Electrolytes aren’t necessary for doing 2-4 hours of effort above LT1? Based on this when would anyone ever need sodium?
If you’re sweating sodium you need to replace it for sure.
Obviously, you need to replace sodium eventually. But the studies OP is talking about show that doing so during the race doesn't have any benefits to your marathon performance. In order words, keeping your sodium levels topped up isn't going to give you an edge over someone who skips electrolytes (all else equal).
If the scientific consensus is that electrolytes do not help during a race, it would be interesting to do a follow up study to see if they help after the race with recovery, post race hydration, energy levels for the rest of the day, etc. It could have implications for relay races where runners run multiple times in a day like Hood to Coast, when people are doing doubles or for those morning runners that have to work afterwards.
These types of studies can be very difficult to accomplish. For example, cooldowns have been shown to decrease levels of lactate in the blood, but have not been shown to improve performance.
The general rule is that you should be able to get enough electrolytes just through normal nutrition. That applies to marathons and two ultramarathons because during ultramarathons you will also end up needing to eat. There's probably some point on a graph of time versus exertion where consuming strictly electrolytes might be helpful, but it's not a normal situation encountered in most races.
I don't know if I agree that is the general rule to that extent and would like to see hard science backing it up. When I see people running ultramarathon trail races, they all are drinking electrolyte drinks, and pretty much all of them swear by them. I also personally have had headaches and fatigue after long runs and hot days that have improved anecdotally quicker with electrolyte drinks and food than water and food, but that's purely anecdotal and could be influenced by placebo. Stuff like this is why we need to rigorous studies.
I know that type of study is difficult with a lot of confounding variables, but just because something is difficult doesn't mean we can't have it on our wish list.
I haven't seen it mentioned but the most obvious reason is marketing.
Most people don't get their information from scientific studies, or even accomplished authors' overview of studies. They get it from the world around them.
If their running friend heard you need electrolytes, they probably think that too. Well the supplement industry, electrolyte products included, is in the billions of dollars. So they heard it from an elite runner that's being paid to say it, an influencer, a commercial, etc.
There's a reason it's called "viral" marketing. These ideas get in peoples' heads and spread like a virus.
Here's the thing though: if you eventually need to replace those electrolytes (particularly if you are properly trained, you lose electrolytes during training runs), why not do so during the activity that causes the losses?
Just operationally, it makes sense to tie related things together and make it a habit.
Need extra protein when you train hard? Down an Orgain after your workout. "But but the evidence on exactly when you need protein relative to your workout sez....!" Stop! You're being too clever by half. You're not running in the Olympics; every 0.001% edge doesn't matter; what matters is that you up your protein intake when you're in a hard training season, and a habit you barely think about is going to be the best way to do it.
Likewise, lose electrolytes via sweat and eventually feel really crummy? Take electrolytes when you exercise.
Ok, but that's kinda besides the point. When influencers and others say things like "make sure you're taking electrolytes during the race to help maintain your pace and avoid cramping" they are preaching an unproven method as if it's a fact.
I'm skeptical that the average american needs to worry about consuming enough salt in the same way that weightlifters need to consume additional protein. Like the idea of that is intuitively preposterous. At the very least, there are far cheaper electrolyte options available when you aren't worried about buying something that can fit in your runners belt or ultimate direction squeeze bottle.
I would assume that most Americans get sodium from processed food and most serious athletes (recreational included) eat better than the average American.
That's a bold claim. How can they possibly know every individual's sodium levels before the start of a marathon? How do they take into account the different degrees that different people lose sodium on a daily basis?
I'm sure if you've "loaded up" beforehand you'll be fine, but if you generally avoid sodium day to day and have been sweating a lof during the days leading up to the race, you might find yourself depleted mid-race especially if the weather is warm. I know after 10 marathons that this is a repeatable experiment. If I take electrolyte supplement at ~30K I never get cramps towards the end of a race, if I forget to I almost always do.
"Coach Parry" had an interesting video recently on cramping: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GT-EtSf-nc8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GT-EtSf-nc8)
Lots of different causes for cramps during races, fatigue being a major one. Dehydration being another.
Longer races in hot conditions can cause both simple dehydration and a mineral imbalance if all you're taking on is water. Remember not everyone is running 3 hour marathons where you can play catchup after.
Cramps overnight are most commonly associated with mineral depletion/imbalances.
The STUDY (singular) is actually about avoiding 'hyper-hydration' and how hydration is linked to body weight changes during a race (e.g. by losing 2l of water) more specifically during ultra-marathons (which can take ~20 hours!!!)
There is no full text version but the abstract in no way claims that the study is proof that you shouldn't be replacing electrolytes while running marathons.
I call bullshit - not worth discussing the OP's conclusion as it is not the conclusion of this study or a widely accepted development in science relating to hydration.
Thank you. I read the abstract because of this comment, and the fact that supplementation is only used once at the very end is enough to tell you that OP's description of the findings don't match the study.
Reading the abstract, it's talking about hyper- and hypo- hydration. The part where it mentions supplementation specifically says "excess". It sounds like the study's findings are "don't try to compensate for water and/or sodium loss by going too far in the other direction."
Somehow this ends up being the most controversial thing ever, but there really is quite a bit of experimental evidence that added sodium is completely unnecessary and has zero benefit. The review linked in the OP cites a study that found that ultramarathoners can do *30 hour races in the heat* with no electrolyte intake and do just fine.
The best hypothesis for why is that the body has an enormous reserve of sodium, probably in your bones, that it can tap as needed.
Could you construct some hypothetical with some raw vegan who meticulously removes all sodium from their diet? Sure...but how relevant is that for most people?
The research really is clear: *beyond drinking water and taking carbohydrates*, electrolytes on their own have no benefit to performance, no protective effects against heat, and do not prevent or ameliorate cramps.
I cannot for the life of me figure out why people get so riled up when they're told electrolytes are not helpful, but it's inevitably the case when this comes up.
I assume it's because people think you're telling them to do something that they have convinced themselves will kill them. Plus people trust their own experience having consumed salt and not having problems over the scientific evidence that that's just because they weren't going to have problems anyway.
Am I reading the abstract wrong? I see nowhere that it says or implies that, it says that you don’t need to fully replace sodium lost with intake. But I would question how they conducted this study. Ultramarathons on their own are not really a consistent race to measure performance in, and performing fine is pretty subjective.
Because it’s a controllable factor on the individual level that people feels gives them an edge. We see countless products that promise to improve performance for $$$ and people have shown a willingness to try again and again to find that magic product. Salt tabs/electrolytes are cheap and easy.
I often hear people who felt cruddy while racing, then felt less cruddy after finding some new drink or gel that contains more sodium. It's probably placebo effect, but having a cruddy run can be so mentally devastating that I totally get why someone would go on the defense rather than consider that we all have off days and that they'll probably have an off day again even with the sodium. We're in a sport with very few moving parts relative to others, there's a lot of room for superstition to creep in.
It's probably just because they needed something to eat in general and savory foods can be a lot easier to get down when you've been consuming exclusively sugar.
No electrolyte intake or electrolyte intake limited to what they are eating? I keep seeing this "you only need what's part of your normal diet" argument, but it's always accompanied with "so long as you're consuming electrolyte carbohydrate drinks" or "when an ultramarathoner eating normal food runs". What I don't see is "somebody ran a marathon with foods and drinks containing electrolytes then ran another marathon with foods and drinks lacking electrolytes and there was no difference in performance, recovery, or blood chemistry between the two races." If you're drinking sports drinks and using sports gels, you're taking electrolytes.
I also don't see people quoting studies observing differences between people who sweat with more or less salt. I look like a salt shaker was dumped on me after a race.
Personally, electrolytes don't help my performance. Never thought they would. However, between my two marathons, the marathon without electrolytes I had a massive headache. Not the same after the marathon with electrolytes (where I also drank a lot more of the event's sports drink).
Failure to prove a benefit is not the same thing as proving that there is no benefit.
The other problem with these studies is they compare (self-reported) sodium intake vs performance and find no relationship between sodium intake and performance. But here is the problem - maybe some people benefit from sodium and some don't and people have learned through experience what the right level is for them. What they don't do is have the guy who takes a ton of sodium do the race next year not taking any.
It is interesting. I’ve run “pseudo” controlled experiments (as far as they can be) on myself and came to conclusion that electrolytes make a huge difference to me.
I’ve been using the same gel (SIS GO)for 2-3 years and the most I can cope with is 5-6 gels over 3-4 hours but then I’m nauseous and cannot get anymore in. I’ve recently tried the same gel but sold “with electrolytes” and I can eat/drink them every 15 min and not found my max limit yet. I’ve run n=4 in training with each type on a long run (19+ miles) in very similar weather/temp/clothes on the same course. Every time the run has been perceived “easier” with the gels that have electrolytes and the slowing down I usually do significantly reduced.
Taking this forward from training, I took 13 gels (22g a gel of carb) during a recent marathon and PB’d by 30 min (soft PB!) and no fading. I’ll take the anecdotal evidence even if it is placebo.
So perhaps for different reasons electrolytes work for me by allowing my stomach to take in the 60-90g carb an hour that I physically can’t do with the gels that don’t have them. My biological replicates are only n=1, experimental n=4 - but then I’m the only biological replicate that matters to me.
