Is it the coffee--or the caffeine--that boosts endurance performance?
Here’s an article you’ll almost certainly want to read on the subject of coffee vs caffeine. Which is it that actually produces the well known performance boost? And which should you rely on before your major efforts?
Most of the research has been done on caffeine pills, because that’s about the only way you can actually measure the precise amount of caffeine being consumed. And research is all about precise measurements. But coffee, which is how most athletes get their caffeine fix, can differ in almost infinite ways--preparation, the beans used, regional custom, and so on.
Also coffee can have additional benefits over pills. Its many bioactive ingredients “may influence blood flow and glucose levels,” as Alex Hutchinson notes. Coffee also has “antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties.” These ingredients can make coffee a life-extending drink, at least for some individuals.
It might depend on whether you have genes that make you a fast caffeine metabolizer or a slow metabolizer. To find out for yourself, you have to test both caffeine pills and coffee drinks to see which gives you the biggest boost. Of course, enjoyment is another key decision point. And pooping. More at Outside Online.
Outdoor running beats treadmill for increased fitness
The treadmill is a life saver for many runners, with countless benefits ranging from better time management, to safety in harsh weather, to perhaps fewer injuries. However, there’s always the lingering question: Is treadmill running as productive as outdoor running with regard to improved speed and fitness (in an outdoor running test like a competitive race)?
A new study has looked into that, and reported negative results for the treadmill. When subjects did 6 weeks of training on either a treadmill or outdoors, the treadmill group suffered a loss of skeletal muscle mass.
On the other hand, those in the “overground” group “preserved leg skeletal muscle mass” and also benefited from “greater physical fitness improvements.” These included more loss of body fat, and faster 1600-meter time trial performances.
Another plus for outdoor running: It requires no financial outlay for special equipment or memberships. More at PeerJ.
Listen to your feet: They can teach you a lot
Most of us seek to produce as little impact shock as possible when we land on the road (track or trail), hoping that lower forces means less risk of injury. In this recent study, researchers asked female runners to attempt to lower their landing forces in one of two different ways--with an internal focus, or an external focus.
The internal-focus instruction: Bend your knees more. The external focus: Run more softly.
The latter approach worked better.
“I think it’s important for physical therapists, coaches and trainers to realize the cues they are giving when training runners matter because some are more effective than others,” said one of the authors in an article at the University of Wisconsin-LaCrosse blog.
Conclusion: “Our findings indicate that instructions promoting an external focus may be more effective at reducing loading rates during running compared to instructions promoting an internal focus.” More at J of Sport Rehabilitation.
What’s the fastest Ironman shoe? Hoka vs Adidas
You might remember that last year’s Ironman World Championships in Kona, HI, featured a number of athletes running in “illegal” shoes. That is, they wore shoes with stack heights substantially higher than the 40mm limit enforced by World Athletics, which governs elite running races around the globe. Only WA doesn’t govern triathlons, so the shoes weren’t illegal. Just strange.
This year, however, the same shoes would have been illegal, because World Triathlon has since changed its regulations to align with WA. So there was increased interest to see what legal shoes would be on the feet of the world’s best triathletes.
A review of those shoes (on the top male Ironmen) gave a strong nod to the Hoka Rocket X 2, which captured 6 of the top 10 positions. Hoka is also a sponsor of the Ironman World Championships and many top triathletes. The Hoka Rocket X2 has a 40mm stack height and uses a midsole foam that Hoka terms “super critical.”
The fastest marathon time (apparently the fastest ever in an Ironman World Champs, 2:32:41) was recorded by Patrick Lange, who raced in the Adidas Adizero Pro 3, with a stack height of 39.5mm. This shoe includes carbon fiber “energy rods” in the midsole rather than a “plate.” More at Triathlete.
New study: Peppermint oil increases endurance
In a study that tested male recreational runners (as opposed to, say, non running college students), subjects who consumed water + “essential peppermint oil” vs water-only were able to continue running 10 minutes longer in a time to exhaustion test. The subjects had a vo2 max indicating they were in sub-19:00 shape for 5K.
All subjects were asked to run as long as they could at 70% of their vo2 max. They received a drink (water, or water + peppermint oil) before running, and modest additional amounts during their treadmill run. On average, they hung in there for 1 hour, 50 minutes with the peppermint oil, and a significantly less time (1:38:30) without the peppermint.
Aside from the time to exhaustion difference, researchers found no other major changes in a range of physical measures. Conclusion: “Peppermint essential oil added to water before and during a race significantly increases the time to exhaustion of recreational runners.” More at European J of Nutrition.
Evolution wants you to be a better runner … even when starving
I’m confident that runners are the only group of athletes deeply interested in evolutionary biology. Football players? Nah. Tennis. Nope. Baseball? Not a chance. Same for most other athletes who need specialized equipment and skills to participate in their chosen sport.
But runners? Yeah, we’re fascinated by evolutionary forces, because we realize that our simple, no-skill, no-equipment activity stems directly from what humans have done throughout our roughly 300,000 years. Except now we wear shoes because the underfoot surface has changed dramatically.
