Essentials of Nutrition for Sports

When I started time trialing, racing 10 miles against the clock, I
read that caffeine might help. I did a dozen time trials my first year. I was positive that I rode faster when I got that caffeine boost from my secret potion—coffee yogurt. Only y

ears later did I learn that the

company that produced the yogurt

used coffee-flavored extract and

that there was no caffeine at all in my magic go-faster food!

Science Is Required

Scientific study is the way to go. The word

science

is frightening

to some and makes others suspicious. However, it is really quite simple: in the scientific method, a question is asked and an experiment is performed. Enough pe

ople participate for long enough

to enable some conclusions to be drawn.

For example, one simply looks at what happens to two groups,

one taking the “good stuff” being tested, the other taking a similar looking or tasting stuff —a placebo, without active ingredients.

Because believing in something influences not only those taking

the product but also those conducting the experiment, it is important that neither group knows who’s getti

ng what until the results are in,

the “code” of the experiment br

oken, and the results analyzed.

For details on what makes a good study see page

135

.

Science Has Limitations

The problem is more complicated, however. Although some fear

“science,” others endorse it too readily. “Science” is fallible.

“Assumptions can be dangerous, especially in science. They

usually start as the most plausible or comfortable interpretation of the available facts. But when their truth cannot be immediately tested and their flaws are not obvious, assumptions often graduate to articles of faith, and new observations are forced to fit them.”

22

22 John S. Mattick, Scientific American, October, 2004.

Publication and Other Biases

Although the scientific method is the way to go, you have to

look at how the real world operates before blindly accepting scientific results.

Take 10 researchers looking into whether or not Maxxta makes

you faster. Suppose Maxxta is a new substance, not well studied. There are no reports yet in the scientific community about it. In fact, it is doubtful whether anyone cares about it at all. Of the 10 researchers, 9 look at the product and find no reason to pursue their study. Early studies either show

no effect or just do not seem

promising enough to warrant more research.

No one, not the scientific nor the lay press, is interested in

reporting that something unknown does not work. Only positive findings on new products make their way into the press.

However, one of the researchers does see some positive effect.

This researcher gets excited. This researcher contacts a product-development company, and the stuff is marketed. The public relations people are called in. The next thing you know,

Runner’s

World

, Bicycling

, Men’s Health,

and

New Woman

publish articles,

and people are talking. The results look impressive.

Athletes are charged up about the whole idea. Members of the

national team get wind of the research and wonder whether they should be taking Maxxta. The national coaches and physiologists wonder too, and they decide they had better try it.

The manufacturer says fine; let me send you some product to try.

The manufacturer notes in its advertising that the national team is using Maxxta. This gets everyone else thinking they had better use it too. Moreover, since Maxxta costs a lot, you had better believe you are getting something for your money.

A couple of years go by, and Maxxta is the rage—everybody is

buying it. Some of the original

10 researchers scratch their heads and

remember that they found no eff

ect. Most of them are respected

Nutrition for Sports, Essentials of 134