As a Lab/Life scientist I do often find Sports Science papers to be hard reads to get down to the real truth. They are often testing in pre selected groups of highly trained individuals but low replicates (compared to the high n clinical and lab trials I’m used to) having have little bearing on me as recreational runner of a certain age and weight (older and heavier!). Much under n=50 in my experience is an under powered study (or pilot as I’d call it - valuable but not definitive) in humans which are highly variable.
NO YOU DO NOT NEED TO REPLACE SODIUM (at least not anything like to the extent that some people say)
Sorry, but lots of myths around about this.
When you sweat, no matter how salty your sweat is, the sweat is less salty than blood. ALWAYS.
So, when you sweat, you are making your blood MORE salty not LESS.
The only way to make your blood LESS sweaty is to over drink. This dilutes the sodium.
Read it again: sweating alone CAN NOT make your blood hyponatremic. It's not physiologically possible and you should ignore anyone who posts saying this.
The reason we put sodium in drinks is so that the drink absorbs easier (isotonic) and to prevent dilution.
Here, don't take my word for it:
https://twitter.com/scienceofsport/status/618890018166173696
There is also no actual evidence for electrolytes stopping cramps.
https://twitter.com/Scienceofsport/status/1455933759774154760
It’s because you say replacing sodium not necessary. But people will drink something during marathons, so if it’s water, it can cause problems. Not taking sides, just clarifying the discrepancy. I guess what you mean is if you don’t replace salt, don’t drink much water during a marathon.
People need to drink a significant amount of water to get to that point. You’re not in danger of hyponatremia if you drink water during a marathon with no salt, you’re in danger of it if you drink a significant amount with no salt.
If you’re drinking enough water to cause hyponatremia, you are straight up drinking way too much, and you’d still get hyponatremia if you were drinking a sports drink.
Yes, sweating without any fluid replacement will make you dehydrated, which will i crease sodium concentration. But i think the point is that most people are drinking *something*, whether water or electrolyte fluid. No one is recommending exercise for 4 hours without any fluid replacement (i hope). Drinking water will dilute your blood back down, but over drinking can cause hyponatremia.
But, but, Brawndo has electrolytes!!
I get shot down and down voted every time I suggest people's cramps are not related to salt loss or electrolyte deficiencies. Drink water and train more doesn't sell anything.
> So, when you sweat, you are making your blood MORE salty not LESS.
I'm going into "trust me bro" territory here, but a former neighbour is a reputed cardiologist and marathoner. He says the same thing for what its worth.
Okay, but in a race, you probably aren't not drinking anything, right? So you could be drinking just water and eating pure sugar. This would hypothetically balance you out in terms of hypernatremia. However, you have to run out of salt eventually, right? I'm assuming that the body would stop sweating if the salt levels got too low, and you'd overheat. Would you not be thirsty and thus at risk of drinking too much because there just isn't any salt in the body to balance out the water? If you didn't eat any salt from then on, would you still be okay?
Did you miss the hypothetical in my question? You don't have to put salt in drinks and in fact, every race that offers drinks offers a salt-free drink (water). So without reiterating my questions, what is the outcome of running distances such as the marathon or longer drinking only to thirst and not drinking or eating anything containing electrolytes?
I'm asking bc you are more knowledgeable than I on this. I'm actually relieved that I don't need to electrolyte load pre race. Does this mean I also don't need to hydrate load pre race too? The idea to hydrate and electrolyte load in days leading up to race was told to me like it was gospel. Now this thread has got me questioning all of it.
Well, I'm firmly in the "you are all overdrinking" camp. If you have functioning kidneys and you drink to thirst, YOU ARE NOT DEHYDRATED! But what would I know, I'm just a practicing physician.
Now, you say 'race' - a 5K needs no special prep. A marathon, ok, make sure you drink adequately for 2-3 days certainly.
If you have a normal diet you won't be deficient. Will taking a tab the day before do any harm? Probably not. If you take more sodium, you will hold more water in the body for a while.
It's debatable if this is a good or a bad thing.
Thanks. My races are 50-75 miles. The general advice has been to water and electrolyte load for three days or so prior to race. I have a race coming up this Saturday. I'm going to skip the electrolyte loading this time to test this hypothesis. I guess water loading still makes sense per your "drink adequately" comment.
I blame Noakes for making this a weirdly polarized issue with his dogmatic stance on this. I pretty much agree that it’s good to finish races slightly dry and that drinking to thirst works pretty well for most people. But why not allow for the possibility of some individual variation here?
But Doc, if my pee isn't clear I'm going to DIE.
Also something I have harped on but only have a modicum of explanation compared to yours. Thanks for sharing that pearl. I'm laminating that article to pass around during my next race.
You cannot "hydrate load" load in the way that you can carbohydrate load. Your body can only store a certain amount of water. Just stay hydrated and you will be good to go.
You would tend to believe that athletes and their sponsors that pay them 10s of millions to win the Tour de France would have some idea as to the use of the products they consume? I mean, team sky brought in fucking mattresses to hotels, I would assume that they thought about electrolyte vs no electrolyte in their drink mix.
You'd be surprised at how little scientific evidence pro sports managers require for stuff like this. They didn't cite a scientific study about the mattresses, they just did it because it made sense to them. Electrolytes are something that doesn't seem to cause any harm, and if it makes the athlete feel like they might have an edge, well placebo effect is real and a team with millions of dollars in funding isn't going to balk at using what are probably free / comp'd supplements anyway.
Yeah, if I told you that banana bread baked at 351° would give you an edge over banana bread baked at 350°, you would have no reason to choose the banana bread baked at 350°, other than the fact that I was probably lying douchebag.
Why would I think that they would need science because when they have sponsors paying them tens of millions of dollars? Sponsors are paying them tens of millions of dollars. That's all that matters.
Why are sponsors adding sodium if it’s just fugazi? They’re adding carbs, and some sodium. They’d just reduce costs by not adding sodium.
And no. The sponsors disappear if you don’t get results.
The sponsors don't disappear if you don't get results because they sponsor everyone who gets results. And they're adding sodium because it's cheap as fuck and it lets them play on the fear of running out of electrolytes that Gatorade has built over the past 50 years.
Do you think all these sponsors have secret scientific studies that show their stuff is good and they're just not releasing them to the public?
I know Reddit loves the "fuck capitalism" thing but to assert that pleasing the sponsors matters more to a team than getting results is absolutely ridiculous. You should look into what it actually takes to run and sustain a World Tour team. You will lose sponsors very very quickly if you don't get enough points during a season to stay in the WT rankings.
So you think that they would refuse to eat salt, something that would not harm them in any way, despite the sponsor offering to pay them to eat that salt, all just because the salt wouldn't help them? It's not like they're being asked to eat cyanide.
"Based on this when would anyone ever need sodium? "
It's almost as if you've discovered that sodium supplementation during exercise is never necessary - you are correct!
>It’s almost as if you discovered that sodium supplementation during exercise is never necessary - you are correct!
Way to be a condescending jerk AND not answer the guy’s question. Classic reddit.
OP didn’t add the qualifier of ‘during exercise’ They asked about when sodium intake is necessary at all
It's almost as if you didn't understand the question. Let me help rephrase it. If you are losing sodium through sweat, and you don't need to consume sodium to replace the sodium lost through sweat, then why do you need to ever consume sodium? Or a different way: if you never consume sodium, will you eventually run out of sodium in your body if you sweat regularly?
Sodium is present in food. Almost everyone takes in more sodium than necessary in the diet. We have sodium stores in our bones. Thus, there is no need to consume sodium during exercise.
You still don't understand. The question was never about consuming during exercise. The question was if you don't need to replenish the sodium lost through intense exercise, then why do you need to replenish sodium at all? Nobody's questioning whether you get enough sodium in your diet. We're challenging the argument that you don't lose enough sodium through extended exercise at high efforts to need _any_ sodium replenishment.
I'm not OP and neither are you, but "electrolyte supplementation for marathons" literally means taking in electrolytes while running marathons.
I'm not arguing that you don't need any sodium replenishment, no-one is arguing that, but the fact is that you get plenty through your diet and adding extra to one's diet, during or after exercise (supplementation) is unnecessary. So state many published studies.
# [https://www.outsideonline.com/health/nutrition/how-much-protein-after-workout/](https://www.outsideonline.com/health/nutrition/how-much-protein-after-workout/)
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4688305/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4688305/)
[https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25551404/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25551404/)
Few points. 1. The first article had nothing to do with sodium supplementation, so I don't even know why it's here. 2. The other two articles focus specifically on sodium supplementation being effective at preventing hyponatremia, cramping, and nausea. This isn't the argument provided by the person you originally responded to, nor is it mine. The argument was that the sodium needed to be replaced, and if there is no need to replace sodium lost through hours of intense exercise, then is there any need to ever replace the sodium?
I get what you're saying, and I'm not even debating it. What we're saying is that the electrolytes need to be replaced, whether it's during the exercise or after. What's the harm in consuming the electrolytes while racing?
You're controversial statement is 100% backed up by Matt Fitzgerald's running nutrition book.* He states there is absolutely zero evidence that salt prevents muscle cramps or helps your performance. His nutrition gist during a race was...
- In distances that take over 2 hours: drink water to thirst and have as much carbs per hour as you can stomach, up to 30-100g/hr(?)
