Effects of carbohydrate dose and frequency on metabolism, gastrointestinal discomfort, and cross‐country skiing performance

Stocks, Ben; Betts, James A.; McGawley, Kerry

doi:10.1111/sms.12544

Cited by 9 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Likewise, Trommellen and colleagues also showed that the combined ingestion of Glc and Fru (1.2 g/kg/h Glc plus 0.3 g/kg/h Fru or 0.9 g/kg/h Glc +0.6 g/kg/h Suc) did not further accelerate post-exercise synthesis of muscle glycogen, compared to ingestion of 1.5 g/kg/h of Glc alone [ 91 ]. Hence, these data clarify that the post exercise muscle glycogen regeneration rate is independent from the type and the length of ingested CHO; but the combined ingestion of Glc and Fru or Suc results in less gastrointestinal disturbance compared to Glc alone, due to a lower accumulation of CHO in the gastrointestinal tract, in line with previous studies [ 91 , 93 ].…”

Section: Functional Beverages Containing Chosupporting

confidence: 89%

Role of Functional Beverages on Sport Performance and Recovery

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Functional beverages represent a palatable and efficient way to hydrate and reintegrate electrolytes, carbohydrates, and other nutrients employed and/or lost during physical training and/or competitions. Bodily hydration during sporting activity is one of the best indicators of health in athletes and can be a limiting factor for sport performance. Indeed, dehydration strongly decreases athletic performance until it is a risk to health. As for other nutrients, each of them is reported to support athletes’ needs both during the physical activity and/or in the post-workout. In this study, we review the current knowledge of macronutrient-enriched functional beverages in sport taking into account the athletes’ health, sports performance, and recovery.

show abstract

Section: Functional Beverages Containing Chosupporting

confidence: 89%

Role of Functional Beverages on Sport Performance and Recovery

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While a self-paced treadmill of this type is uncommon it is not unique, with other research groups describing similar systems within laboratory settings (Stöggl et al, 2007; Losnegard et al, 2012). With reliable performance data, a range of novel laboratory-based studies are possible using running or cross-country roller-skiing, as opposed to the more common mode of cycling, whereby pacing and intervention strategies may be examined in relation to maximal performance (Andersson et al, 2016; Stocks et al, 2016; Watkins et al, 2017). …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Reliability and Validity of a Four-Minute Running Time-Trial in Assessing V˙O2max and Performance

McGawley

2017

Front. Physiol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Traditional graded-exercise tests to volitional exhaustion (GXTs) are limited by the need to establish starting workloads, stage durations, and step increments. Short-duration time-trials (TTs) may be easier to implement and more ecologically valid in terms of real-world athletic events. The purpose of the current study was to assess the reliability and validity of maximal oxygen uptake (V˙O2max) and performance measured during a traditional GXT (STEP) and a four-minute running time-trial (RunTT).Methods: Ten recreational runners (age: 32 ± 7 years; body mass: 69 ± 10 kg) completed five STEP tests with a verification phase (VER) and five self-paced RunTTs on a treadmill. The order of the STEP/VER and RunTT trials was alternated and counter-balanced. Performance was measured as time to exhaustion (TTE) for STEP and VER and distance covered for RunTT.Results: The coefficient of variation (CV) for V˙O2max was similar between STEP, VER, and RunTT (1.9 ± 1.0, 2.2 ± 1.1, and 1.8 ± 0.8%, respectively), but varied for performance between the three types of test (4.5 ± 1.9, 9.7 ± 3.5, and 1.8 ± 0.7% for STEP, VER, and RunTT, respectively). Bland-Altman limits of agreement (bias ± 95%) showed V˙O2max to be 1.6 ± 3.6 mL·kg−1·min−1 higher for STEP vs. RunTT. Peak HR was also significantly higher during STEP compared with RunTT (P = 0.019).Conclusion: A four-minute running time-trial appears to provide more reliable performance data in comparison to an incremental test to exhaustion, but may underestimate V˙O2max.

show abstract

“…More rapid digestion and absorption is also a likely cause of the lower gastrointestinal distress observed with high ingestion rates of isocaloric glucose–fructose mixtures over glucose alone. Lower gastrointestinal distress could, in part, account for some of the performance benefits seen with glucose–fructose co-ingestion [16,81]. The high rates of carbohydrate absorption with glucose–fructose co-ingestion also raise the possibility of enhancing the rate of recovery of endogenous carbohydrate stores post-exercise.…”

Section: Physiological Rationale For Glucose–fructose Co-ingestionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Glucose Plus Fructose Ingestion for Post-Exercise Recovery—Greater than the Sum of Its Parts?

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Carbohydrate availability in the form of muscle and liver glycogen is an important determinant of performance during prolonged bouts of moderate- to high-intensity exercise. Therefore, when effective endurance performance is an objective on multiple occasions within a 24-h period, the restoration of endogenous glycogen stores is the principal factor determining recovery. This review considers the role of glucose–fructose co-ingestion on liver and muscle glycogen repletion following prolonged exercise. Glucose and fructose are primarily absorbed by different intestinal transport proteins; by combining the ingestion of glucose with fructose, both transport pathways are utilised, which increases the total capacity for carbohydrate absorption. Moreover, the addition of glucose to fructose ingestion facilitates intestinal fructose absorption via a currently unidentified mechanism. The co-ingestion of glucose and fructose therefore provides faster rates of carbohydrate absorption than the sum of glucose and fructose absorption rates alone. Similar metabolic effects can be achieved via the ingestion of sucrose (a disaccharide of glucose and fructose) because intestinal absorption is unlikely to be limited by sucrose hydrolysis. Carbohydrate ingestion at a rate of ≥1.2 g carbohydrate per kg body mass per hour appears to maximise post-exercise muscle glycogen repletion rates. Providing these carbohydrates in the form of glucose–fructose (sucrose) mixtures does not further enhance muscle glycogen repletion rates over glucose (polymer) ingestion alone. In contrast, liver glycogen repletion rates are approximately doubled with ingestion of glucose–fructose (sucrose) mixtures over isocaloric ingestion of glucose (polymers) alone. Furthermore, glucose plus fructose (sucrose) ingestion alleviates gastrointestinal distress when the ingestion rate approaches or exceeds the capacity for intestinal glucose absorption (~1.2 g/min). Accordingly, when rapid recovery of endogenous glycogen stores is a priority, ingesting glucose–fructose mixtures (or sucrose) at a rate of ≥1.2 g·kg body mass−1·h−1 can enhance glycogen repletion rates whilst also minimising gastrointestinal distress.

show abstract

Effects of carbohydrate dose and frequency on metabolism, gastrointestinal discomfort, and cross‐country skiing performance

Cited by 9 publications

References 36 publications

Role of Functional Beverages on Sport Performance and Recovery

Role of Functional Beverages on Sport Performance and Recovery

The Reliability and Validity of a Four-Minute Running Time-Trial in Assessing V˙O2max and Performance

Glucose Plus Fructose Ingestion for Post-Exercise Recovery—Greater than the Sum of Its Parts?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About