Women Experience the Same Ergogenic Response to Caffeine as Men
Skinner TL, Desbrow B, Arapova J, Schaumberg MA, Osborne J, Grant GD, Anoopkumar-Dukie S, Leveritt MD
Medicine and science in sports and exercise · 53 citations
Review labels
Neutral facts our review recorded about how this study was done. They describe method, never whether we like the result.
How it was studied
- Design
- Randomized controlled trial (indexed by PubMed)
- Studied in
- People
- Main outcome
- Health markers and function
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Funding not disclosed
Publication
- Published
- 2019-01-15 · Med Sci Sports Exerc · vol. 51 · issue 6 · pp. 1195–1202
- Publisher
- Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
- Cited
- 68 citations · more than 97% of similar papers · 6.2× the field average
- Impact
- Top 10% most cited in its field
- References
- 36 works
- Access
- Paywalled
- Research areas
- Coffee research and impacts · Muscle metabolism and nutrition · Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet
- Keywords
- Caffeine, Psychology, Medicine, Physical therapy, Internal medicine
- MeSH
- humans, caffeine, central nervous system stimulants, body mass index, cross-over studies, double-blind method, sex factors, heart rate, physical endurance, bicycling, adult, female, male, young adult, performance-enhancing substances
8 authors
From AU, BE
- Tina L. SkinnerThe University of Queensland; Nutrition Sciences (Belgium)
- Ben DesbrowGriffith University
- JULIA ARAPOVAThe University of Queensland; Nutrition Sciences (Belgium)
- Mia Annalies SchaumbergThe University of Queensland; University of the Sunshine Coast; Nutrition Sciences (Belgium)
- John Owen OsborneQueensland University of Technology; The University of Queensland; Nutrition Sciences (Belgium)
- Gary Dean GrantGriffith University
Abstract
Purpose
This study aimed to determine whether 1) consumption of caffeine improves endurance cycling performance in women and 2) sex differences exist in the magnitude of the ergogenic and plasma responses to caffeine supplementation.
Methods
Twenty-seven (11 women and 16 men) endurance-trained cyclists and triathletes participated in this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study. Participants completed an incremental exercise test to exhaustion, two familiarization trials, and two performance trials. Ninety minutes before the performance trials, participants ingested opaque capsules containing either 3 mg·kg body mass of anhydrous caffeine or a placebo. They then completed a set amount of work (75% of peak sustainable power output) in the fastest possible time. Plasma was sampled at baseline, preexercise, and postexercise for caffeine. Strict standardization and verification of diet, hydration, training volume and intensity, and contraceptive hormone phase (for women) were implemented.
Results
Performance time was significantly improved after caffeine administration in women (placebo: 3863 ± 419 s, caffeine: 3757 ± 312 s; P = 0.03) and men (placebo: 3903 ± 341 s, caffeine: 3734 ± 287 s; P < 0.001). The magnitude of performance improvement was similar for women (mean = 4.3%, 95% CI = 0.4%-8.2%) and men (4.6%, 2.3%-6.8%). Plasma caffeine concentrations were similar between sexes before exercise, but significantly greater in women after exercise (P < 0.001).
Conclusions
Ingestion of 3 mg·kg body mass of caffeine enhanced endurance exercise performance in women. The magnitude of the performance enhancement observed in women was similar to that of men, despite significantly greater plasma caffeine concentrations after exercise in women. These results suggest that the current recommendations for caffeine intake (i.e., 3-6 mg·kg caffeine before exercise to enhance endurance performance), which are derived almost exclusively from studies on men, may also be applicable to women.
Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher.
Community trust
Loading…
How much do you trust this study's findings?
Comments
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inSomething wrong here?
Flag this study if its information, labels or funding look wrong. An editor reviews every flag.
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inEducational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.