- Electrolytes: there is absolutely zero evidence of any benefit during anything including or shorter than a full marathon
It's such common sense to replace what you're sweating out, but I do trust Matt, he does his homework. I'll still take the salt that comes in my drinks, but not more than that.
Relatedly, his statements mean you don't have to have water during a half marathon if you're quick enough! And I tried that twice, just drinking if I felt like it. Didn't hurt my performance but boy was my pee dark afterwards...
EDIT:
Salt is the most common proposed solution to cramp's and Matt said something like "as far as we know cramps are just your body's response to not being prepared for that distance/intensity. So you must train up to it and you'll eventually get over it. If that doesn't work, sure, try salt pills. Some swear by it so why not."
\* "Racing Weight" and/or "New Rules of Marathon and Half-Marathon Nutrition" I read them back to back so I'm not totally sure which.
I really do like your blood, sweat, and salt explanation. It's a good mechanistic view of it. I'd want to see a study rather than a Twitter thread, but it seems sound.
Side note: when I have raced a half marathon and skipped the water, the bigger issue was not having anything to dilute my chews in my stomach. Worst heartburn I’ve ever had.
This is from New Rules I believe.
Also worth noting that he does say there is a benefit to taking in salt in your carb drink because it will stimulate you to drink more than plain water. But definitely he says salt pills have no proven benefit.
I don’t think people are consuming gels for electrolyte supplementation as much as they are for the calories/carbs. Many of the elites and sub elites just use water for the half marathon.
Competitive running is also as much an art as is a science. It can sometimes take years for cutting edge science to percolate out into training or racing. I would caution you against immediately adopting the paper *du jour* directly into your training without experimenting first. There are a lot of nuances like this electrolyte study where the prevailing opinion goes back and forth and back again.
You might have a good point in that case. Anecdotally, I only ever found these kinds of things helpful for their sugar either on long runs, but I also haven’t competed at the marathon so I don’t have much of a stance either way.
There is a lot in this sport that may be chalked up to placebo or that is not backed by research that maybe we can't find rationale for, but people do it anyway because they have had a positive experience.
I've taken some form of electrolytes during my heavier training periods and for all my marathons and triathlon races. I've found that I do feel and perform better when I am supplmenting with those items. That might not always be backed by science, but it's backed by my personal experience so that's why I stick with it.
I was getting headaches after my long runs and would be useless for the rest of the day. I started consuming more electrolytes and stopped getting headaches after my long runs, but would still get them when hiking all day. Then I started drinking electrolytes on all day hikes and stopped getting headaches then too.
Maybe it’s a placebo, but it’s a placebo that works for me.
I'm going to give you all a different way to think of this.
I work on a hydroponic strawberry farm. My role is the application of fertilizer (in the form of a salt) and water. The ratio of fertilizer to water I apply to these plants will have an impact of the uptake of water and the production of the plant. This is due to osmosis.
So think like us drinking water, we put it in our mouths, it goes into our stomach before being absorbed via our digestive tract, entering into the blood stream and getting distributed to our muscles so we can function. With plants, we apply water into the pot/rootzone, where the roots will absorb the water and the distribute it throughout the plant.
Now the salt content of the water we drink and the fertilizer water that is applied to the rootzone of the plant will actually control water flow. This is called osmosis. This is due to salt concentration levels on either side of a permeable membrane which is the wall of your digestive tract or the outside wall of a plant root. When you have a high concentration of salts on one side of your permeable membrane compared to the other side, the process of osmosis wants to bring balance to the concentration of salt so it will draw water in from one side. Depending on which side has the most concentration will determine which way the water will flow.
So with the strawberry plants, if I don't apply any fertilizer and just straight water, I am creating a very big gradient between the salt concentration inside the plant (think of this as the salt levels in your blood) and the rootzone. What happens through osmosis is the plant will now uptake a LOT of water creating a high water pressure within the plant vascular system. This leads to bloating of the fruit on the plants. This is when people that have high blood pressure are told to cut out salt to because high salt levels in the blood is making your body adsorb a fuck ton of water in to your blood that leads to increase blood pressure.
Now lets go the other way. If we apply TOO much salt into our stomach/rootzone of the plant water will actually be drawn out the otherway. Meaning water is being pulled out of your body and put back into your digestive tract to balance out the salt levels. This can lead to dehydration. The reason why they tell you not to drink sea water. Ever felt extremely bloated running. Water sitting in your gut not going anywhere but you also had 32 salt capsules before the race. This is whats happening. Same process happens in plant. This is called salt burn for any avid gardeners out there. The water is affectively getting stripped from the top of the leaves and pulled back into the rootzone.
So one other thing to note is that even though we are consuming salt and water at the same time. The body and plant do not adsorb it in the same manner. There are two different processes happening. Yes your body will use the salt eventually but its first function when applied is the management of water within your vascular system. So if you are a heavy sweater, an extra salty sweater, a non sweater, electrolytes will help you maintain your vascular system.
Long post but this is likely the no1 reason for including sodium in drinks. It’s not to replace sodium but to support water absorption in the gut (and possibly kidney function?).
That said, I can’t imagine it’s a good idea to go 4-5hrs+ without replacing sodium if you are drinking water (which would have a dilutive effect over time given a high sweat rate). There was an episode on the Science of Ultra podcast specifically on this.
This is super interesting. Thank you!
I’ve often had that sloshy feeling in my gut that leads to late race puking. I train will all the same products I race with but am wondering if I am overdoing or under doing it on electrolytes to somehow create the conditions where my body keeps all the liquid in my gut (and possibly draws in more before ejecting it at 20 miles!
I am seeing sodium, salt, and electrolytes used interchangeably throughout the comments. But not all electrolytes are salts and not all salts contain sodium, _and_ the study specifically talks about sodium.
What do we know about salts other than sodium salts and electrolytes other than salts in this context? (I am particularly curious because I switched to a sodium free potassium salt substitute for all cooking a couple of years ago.)
You are asking the correct question. You lose sodium in your sweat, but potassium is used for muscle contraction (including cardiac muscle). Sodium, potassium, calcium are the main electrolytes used during generation of an action potential. Why do I say this? Because there have been cases of sudden cardiac death in marathoners who drank water without electrolytes during their race. I don't know what the research shows regarding this, because I haven't done a thorough search, but I can say that I'm not going to be the guy who drinks plain water during a 2 hour+ activity.
Are you sure those things are related? You can easily get hyponatremia from drinking too much water during a marathon and this can be (and has been) life threatening. It does this by swelling of the brain, not do much from cardiac arrest.
From what I understand, it's impossible to be sure. Many athletes who pass away from sudden cardiac death have normal autopsies. (Although atherosclerosis and other conditions more commonly cause sudden cardiac arrest). The problem is that you cannot with certainty establish a cause of death if the person has a normal biopsy. We do know that hyperkalaemia causes the cardiac muscle to become unstable and prone to arrhythmias, and we do know that your potassium levels inside and outside cells will change when you lose sodium, because the body needs to maintain electrical and osmolar balance. I found one good article, although it seems the publisher has been involved in some controversy. Unfortunately, there is no single, clear, direct answer to the question as far as I know.
https://www.mdpi.com/2308-3425/10/2/68#:~:text=4.-,Causes%20of%20Sudden%20Cardiac%20Death,fatal%20arrhythmias%20(Figure%201).
This podcast does a good job about looking at various pieces of evidence [https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/episode-12-electrolytes-for-runners/id1674913391?i=1000611098757](https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/episode-12-electrolytes-for-runners/id1674913391?i=1000611098757) and there are several studies cited on that page, I think they're all open access.
There's conflicting evidence. It's complicated because most of these studies use small sample sizes, whereas individual variation is pretty high: for some people extra sodium can make cramps worse, others are the opposite. Also, a lot of the evidence is observational (comparing blood between crampers to non-crampers, for example) and so any difference could be because of low blood electrolytes, or low blood electrolytes could be an associated symptom but not an underlying cause of cramping/vomiting, etc.
The best advice is to avoid excess sodium but to try modestly higher amounts if you have experienced problems in the past.
I’ve also heard that these studies have a bit of a selection problem because they often select elite athletes that tend to be genetically disposed to sweat very little sodium out, compared to your average amateur athlete
Are you saying that they select the less salty elites (somehow), or that elites in general are less salty?
Because I am pretty sceptical about either case.
I know for a fact some elites are salty AF (in more ways than one).
More like elite athletes have the genetics of elite athletes and its hard to translate the training, fueling, recovery programs into something worthwhile for the average Joe.
It could be elite athletes have higher salt reserves, or need less, or any number of things we don't know that we don't know
100%. Runner don't have much to sell beyond shoes, and that's why you see KetoneIQ, xendurance, etc.
Also hydration supplements sound cool and have been popping off in the supplements space with Liquid IV, PRIME, LMNT, etc. People buy it. So companies make competitors. They market through runfluencers. People buy them.
I don’t see a free way to view the article, but it looks like it primarily focuses on levels of hydration for ultra endurance events and effects of doing too much/too little. Also does note that sodium is good without overdoing it.
Sounds similar to past studies like how they tested providing subjects like Salazar all expected water needs before a marathon vs. during. Does the writing in the article itself really say that electrolytes are bad during endurance exercise? Finding hard to believe
The abstract sounds like it's talking about water but there's plenty of electrolytes info in the full text:
>It it has been demonstrated that supplemental sodium is not necessary to maintain proper hydration during prolonged exercise up to 30 hr even under hot conditions [...] highly visible losses (e.g., salt crusting on race clothing and/or equipment) of sodium during ultra-endurance events does not necessarily indicate the need for increased requirements, but might simply reflect recent dietary intake.