Scientists are just as interested in how present-day running has evolved from our long-ago running. This topic could fill a book. For now, it’s reflected in two recent, speculative, and thought-provoking papers.
Jose Areta, a researcher in the field of energy availability, imagines what would have happened to a paleo human during the first stages of starvation in a famine. Evolution wouldn’t have cared about having babies at this point, or about bone and muscle growth, or about much except for the next meal. It would “turn off” all biological processes that were nonessential in the short term.
At the same time, it would “turn on” anything that might increase food acquisition.This could include an increased vo2 max and endurance capacity. These would boost the chances that our skinny paleo ancestor could run down (literally) a next meal. And survive another day.
This adaptation wouldn’t last long, just as you can’t sustain your training for long on a low-energy diet. But it could help a paleo runner open a brief survival window, and get through the famine. Eventually any related genes would be passed along to the next generation. These might include genes that enhanced running potential at a time of low energy availability.
Conclusion: “The effects of energy deficiency may not be ‘all positive’ or ‘all negative’: some energy deficit may trigger adaptive responses while excessive deficit may result in negative health consequences (e.g. low bone mineral density and stress fractures), which may ultimately affect performance.” More at Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology with free full text.
Another recent report investigated runners who had competed in one of two ultramarathons that stretched over 250K (150 miles) in 5 days. The researchers aimed to determine how these events affected “cognitive plasticity under conditions of energetic deficit.”
Here’s what happened: During the 5-day races, the runners couldn’t consume enough calories to match their expenditure. They functioned on low energy, and lost weight. The researchers measured changes in various types of memory, including “spatial working memory.” This is the kind of memory you would need if you were foraging for edible plants or animals.
Outcome: “Performance in spatial working memory was prioritized at the expense of episodic memory.” The paper’s authors suggest that this represented “an adaptive response … that could be beneficial during energetic deficit because it may improve (a) ability to find the way home following a foraging or long-distance hunting trip, and (b) ability to acquire food by facilitating recollection of the location and quality of previously visited feeding sites.” More at American J of Biological Anthropology with free full text.
Caution advised: ChatGPT isn’t ready to be a reliable coach
Like many of you, I’m trying to keep up with the blitzkrieg world of Artificial Intelligence bots. I’m intrigued for sure, and at times I’ve been impressed. I’ve also seen lots of “hallucinations”--really bad mistakes.
Here an acknowledged expert in women’s exercise and strength-building explains in step-by-step detail how a Chat GPT summary of her training programs differs from what she would actually advise doing. It makes for a fascinating read.
The AI responses do come close to summarizing some of Stacy Sims’s approach. But of course the difference is in the details, and the details don’t hit the mark.
This inspired me to ask a popular AI bot to give me a 16-week marathon training program like one Hal Higdon would recommend. The response came back quickly, but in a short, generic form, and with no single run longer than 12 miles. I’ve known Higdon for a long time, and that ain’t Hal.
So for now I’d keep looking for in-depth articles and full-length books from acknowledged experts. The chatbots are fun, but you don’t want any hallucinations in your personal health and fitness program. More at Dr. Stacy Sims.
How long does it take to get in shape?
A training plan works best when you understand how long it takes to deliver the hoped-for gains.
If you’re thinking tomorrow, or next week, or even next month, you’ll likely be disappointed.
Training and fitness don’t work that way. There are many variables in the mix, including key ones like your beginning fitness, how hard you train, and how long you train.
Marathon training plans are the ones many runners seem to seek out and follow most closely. These tend to last from 12 weeks to 16 weeks (the most popular time frame) to 24 weeks. Of course, if you want to chase a marathon PR, that could involve a multiyear project with various peaks and valleys along the way.
Here the author explains what you can expect as you work through this process. And why, based on various physiological adaptations. The truest sentence I found in this article is: “Impatience and unrealistic expectations can cause frustration and hinder desired progression.”
Yes, that happens. Over and over again. Some of us learn. Some of us are too bull-headed.
I chuckled at another observation that rang true. Many runners fall into the trap of “demanding endeavors–like races or extensive training sessions–in close proximity to the designated race day.” Who hasn’t tried to squeeze in just one or two final butt-busters in the last weeks before a big race? And later regretted it. I’ve got both my hands up in the air, and I’m not proud of that.
This article is designed to help you “embark on a purposeful journey.” I hope it works. More at Trail Runner.
SHORT STUFF you don’t want to miss
>>> Beat “The Wall:” How to avoid the dreaded marathon “bonk”
>>> Always tough to decide: Should you add more fast runs or more long runs to your training program?
>>> Need to know: A podiatrist explains when you should train in super shoes
GREAT QUOTES make great training partners
“It's a treat being a long-distance runner, out in the world by yourself with not a soul to make you bad-tempered or tell you what to do.”
—Alan Sillitoe, author, “Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner”
That’s all for now. Thanks for reading. See you again next week. Amby