, but what about for the caffeine naïve athlete? Would a vente from the corner coffee shop on the way to a competition put them over the edge? Probably not, but a competition wouldn’t be the best time to discover an athlete’s response to caffeine. To evaluate how long the ergogenic effect of caffeine lasts and how it differed between regular caffeine users and nonusers, Bell and McLellan (2002) had study participants ingest either 5 mg/kg of caffeine or a placebo and complete one of six randomized submaximal (80%) exercise tests to exhaustion trials, at 1, 3, or 6 hours after ingestion, once per week. Caffeine significantly improved (increased) time to exhaustion and was greater for nonusers who had a longer lasting ergogenic effect that was still evident at the 6 hour post ingestion trial. For those who are caffeine experienced, caffeine clears from the blood stream between 3 and 6 hours after ingestion, whereas for our caffeine naïve consumers it takes a bit longer.

What do Athletes Know? During the 2005 Hawaiian Ironman Triathlon World Championship, participants were asked to complete a questionnaire to discover what their knowledge about caffeine and exercise was, along with the sources they received their information from. 73% of the respondents perceived that caffeine had a positive or strongly positive effect on performance, with the most common sources of caffeine information being fellow athletes, magazines, journal articles, and coaches, in addition to self-research and experimentation. 53% of these athletes planning on using caffeine indicated they did not know how much caffeine would improve their triathlon performance! This research highlights the need for more athlete education on the topic of how to correctly use caffeine to enhance performance—if its use is being considered.

Caffeine Wrap-Up: Though we are not promoting the use of caffeine, this article shares some of the benefits and dosing strategies for improving performance. The ergogenic effects of caffeine can vary depending on dosing, timing, exercise intensity, duration, and habitual or naïve caffeine use. Athletes should use caution if considering using caffeine if they have medical conditions or prone to sleep disturbances and consult with their healthcare provider.