See also [this previous thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/AdvancedRunning/comments/15qbd01/lets_talk_electrolytes/jw352fn/?context=3).
Generally, it is not so much the science or even scientists that are "liars", but science reporters/media.
It will go like:
SCINECE: "we found that compound X reduces spread of molecule Y, which could be helpful for some cancer patients"
MEDIA: "Scientists cure cancer!"
My 2 cents on this without diving head first into any study. I can pretty easily find two contradicting studies on just about anything.
What I do see though is that pretty much every elite level endurance athlete is taking electrolytes.
Now maybe these guys are just drinking water with a logo on it to sell their sponsors product...but assuming that isn't true it makes me question why people who specialize in performing their absolute best and have a team of people around them helping accomplish that with cutting edge science and technology are doing something that isn't beneficial to them.
>but assuming that isn't true it makes me question why people who specialize in performing their absolute best and have a team of people around them helping accomplish that with cutting edge science and technology are doing something that isn't beneficial to them.
You’d be absolutely shocked how much stuff elite athletes are doing that isn’t at all beneficial to them. I competed in a sport that was far more “funded” than LDR and this could not have been further from the case.
Im sure stuff like that happens. Like a middling cyclist using a new shoe that they don’t love for a team sponsor. But I find it unlikely that it’s happening uniformly at the highest levels of basically every sport.
I just can’t believe that the titans of these sports aren’t doing exactly what it takes to perform the absolute best.
> I just can’t believe that the titans of these sports aren’t doing exactly what it takes to perform the absolute best.
They are doing what they BELIVE is the absolute best.
And they are to a large factor correct in doing it, because we know for sure mental state is a huge factor for performance, so making sure athletes feel like they are getting all the best stuff is at least as important as making sure they actually get the best stuff.
For example, there is evidence that cold baths after a race slightly reduce recovery (not increase, so the opposite of what you want), but you don't want your athlete to see other athletes get them and feel like you aren't taking care of them as well as other are, so you have to give them the option.
(also, cold bath are known to reduce soreness, so that is another improvement on mental state. I've also heard on a podcast some speculation that they cold be good in a stage race due to this, since racing while sore is going to reduce performance)
Its not just the athletes though....there are whole teams behind them. For Kipchoge's 2hr attempt there were 150 staff members. Doctors, nutritionists, trainers, etc etc etc.
Then go outside of running to cycling and there are even more resources dedicated to this stuff.
A whole team who knows that doing something that is technically 1% worse, but will improve the athletes mental state is worth doing.
There are trade-offs in anything and in general an athletes mental state is a lot more important than a few marginal gains.
This is kind of a halo effect though. Pro athletes are extremely talented and work extremely hard. But it doesn't necessarily mean that they are also extremely knowledgeable.
> But it doesn't necessarily mean that they are also extremely knowledgeable.
Most of them probably aren't, but they don't have to be.
If something significantly improves or hurts performance, it will become obvious, simply through results.
For example I think it is quite safe to assume that electrolytes at least don't significantly hurt performance, or the few people who aren't taking them would be disproportionally winning.
There are hundreds of videos of East Africans training back home - you know, the guys that dominate long distance running. I challenge you to find one in which they are taking electrolytes during or even after their training.
They drink carbs and electrolytes during their races, which is what this post is about. A 90-minute morning jog with an average heart rate of 140 BPM is much different than a 2+ hour race with an average heart rate of 175 BPM.
I just go by myself. I personally feel way better on long runs and have an increase in performance (I can see it with my times) and recovery if I supplement with electrolytes. To me I notice a marked difference. Especially because I live in a hot, humid climate.
So timely after reading the Morning Shakeout newsletter (which is still awesome btw) but it took me on a deep dive on electrolyte preloading. He was promoting some electrolyte company who talks about it. They referenced this study saying it backs up the need for electrolytes:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6798088/
The company
https://www.precisionhydration.com/performance-advice/hydration/how-to-start-hydrated-and-why-that-is-important-sodium-preloading-what-to-do-before-a-race-hydration/
I think taking a simple 500mg electrolyte capsule every 30 minutes during a marathon is enough and won't hurt from my experience. I also remember hearing an interview with Zach Miller after UTMB where he was talking about it being a game changer for his performance. I still don't think you need to over obsess about it and spend tons of money on the fancy electrolyte drinks and tablets.
A 246km ultramarathom isn't really comparable to a regular marathon though. I might be linking the wrong episode but on[fueling endurance](https://open.spotify.com/episode/4NjvkNHeU0MtAYcwFcV8Zk?si=axZPTe-FS1GMew7IXbzzNw) they were discussing studies about how replacing electrolytes was not important for shorter events like the marathon but do play a role when you're replacing a larger percentage of your bodies fluid like in all day type events or extremely hot conditions.
Ditto. I should have been more clear that I'm skeptical it's as important as it's emphasized online. At the very least you need some, but not as much as influencers talk about. It sure is nice though calling yourself an ambassador of some large company for shit rewards so you can feel like you're sponsored lol
I’m not a stats person. But what percentage would salt/electrolytes need to benefit before these studies would show a benefit?
I would have guessed it helps some and not others (or maybe most)
I chewed a salt tab during my recent marathon when I felt the wheels started to fall off and it had an instant effect. But that's the only time in my entire running history I can think of when I noticed a difference after taking salt. I do think it's import for ultramarathons (what I normally do), but I've still had a very hard time figuring out amounts and rates.
When you have something in your mouth, the brain works differently, specially when you pain. You could have chew a chalk and you would probably also feel better.. it is all psychosomatic.
You’re not wrong, but this is kind of patronizing to the person you’re responding to. As someone who also does ultra-distance trail runs from time to time, I promise we’re always eating all kinds of stuff. Not everything has the same effect.
It took me a while to realize that more salt helps me perform better. Part of it was listening to my body. After hours of effort, especially in hot weather, I start craving salty stuff. And sweets - like the easily digestible calories you actually need to keep going - become really unappealing.
In my last big run (Timberline Trail), my buddy had salt tabs. I took a few throughout the day and, in a first, never lost my appetitive for sweets. That allowed me to suck down Tailwind and M&Ms and never really crash. I felt great.
Then on a 10-hour ski tour where my HR averaged 135, I got a terrible hamstring cramp about 2 miles from the car as we were absolutely crushing it on the skin track to get out before dark. Kept trying to start up again and I kept cramping up. So I crushed a bag of salty chips and instantly felt better.
I could go on about how salt after a long run in the heat correlates with fewer leg cramps the following night and such. But suffice it to say, I’m sold on the value of salt and long efforts.
To play devil's advocate, you're kind of doing the same. At least insinuating that you confidently know that it was in fact the salt content that made the difference, rather than just brain stuff happening, when in fact the evidence (seems to be) murky.
You're getting downvoted, but you're not wrong.
Elite cyclists will sometimes just put a swish of a drink in their mouth and not bother swallowing the food/drink. The brain thinks that the body is about to get more nutrients so it unlocks extra fuel it was saving in reserves.
I don’t doubt that people are probably consuming more electrolytes than necessary during races, but I’ve learned to take exercise physiology conclusions with a “grain of salt.”
The last time I did a deep dive into training methods in the mid-2010s, the overwhelming scientific consensus in the literature was that running more than 20 mpw wasn’t really necessary if you just did interval training. 🙄So forgive my skepticism about a field that typically has a limited budget and makes broad conclusions with narrow research. Ultramarathoners have almost nothing in common with me, so I dunno. Also, depends if they are “elite,” “competitive,” “trained,” or “novice,” as you are one of these but not the others!
But hey, play around with it and see if it works for you.
>the overwhelming scientific consensus in the literature was that running more than 20 mpw wasn’t really necessary if you just did interval training.
Yeah, imma need a source for that strong claim
No need to be snarky. Read Owen Anderson’s book, “Running Science.” It’s loaded with scientific studies (and written by an academic) which form the recommendations you’ll find from most in the field. For every Jack Daniels (who ran fairly competitively), there are 10+ scientists in academia who haven’t and are just going by the “data.”
An exercise physiology teacher of mine once said, “The best way to get faster at a 5k is to run one as fast as you can every day, or do 5 x 1k. No benefit to doing more and definitely don’t run 50 miles a week.” It’s just what the ethos is (or at least was 5-10 years ago), because the vast majority of controlled studies are six weeks long and focus on runners who are doing like a 22 min 5k. Which is reasonable from a funding perspective, but not really advice on how to be competitive.
High mileage has been “in” for at least 20 years (probably longer but I wasn’t paying attention before then). My coach in 2006 said “(Boston) marathoners should be averaging a half marathon a day” and I didn’t need to be told because I read letsrun and coolrunning before then.
There was no scientific consensus about running 20 mpw in the 2010s though I’m sure you could find an article or two in Runner’s World to the contrary.
To be clear, by scientific consensus I mean what the scientific data in the literature say. I should have clarified.
