SAFETYLIT WEEKLY UPDATE

We compile citations and summaries of about 400 new articles every week.
RSS Feed

HELP: Tutorials | FAQ
CONTACT US: Contact info

Search Results

Journal Article

Citation

Seifert JG, Connor DA. J. Int. Soc. Sports Nutr. 2014; 11: 56.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2014, International Society of Sports Nutrition)

DOI

10.1186/s12970-014-0056-5

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Caffeine based energy shot products accounted for $1.3 billion in sales in 2011. Caffeine has been shown to confer numerous benefits during exercise and is oftentimes combined with ingredients such as carbohydrates and taurine in the hope of further performance improvement. The purpose of this project was to compare auditory response time, power output, and physiological responses between the ingestion of a CHO, PRO, caffeine supplement (CPC), a caffeine-taurine-niacin based supplement (CTN), and a placebo (PL) in commercially formulated products that make claims as to improving performance.

METHODS: Fourteen subjects cycled an interval exercise of 70% VO(2)max for 13 minutes and 90% of VO(2)max for two minutes for a total of 120 minutes which was then followed by a six-minute power output (PO) task. Subjects ingested a total of 45 g CHO, 7.5 g PRO, and 375 mg caffeine for CPC while 512 mg caffeine and 1200 mg taurine were ingested for CTN throughout the exercise. The treatments were administered in a double blind, randomly assigned protocol. Response time was assessed by auditory response. Significance was set at p < 0.05.

RESULTS: Average PO was significantly greater for CPC: 309 +/- 60 W than CTN: 290 +/- 57 W and PL: 282 +/- 63 W. Response time was significantly faster for the CPC: 0.219 +/-.049 s than CTN: 0.232 +/-.060 s and PL: 0.228 +/-.047 s. HR was significantly greater for CTN: 143 +/- 16 bpm than CPC: 139 +/- 16 bpm. RPE was significantly lower for CPC: 13.0 +/- 1.7 than CTN: 13.5 +/- 1.2 and PL: 13.8 +/- 1.9. Blood glucose was greater for CPC: 5.5 +/- 0.8 mM/L than CTN: 4.9 +/- 0.7 mM/L and PL: 4.6 +/- 1.1 mM/L. No significant differences were observed for RER.

CONCLUSIONS: The co-ingestion of CPC improved both cycling power output and auditory response time following 2 hours of moderate and high intensity interval cycling compared to CTN and PL. It is possible that the CPC treatment conferred not only a positive peripheral effect, but also a central effect. Even with a large caffeine dose, the combination of caffeine, taurine, niacin led to an inhibitory pattern which did not improve power output or response time performances over a PL.


Language: en

NEW SEARCH


All SafetyLit records are available for automatic download to Zotero & Mendeley
Print