Outcomes indicated that there was no difference in athletic performance between commercially-available CHO and CHO-P supplementation during an endurance run while

following recommendations for supplementation. This investigation also found that caloric supplementation did not enhance performance above that of the artificially sweetened PLA. Considering the nature and conditions of the present investigation, it is important to note the strengths in relation to external validity. In this investigation, supplements were compared within trials using an outdoor course that more closely approximated real-life competitive conditions. Additionally, commercially-available supplements were tested, and supplement volume and administration protocol mimicked refueling stations during road races. A glycogen-depleting protocol was not used prior to testing any of the supplements since this is not typical practice of an endurance runner prior to training AZ 628 cell line and competition. The few running field experiments testing commercially-available CHO supplements against PLA, have also found no effect find more of supplementation on endurance performance [15, 16]. Similar to the present investigation, both investigations conducted trials on an outdoor paved running trail using similar distances for the running

trials (18 km [16] vs 20.9 km [15] vs 19.2 km in the present investigation) which resulted in an exercise bout > 60 minutes, controlled for weather conditions and dietary factors, excluded use of a glycogen-depleting protocol prior to supplement testing, provided commercially available supplements in

a similar serving size (150 ml vs 120 ml in the present investiation), and administered supplements mimicking real-life conditions (i.e.- water stations as used in a marathon). Based on similarities in methodology and findings among previous running field trials and the present investigation, one may infer that caloric supplementaiton during endurance running may not enhance endurance performance over that of a PLA during runs around 18–20 km in length. Furthermore, Calpain there are two methods commonly used when assessing endurance performance, time trial (TT) and time to exhaustion (TTE). The methodology used in the present investigation and aforementioned field experiments [15, 16] most closely resembles TT. Within the TT method, participants exercise for a set period of time or distance. Within TTE, participants are instructed to either cycle at a consistent intensity level, ≥ 65% VO2max, until complete fatigue, or cycle at varying intensity levels and at the final level continue until fatigue. When comparing methodologies, the TT method has shown to be more reliable in comparison to TTE such that the calculated coefficient of variance for TTE among several studies has shown to range from 5.2-55.9% whereas as the TT method has Luminespib ic50 demonstrated a variation of 1-5% [17].