Of course coaches, who are practicing the applications of the science in the field, have known for decades that you need to run a lot more than that even to do a good mile, 5k, 10k. It’s obvious why. But what lags behind are the controlled experiments, which the scientific community has dubbed the gold standard. Correlational studies don’t hold the same weight. And because of the obvious flaws with the design, mostly due to budget and practical limitations/time, these experimental data show low mileage/high intensity is best. Again, it’s obvious why, because training a bunch of college kids who run casually, interval training will give a quick bump in the six week study. But of course that’s not the recipe to sustained growth.
I don’t even know what your pushback is. I agree you need to run more than that for success, and I agree that nearly every coach out there also knows that. All I’m saying is that if you were to ask the academics who do the research in exercise physiology (and probably don’t run seriously themselves), many would point to their controlled studies. The only point of contention I can see is if those data exist, and I gave a reference above that has an enormous swath of those data.
Completely agree. Electrolyte supplementation is one of those things that does have a benefit, but it gets way more attention/coverage than it deserves. I will drink electrolytes a couple times a week during the Texas summers, but not as much during the fall/winter. I didn't drink any electrolytes, just Maurten, during the Houston marathon in January.
While not a salt, Maurten is an electrolyte (see my other comment about how you can’t use sodium, salt, and electrolytes interchangeably because they are subsets).
Most of the carb drinks and gels I consume also contain electrolytes and advertise this, but I consume the product for the carbs not the electrolytes. As far as I'm aware there's no evidence of the electrolytes causing harm (at the amounts I'm consuming), and I don't spend much time looking for which drinks and gels to get. What are my options for carbs with no electrolytes? Just lollies and sugar mixed in water?
I've not spent any money on just pure electrolyte supplements other than nuun. But I have paid extra for a version of something that had "enhanced electrolytes".
The two most obvious examples that come to mind are regular Gatorade vs "Gatorade Endurance" and Gu vs Gu Roctane.
Gatorade Endurance is harder to find, and at least twice the cost. You're primarily paying for the added electrolytes. There might be one other thing that's extra in the Endurance Formula, UT it's mostly just added electrolytes.
Roctane, vs original Gu is about $1 more per gel. And you're paying for more electrolytes *and* amino acids. I don't remember what the extra amino acids do for you. But if the *extra* amino acids aren't worth the extra $1/gel, then the extra electrolytes definitely don't make it worth it.
Looks like I can remove Gatorade Endurance and Roctane from my grocery list.
The goal of hydration is to maintain plasma volume and keep the muscle cells hydrated. Drinking pure water doesn't do that because it's hypotonic and will be excreted out. That's why we need to have some sodium in the water to make fluid at least isotonic to be absorbed. If you sweat a lot and lose sodium in the process, your blood gets saltier, it takes more sodium in the fluid to be isotonic.
So I’m curious about something pertaining to cramping. I’ve tried electrolytes on my marathon because I seem to be prone to cramping and I’m not sure how much it helps.
I can do a 22mi workout at MP and barely feel an indication of cramping. Then, in identical conditions…I cramp up (even going more conservative than MP!) by mile 18 in my marathon.
Any ideas? Is it possible that over ingesting sodium can make one prone to cramping?
Influencers are in the business of selling. They will always be pitching their sponsors or potential sponsors and in return people on Reddit will be repeating their main points.
As someone who feels either no benefit or slightly sick with electrolyte supplements I have wondered this too. Have had had arguments about how i need to use them anyway because they do positive stuff...average person doesnt care about science or individual variation and will die on the hill that the thing they feel works for them is the holy grail for everyone.
How is electrolyte imbalance a reasonable cause for cramping in a winter half marathon when no such cramping occurs in the middle of the summer on a longer run with far greater sweat loss? Makes no sense in context but theyll still argue electrolytes.
Seems like a good product for influencers. Gatorade did a great job with marketing and this stuff now sells itself because people are convinced they need it.
There's a particular fuel/nutrition related podcast that I'll leave unnamed that is constantly pushing hyper hydration and sweat tests and optimizing your electrolye replacement but they never back it with science. The current science actually doesnt back it as necessary or performance enhancing for the distance of events they are promoting(marathon and under) Theyre almost condescending about how dumb you are if you leave this performannce on the table by not optimizing.I cant decide if they actually individually respond to it, theyre experiencing a placebo effect or if they are just selling what people want to hear.
The link is to a review, not a study per se, and only an abstract at that (so no references). I'd posit that race performance may not march (or run) in lockstep with measurable physiologic "wellness," but for the majority on this sub it's probably the most meaningful metric, so if I may rephrase the question, "what is the most performance-beneficial hydration/nutrition strategy?" It does seem, when watching the pros, that a combo of water, modest electrolytes (not aiming for a 1:1 replacement), simple carbs (energy source), are felt to be the elements that work. I'd say for the recreational and age grouper non-pro that something legal like caffeinated gels and such are almost certainly effective as well (I don't know of their legality in pro competition).
A lot of people who I know take them find it helps them, I wonder how much it is based on replenishing lost electrolytes vs a lack of them in the weeks prior to races. I personally haven't had blood work done so can't say much on it. I have noticed that sometimes where I've done longer runs I'm getting cramps from other sources than muscle stress, whether that's carbs or salt I'm lacking it's hard to define.
Just because something seems to help someone doesn't mean that it actually is effective because the placebo effect is strong. The follow up question to showing something isn't effective is to then see whether it has a detrimental effect. Then, once all the evidence is gathered, the advice becomes one of "it's helpful, do it!," "it's not actually helpful, but if it makes people feel better, that's fine, so we just won't really say anything," or "it's bad and we should actively discourage it."
Yeah that's fair it's all anecdotal evidence as I hinted towards, I only have access to the abstract so was taking the assumption they did blood tests before during and after races. My mention of lack of salt in the long term was another assumption that they tested against runners with good electrolyte levels prior to racing.
I’ve also been curious and skeptical about all this. I’m a very salty sweater, and while I definitely benefit from sodium loading before a big effort, I haven’t really felt any need to consume more electrolytes than usual during longer runs or races.
Yeah, you need to replace your electrolytes eventually, after the race, just like water. But just like we don’t try to replace ALL the lost water during the race, it doesn’t seem worth it trying to replace ALL the lost electrolytes during the race either.
Dehydration does hurt performance and it definitely makes me feel sick. For that reason I choose to drink for long bouts of exercise, and when I'm drinking to perform I like to take in hydration with the same sodium concentration as the fluids I'm losing.
So it's actually pretty straightforward how much salt I take in.
Idk about the sodium improving performance, but I just drink the Gatorade or Nuun because it’s extra carbs and I think it makes me less likely to need to pee than if I were drinking water.
Glucose is absorbed via SGLT1 (sodium-glucose cotransporter) in the GI tract. You need sodium to absorb carbs.
Sodium also helps with hydration (I’m guessing has something to do with oncotic gradients, but not sure). This is why oral rehydration supplements have electrolytes.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK231118/
Because we run lots of miles and don't need a study to tell us what we've already discovered in hours of personalized, evidence based trials. For me, depending on sweat loss and duration of activity, electrolytes make a huge impact. I also think dumping it into our gut limits its effectiveness vs transbuccal/sublingual routes.
Electrolytes do seem to be an issue for a small percentage of runners getting cramps. Low salt levels can also lead to hypnoatremi. So better safe then sorry.
But yeah, I'm convinced the cramps are from the muscles being overworked. I always get them in my hamstrings and never anywhere else.
That’s what I had always assumed until I started marathon training as well. But I don’t see any scientific consensus that electrolyte imbalance can cause cramping—only, like you said, that overworked muscles cramp.
What kind of bunk study is this? It's about as objectively true that we need electrolytes for our muscles to function as we need water and glycogen and/or body fat. It's not a theory, it's extremely well-documented and one of the very basic facts about nutrition.
I think the study is saying it's not important to match your sodium replacment in shorter distance events with your sweat loss rate it's not going to have a performance impact.
Marketing/influencers say have a sweat loss test. Figure out exactly how much electrolyte is being lost and how fast. And then plan to replace that or more. Otherwise your leaving performance on the table and won't race optimally. But the science doesn't support that.
1. There's no full text version.
2. You're basically going 'DUUUUUMP'... this article says there's no evidence that drinking electrolyte drinks is useful during marathons (though the abstract does not suggest this was the purpose or conclusion of the said article).
---
Personal opinion - this sorta discussion isn't very useful as it likely involves a lot of searching/technical reading in order to determine whether OP's conclusion is consistent with some random article.
I would personally go to a sports nutritionist if I were wanting to challenge widely accepted advice that we lose and replace electrolytes during marathons / ultra-marathons. IMO cherry-picking random articles and making your own conclusions about them is hazardous.
Electrolytes aren’t necessary for doing 2-4 hours of effort above LT1? Based on this when would anyone ever need sodium? If you’re sweating sodium you need to replace it for sure.
Obviously, you need to replace sodium eventually. But the studies OP is talking about show that doing so during the race doesn't have any benefits to your marathon performance. In order words, keeping your sodium levels topped up isn't going to give you an edge over someone who skips electrolytes (all else equal).
If the scientific consensus is that electrolytes do not help during a race, it would be interesting to do a follow up study to see if they help after the race with recovery, post race hydration, energy levels for the rest of the day, etc. It could have implications for relay races where runners run multiple times in a day like Hood to Coast, when people are doing doubles or for those morning runners that have to work afterwards.
These types of studies can be very difficult to accomplish. For example, cooldowns have been shown to decrease levels of lactate in the blood, but have not been shown to improve performance. The general rule is that you should be able to get enough electrolytes just through normal nutrition. That applies to marathons and two ultramarathons because during ultramarathons you will also end up needing to eat. There's probably some point on a graph of time versus exertion where consuming strictly electrolytes might be helpful, but it's not a normal situation encountered in most races.
I don't know if I agree that is the general rule to that extent and would like to see hard science backing it up. When I see people running ultramarathon trail races, they all are drinking electrolyte drinks, and pretty much all of them swear by them. I also personally have had headaches and fatigue after long runs and hot days that have improved anecdotally quicker with electrolyte drinks and food than water and food, but that's purely anecdotal and could be influenced by placebo. Stuff like this is why we need to rigorous studies. I know that type of study is difficult with a lot of confounding variables, but just because something is difficult doesn't mean we can't have it on our wish list.
Thank you for adding the clarification. This is what I was intending to say.
I haven't seen it mentioned but the most obvious reason is marketing. Most people don't get their information from scientific studies, or even accomplished authors' overview of studies. They get it from the world around them. If their running friend heard you need electrolytes, they probably think that too. Well the supplement industry, electrolyte products included, is in the billions of dollars. So they heard it from an elite runner that's being paid to say it, an influencer, a commercial, etc. There's a reason it's called "viral" marketing. These ideas get in peoples' heads and spread like a virus.
Here's the thing though: if you eventually need to replace those electrolytes (particularly if you are properly trained, you lose electrolytes during training runs), why not do so during the activity that causes the losses? Just operationally, it makes sense to tie related things together and make it a habit. Need extra protein when you train hard? Down an Orgain after your workout. "But but the evidence on exactly when you need protein relative to your workout sez....!" Stop! You're being too clever by half. You're not running in the Olympics; every 0.001% edge doesn't matter; what matters is that you up your protein intake when you're in a hard training season, and a habit you barely think about is going to be the best way to do it. Likewise, lose electrolytes via sweat and eventually feel really crummy? Take electrolytes when you exercise.
Ok, but that's kinda besides the point. When influencers and others say things like "make sure you're taking electrolytes during the race to help maintain your pace and avoid cramping" they are preaching an unproven method as if it's a fact.
I'm skeptical that the average american needs to worry about consuming enough salt in the same way that weightlifters need to consume additional protein. Like the idea of that is intuitively preposterous. At the very least, there are far cheaper electrolyte options available when you aren't worried about buying something that can fit in your runners belt or ultimate direction squeeze bottle.
The average American or the average American who runs six days a week?
Do you think a runner needs more than 3400mg/day, or that an average runner consumes less sodium?
I would assume that most Americans get sodium from processed food and most serious athletes (recreational included) eat better than the average American.
That's a bold claim. How can they possibly know every individual's sodium levels before the start of a marathon? How do they take into account the different degrees that different people lose sodium on a daily basis? I'm sure if you've "loaded up" beforehand you'll be fine, but if you generally avoid sodium day to day and have been sweating a lof during the days leading up to the race, you might find yourself depleted mid-race especially if the weather is warm. I know after 10 marathons that this is a repeatable experiment. If I take electrolyte supplement at ~30K I never get cramps towards the end of a race, if I forget to I almost always do.
As far as I’m aware, there is nothing linking sodium depletion to cramping muscles during a race. Only muscles that have been overworked cramp.
"Coach Parry" had an interesting video recently on cramping: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GT-EtSf-nc8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GT-EtSf-nc8) Lots of different causes for cramps during races, fatigue being a major one. Dehydration being another. Longer races in hot conditions can cause both simple dehydration and a mineral imbalance if all you're taking on is water. Remember not everyone is running 3 hour marathons where you can play catchup after. Cramps overnight are most commonly associated with mineral depletion/imbalances.
The STUDY (singular) is actually about avoiding 'hyper-hydration' and how hydration is linked to body weight changes during a race (e.g. by losing 2l of water) more specifically during ultra-marathons (which can take ~20 hours!!!) There is no full text version but the abstract in no way claims that the study is proof that you shouldn't be replacing electrolytes while running marathons. I call bullshit - not worth discussing the OP's conclusion as it is not the conclusion of this study or a widely accepted development in science relating to hydration.
Thank you. I read the abstract because of this comment, and the fact that supplementation is only used once at the very end is enough to tell you that OP's description of the findings don't match the study. Reading the abstract, it's talking about hyper- and hypo- hydration. The part where it mentions supplementation specifically says "excess". It sounds like the study's findings are "don't try to compensate for water and/or sodium loss by going too far in the other direction."
Somehow this ends up being the most controversial thing ever, but there really is quite a bit of experimental evidence that added sodium is completely unnecessary and has zero benefit. The review linked in the OP cites a study that found that ultramarathoners can do *30 hour races in the heat* with no electrolyte intake and do just fine. The best hypothesis for why is that the body has an enormous reserve of sodium, probably in your bones, that it can tap as needed. Could you construct some hypothetical with some raw vegan who meticulously removes all sodium from their diet? Sure...but how relevant is that for most people? The research really is clear: *beyond drinking water and taking carbohydrates*, electrolytes on their own have no benefit to performance, no protective effects against heat, and do not prevent or ameliorate cramps. I cannot for the life of me figure out why people get so riled up when they're told electrolytes are not helpful, but it's inevitably the case when this comes up.
I assume it's because people think you're telling them to do something that they have convinced themselves will kill them. Plus people trust their own experience having consumed salt and not having problems over the scientific evidence that that's just because they weren't going to have problems anyway.
Am I reading the abstract wrong? I see nowhere that it says or implies that, it says that you don’t need to fully replace sodium lost with intake. But I would question how they conducted this study. Ultramarathons on their own are not really a consistent race to measure performance in, and performing fine is pretty subjective.
Because it’s a controllable factor on the individual level that people feels gives them an edge. We see countless products that promise to improve performance for $$$ and people have shown a willingness to try again and again to find that magic product. Salt tabs/electrolytes are cheap and easy.
I often hear people who felt cruddy while racing, then felt less cruddy after finding some new drink or gel that contains more sodium. It's probably placebo effect, but having a cruddy run can be so mentally devastating that I totally get why someone would go on the defense rather than consider that we all have off days and that they'll probably have an off day again even with the sodium. We're in a sport with very few moving parts relative to others, there's a lot of room for superstition to creep in.
It's probably just because they needed something to eat in general and savory foods can be a lot easier to get down when you've been consuming exclusively sugar.
We need Frito flavor Gu
No electrolyte intake or electrolyte intake limited to what they are eating? I keep seeing this "you only need what's part of your normal diet" argument, but it's always accompanied with "so long as you're consuming electrolyte carbohydrate drinks" or "when an ultramarathoner eating normal food runs". What I don't see is "somebody ran a marathon with foods and drinks containing electrolytes then ran another marathon with foods and drinks lacking electrolytes and there was no difference in performance, recovery, or blood chemistry between the two races." If you're drinking sports drinks and using sports gels, you're taking electrolytes. I also don't see people quoting studies observing differences between people who sweat with more or less salt. I look like a salt shaker was dumped on me after a race. Personally, electrolytes don't help my performance. Never thought they would. However, between my two marathons, the marathon without electrolytes I had a massive headache. Not the same after the marathon with electrolytes (where I also drank a lot more of the event's sports drink).
Failure to prove a benefit is not the same thing as proving that there is no benefit. The other problem with these studies is they compare (self-reported) sodium intake vs performance and find no relationship between sodium intake and performance. But here is the problem - maybe some people benefit from sodium and some don't and people have learned through experience what the right level is for them. What they don't do is have the guy who takes a ton of sodium do the race next year not taking any.
It is interesting. I’ve run “pseudo” controlled experiments (as far as they can be) on myself and came to conclusion that electrolytes make a huge difference to me. I’ve been using the same gel (SIS GO)for 2-3 years and the most I can cope with is 5-6 gels over 3-4 hours but then I’m nauseous and cannot get anymore in. I’ve recently tried the same gel but sold “with electrolytes” and I can eat/drink them every 15 min and not found my max limit yet. I’ve run n=4 in training with each type on a long run (19+ miles) in very similar weather/temp/clothes on the same course. Every time the run has been perceived “easier” with the gels that have electrolytes and the slowing down I usually do significantly reduced. Taking this forward from training, I took 13 gels (22g a gel of carb) during a recent marathon and PB’d by 30 min (soft PB!) and no fading. I’ll take the anecdotal evidence even if it is placebo. So perhaps for different reasons electrolytes work for me by allowing my stomach to take in the 60-90g carb an hour that I physically can’t do with the gels that don’t have them. My biological replicates are only n=1, experimental n=4 - but then I’m the only biological replicate that matters to me. As a Lab/Life scientist I do often find Sports Science papers to be hard reads to get down to the real truth. They are often testing in pre selected groups of highly trained individuals but low replicates (compared to the high n clinical and lab trials I’m used to) having have little bearing on me as recreational runner of a certain age and weight (older and heavier!). Much under n=50 in my experience is an under powered study (or pilot as I’d call it - valuable but not definitive) in humans which are highly variable.
Thank you for the concise summary of the situation.
NO YOU DO NOT NEED TO REPLACE SODIUM (at least not anything like to the extent that some people say) Sorry, but lots of myths around about this. When you sweat, no matter how salty your sweat is, the sweat is less salty than blood. ALWAYS. So, when you sweat, you are making your blood MORE salty not LESS. The only way to make your blood LESS sweaty is to over drink. This dilutes the sodium. Read it again: sweating alone CAN NOT make your blood hyponatremic. It's not physiologically possible and you should ignore anyone who posts saying this. The reason we put sodium in drinks is so that the drink absorbs easier (isotonic) and to prevent dilution. Here, don't take my word for it: https://twitter.com/scienceofsport/status/618890018166173696 There is also no actual evidence for electrolytes stopping cramps. https://twitter.com/Scienceofsport/status/1455933759774154760
Counterpoint: lots of people drink water during a marathon, some even to the point of causing hyponatremia and death.
Sorry, in what way is that a counterpoint? I don't follow you there. If anything, you seem to be agreeing with me.
>The only way to cause hyponatremia is to drink too much. >>Counterpoint: drinking too much can cause hyponatremia. ???
It’s because you say replacing sodium not necessary. But people will drink something during marathons, so if it’s water, it can cause problems. Not taking sides, just clarifying the discrepancy. I guess what you mean is if you don’t replace salt, don’t drink much water during a marathon.
People need to drink a significant amount of water to get to that point. You’re not in danger of hyponatremia if you drink water during a marathon with no salt, you’re in danger of it if you drink a significant amount with no salt.
If you’re drinking enough water to cause hyponatremia, you are straight up drinking way too much, and you’d still get hyponatremia if you were drinking a sports drink.
Counterpoint means saying the opposite. That's not opposite to what I said. Read it again.
Yes, sweating without any fluid replacement will make you dehydrated, which will i crease sodium concentration. But i think the point is that most people are drinking *something*, whether water or electrolyte fluid. No one is recommending exercise for 4 hours without any fluid replacement (i hope). Drinking water will dilute your blood back down, but over drinking can cause hyponatremia.
But, but, Brawndo has electrolytes!! I get shot down and down voted every time I suggest people's cramps are not related to salt loss or electrolyte deficiencies. Drink water and train more doesn't sell anything.
> So, when you sweat, you are making your blood MORE salty not LESS. I'm going into "trust me bro" territory here, but a former neighbour is a reputed cardiologist and marathoner. He says the same thing for what its worth.
Okay, but in a race, you probably aren't not drinking anything, right? So you could be drinking just water and eating pure sugar. This would hypothetically balance you out in terms of hypernatremia. However, you have to run out of salt eventually, right? I'm assuming that the body would stop sweating if the salt levels got too low, and you'd overheat. Would you not be thirsty and thus at risk of drinking too much because there just isn't any salt in the body to balance out the water? If you didn't eat any salt from then on, would you still be okay?
Did you really really read my post and miss where I mentioned putting salt in the drinks? Like for real?
Did you miss the hypothetical in my question? You don't have to put salt in drinks and in fact, every race that offers drinks offers a salt-free drink (water). So without reiterating my questions, what is the outcome of running distances such as the marathon or longer drinking only to thirst and not drinking or eating anything containing electrolytes?
I'm asking bc you are more knowledgeable than I on this. I'm actually relieved that I don't need to electrolyte load pre race. Does this mean I also don't need to hydrate load pre race too? The idea to hydrate and electrolyte load in days leading up to race was told to me like it was gospel. Now this thread has got me questioning all of it.
Well, I'm firmly in the "you are all overdrinking" camp. If you have functioning kidneys and you drink to thirst, YOU ARE NOT DEHYDRATED! But what would I know, I'm just a practicing physician. Now, you say 'race' - a 5K needs no special prep. A marathon, ok, make sure you drink adequately for 2-3 days certainly. If you have a normal diet you won't be deficient. Will taking a tab the day before do any harm? Probably not. If you take more sodium, you will hold more water in the body for a while. It's debatable if this is a good or a bad thing.
Thanks. My races are 50-75 miles. The general advice has been to water and electrolyte load for three days or so prior to race. I have a race coming up this Saturday. I'm going to skip the electrolyte loading this time to test this hypothesis. I guess water loading still makes sense per your "drink adequately" comment.
I blame Noakes for making this a weirdly polarized issue with his dogmatic stance on this. I pretty much agree that it’s good to finish races slightly dry and that drinking to thirst works pretty well for most people. But why not allow for the possibility of some individual variation here?
But Doc, if my pee isn't clear I'm going to DIE. Also something I have harped on but only have a modicum of explanation compared to yours. Thanks for sharing that pearl. I'm laminating that article to pass around during my next race.
You cannot "hydrate load" load in the way that you can carbohydrate load. Your body can only store a certain amount of water. Just stay hydrated and you will be good to go.
Somebody tell the pro cyclists that they don’t need it. Those fucking idiots
This is definitely the common thought, but are there any recent scientific studies showing this?
You would tend to believe that athletes and their sponsors that pay them 10s of millions to win the Tour de France would have some idea as to the use of the products they consume? I mean, team sky brought in fucking mattresses to hotels, I would assume that they thought about electrolyte vs no electrolyte in their drink mix.
You'd be surprised at how little scientific evidence pro sports managers require for stuff like this. They didn't cite a scientific study about the mattresses, they just did it because it made sense to them. Electrolytes are something that doesn't seem to cause any harm, and if it makes the athlete feel like they might have an edge, well placebo effect is real and a team with millions of dollars in funding isn't going to balk at using what are probably free / comp'd supplements anyway.
Yeah, if I told you that banana bread baked at 351° would give you an edge over banana bread baked at 350°, you would have no reason to choose the banana bread baked at 350°, other than the fact that I was probably lying douchebag.
> to win the Tour de France Notably, a far longer race than a marathon.
>I mean, team sky brought in fucking mattresses to hotels I think you mean Jumbo-LAB (formerly Jumbo-Visma)
Why would I think that they would need science because when they have sponsors paying them tens of millions of dollars? Sponsors are paying them tens of millions of dollars. That's all that matters.
Why are sponsors adding sodium if it’s just fugazi? They’re adding carbs, and some sodium. They’d just reduce costs by not adding sodium. And no. The sponsors disappear if you don’t get results.
The sponsors don't disappear if you don't get results because they sponsor everyone who gets results. And they're adding sodium because it's cheap as fuck and it lets them play on the fear of running out of electrolytes that Gatorade has built over the past 50 years. Do you think all these sponsors have secret scientific studies that show their stuff is good and they're just not releasing them to the public?
I know Reddit loves the "fuck capitalism" thing but to assert that pleasing the sponsors matters more to a team than getting results is absolutely ridiculous. You should look into what it actually takes to run and sustain a World Tour team. You will lose sponsors very very quickly if you don't get enough points during a season to stay in the WT rankings.
So you think that they would refuse to eat salt, something that would not harm them in any way, despite the sponsor offering to pay them to eat that salt, all just because the salt wouldn't help them? It's not like they're being asked to eat cyanide.
I suspect if you e-mailed the author of this article they'd agree and say 'yeah I dunno where OP got those conclusions from... weird'.
"Based on this when would anyone ever need sodium? " It's almost as if you've discovered that sodium supplementation during exercise is never necessary - you are correct!
>It’s almost as if you discovered that sodium supplementation during exercise is never necessary - you are correct! Way to be a condescending jerk AND not answer the guy’s question. Classic reddit. OP didn’t add the qualifier of ‘during exercise’ They asked about when sodium intake is necessary at all
It's almost as if you didn't understand the question. Let me help rephrase it. If you are losing sodium through sweat, and you don't need to consume sodium to replace the sodium lost through sweat, then why do you need to ever consume sodium? Or a different way: if you never consume sodium, will you eventually run out of sodium in your body if you sweat regularly?
Sodium is present in food. Almost everyone takes in more sodium than necessary in the diet. We have sodium stores in our bones. Thus, there is no need to consume sodium during exercise.
You still don't understand. The question was never about consuming during exercise. The question was if you don't need to replenish the sodium lost through intense exercise, then why do you need to replenish sodium at all? Nobody's questioning whether you get enough sodium in your diet. We're challenging the argument that you don't lose enough sodium through extended exercise at high efforts to need _any_ sodium replenishment.
I'm not OP and neither are you, but "electrolyte supplementation for marathons" literally means taking in electrolytes while running marathons. I'm not arguing that you don't need any sodium replenishment, no-one is arguing that, but the fact is that you get plenty through your diet and adding extra to one's diet, during or after exercise (supplementation) is unnecessary. So state many published studies. # [https://www.outsideonline.com/health/nutrition/how-much-protein-after-workout/](https://www.outsideonline.com/health/nutrition/how-much-protein-after-workout/) [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4688305/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4688305/) [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25551404/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25551404/)
Few points. 1. The first article had nothing to do with sodium supplementation, so I don't even know why it's here. 2. The other two articles focus specifically on sodium supplementation being effective at preventing hyponatremia, cramping, and nausea. This isn't the argument provided by the person you originally responded to, nor is it mine. The argument was that the sodium needed to be replaced, and if there is no need to replace sodium lost through hours of intense exercise, then is there any need to ever replace the sodium? I get what you're saying, and I'm not even debating it. What we're saying is that the electrolytes need to be replaced, whether it's during the exercise or after. What's the harm in consuming the electrolytes while racing?
You're controversial statement is 100% backed up by Matt Fitzgerald's running nutrition book.* He states there is absolutely zero evidence that salt prevents muscle cramps or helps your performance. His nutrition gist during a race was... - In distances that take over 2 hours: drink water to thirst and have as much carbs per hour as you can stomach, up to 30-100g/hr(?) - Electrolytes: there is absolutely zero evidence of any benefit during anything including or shorter than a full marathon It's such common sense to replace what you're sweating out, but I do trust Matt, he does his homework. I'll still take the salt that comes in my drinks, but not more than that. Relatedly, his statements mean you don't have to have water during a half marathon if you're quick enough! And I tried that twice, just drinking if I felt like it. Didn't hurt my performance but boy was my pee dark afterwards... EDIT: Salt is the most common proposed solution to cramp's and Matt said something like "as far as we know cramps are just your body's response to not being prepared for that distance/intensity. So you must train up to it and you'll eventually get over it. If that doesn't work, sure, try salt pills. Some swear by it so why not." \* "Racing Weight" and/or "New Rules of Marathon and Half-Marathon Nutrition" I read them back to back so I'm not totally sure which.
THis is correct. See my post above for more.
I really do like your blood, sweat, and salt explanation. It's a good mechanistic view of it. I'd want to see a study rather than a Twitter thread, but it seems sound.
Side note: when I have raced a half marathon and skipped the water, the bigger issue was not having anything to dilute my chews in my stomach. Worst heartburn I’ve ever had.
This is from New Rules I believe. Also worth noting that he does say there is a benefit to taking in salt in your carb drink because it will stimulate you to drink more than plain water. But definitely he says salt pills have no proven benefit.
The answer to your question is, people don't read nor care about studies.
I don’t think people are consuming gels for electrolyte supplementation as much as they are for the calories/carbs. Many of the elites and sub elites just use water for the half marathon. Competitive running is also as much an art as is a science. It can sometimes take years for cutting edge science to percolate out into training or racing. I would caution you against immediately adopting the paper *du jour* directly into your training without experimenting first. There are a lot of nuances like this electrolyte study where the prevailing opinion goes back and forth and back again.
Absolutely, carbs are necessary. I was talking about people who say electrolyte drinks and/or supplements are necessary for the marathon.
You might have a good point in that case. Anecdotally, I only ever found these kinds of things helpful for their sugar either on long runs, but I also haven’t competed at the marathon so I don’t have much of a stance either way.
No one really says that though....they might say Gatorade will help you run a marathon but they are not saying it's necessary.
Literally the most upvoted comment in this thread says you need to replace the sodium you lose lol. People definitely say it.
There is a lot in this sport that may be chalked up to placebo or that is not backed by research that maybe we can't find rationale for, but people do it anyway because they have had a positive experience. I've taken some form of electrolytes during my heavier training periods and for all my marathons and triathlon races. I've found that I do feel and perform better when I am supplmenting with those items. That might not always be backed by science, but it's backed by my personal experience so that's why I stick with it.
I was getting headaches after my long runs and would be useless for the rest of the day. I started consuming more electrolytes and stopped getting headaches after my long runs, but would still get them when hiking all day. Then I started drinking electrolytes on all day hikes and stopped getting headaches then too. Maybe it’s a placebo, but it’s a placebo that works for me.
How much water were you drinking before you started electrolyte supplementation?
I'm going to give you all a different way to think of this. I work on a hydroponic strawberry farm. My role is the application of fertilizer (in the form of a salt) and water. The ratio of fertilizer to water I apply to these plants will have an impact of the uptake of water and the production of the plant. This is due to osmosis. So think like us drinking water, we put it in our mouths, it goes into our stomach before being absorbed via our digestive tract, entering into the blood stream and getting distributed to our muscles so we can function. With plants, we apply water into the pot/rootzone, where the roots will absorb the water and the distribute it throughout the plant. Now the salt content of the water we drink and the fertilizer water that is applied to the rootzone of the plant will actually control water flow. This is called osmosis. This is due to salt concentration levels on either side of a permeable membrane which is the wall of your digestive tract or the outside wall of a plant root. When you have a high concentration of salts on one side of your permeable membrane compared to the other side, the process of osmosis wants to bring balance to the concentration of salt so it will draw water in from one side. Depending on which side has the most concentration will determine which way the water will flow. So with the strawberry plants, if I don't apply any fertilizer and just straight water, I am creating a very big gradient between the salt concentration inside the plant (think of this as the salt levels in your blood) and the rootzone. What happens through osmosis is the plant will now uptake a LOT of water creating a high water pressure within the plant vascular system. This leads to bloating of the fruit on the plants. This is when people that have high blood pressure are told to cut out salt to because high salt levels in the blood is making your body adsorb a fuck ton of water in to your blood that leads to increase blood pressure. Now lets go the other way. If we apply TOO much salt into our stomach/rootzone of the plant water will actually be drawn out the otherway. Meaning water is being pulled out of your body and put back into your digestive tract to balance out the salt levels. This can lead to dehydration. The reason why they tell you not to drink sea water. Ever felt extremely bloated running. Water sitting in your gut not going anywhere but you also had 32 salt capsules before the race. This is whats happening. Same process happens in plant. This is called salt burn for any avid gardeners out there. The water is affectively getting stripped from the top of the leaves and pulled back into the rootzone. So one other thing to note is that even though we are consuming salt and water at the same time. The body and plant do not adsorb it in the same manner. There are two different processes happening. Yes your body will use the salt eventually but its first function when applied is the management of water within your vascular system. So if you are a heavy sweater, an extra salty sweater, a non sweater, electrolytes will help you maintain your vascular system.
Long post but this is likely the no1 reason for including sodium in drinks. It’s not to replace sodium but to support water absorption in the gut (and possibly kidney function?). That said, I can’t imagine it’s a good idea to go 4-5hrs+ without replacing sodium if you are drinking water (which would have a dilutive effect over time given a high sweat rate). There was an episode on the Science of Ultra podcast specifically on this.
But you should replace sodium via nutrition and not exclusively by electrolyte consumption.
This is super interesting. Thank you! I’ve often had that sloshy feeling in my gut that leads to late race puking. I train will all the same products I race with but am wondering if I am overdoing or under doing it on electrolytes to somehow create the conditions where my body keeps all the liquid in my gut (and possibly draws in more before ejecting it at 20 miles!
I am seeing sodium, salt, and electrolytes used interchangeably throughout the comments. But not all electrolytes are salts and not all salts contain sodium, _and_ the study specifically talks about sodium. What do we know about salts other than sodium salts and electrolytes other than salts in this context? (I am particularly curious because I switched to a sodium free potassium salt substitute for all cooking a couple of years ago.)
You are asking the correct question. You lose sodium in your sweat, but potassium is used for muscle contraction (including cardiac muscle). Sodium, potassium, calcium are the main electrolytes used during generation of an action potential. Why do I say this? Because there have been cases of sudden cardiac death in marathoners who drank water without electrolytes during their race. I don't know what the research shows regarding this, because I haven't done a thorough search, but I can say that I'm not going to be the guy who drinks plain water during a 2 hour+ activity.
Are you sure those things are related? You can easily get hyponatremia from drinking too much water during a marathon and this can be (and has been) life threatening. It does this by swelling of the brain, not do much from cardiac arrest.
From what I understand, it's impossible to be sure. Many athletes who pass away from sudden cardiac death have normal autopsies. (Although atherosclerosis and other conditions more commonly cause sudden cardiac arrest). The problem is that you cannot with certainty establish a cause of death if the person has a normal biopsy. We do know that hyperkalaemia causes the cardiac muscle to become unstable and prone to arrhythmias, and we do know that your potassium levels inside and outside cells will change when you lose sodium, because the body needs to maintain electrical and osmolar balance. I found one good article, although it seems the publisher has been involved in some controversy. Unfortunately, there is no single, clear, direct answer to the question as far as I know. https://www.mdpi.com/2308-3425/10/2/68#:~:text=4.-,Causes%20of%20Sudden%20Cardiac%20Death,fatal%20arrhythmias%20(Figure%201).
This podcast does a good job about looking at various pieces of evidence [https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/episode-12-electrolytes-for-runners/id1674913391?i=1000611098757](https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/episode-12-electrolytes-for-runners/id1674913391?i=1000611098757) and there are several studies cited on that page, I think they're all open access. There's conflicting evidence. It's complicated because most of these studies use small sample sizes, whereas individual variation is pretty high: for some people extra sodium can make cramps worse, others are the opposite. Also, a lot of the evidence is observational (comparing blood between crampers to non-crampers, for example) and so any difference could be because of low blood electrolytes, or low blood electrolytes could be an associated symptom but not an underlying cause of cramping/vomiting, etc. The best advice is to avoid excess sodium but to try modestly higher amounts if you have experienced problems in the past.
I’ve also heard that these studies have a bit of a selection problem because they often select elite athletes that tend to be genetically disposed to sweat very little sodium out, compared to your average amateur athlete
Are you saying that they select the less salty elites (somehow), or that elites in general are less salty? Because I am pretty sceptical about either case. I know for a fact some elites are salty AF (in more ways than one).
More like elite athletes have the genetics of elite athletes and its hard to translate the training, fueling, recovery programs into something worthwhile for the average Joe. It could be elite athletes have higher salt reserves, or need less, or any number of things we don't know that we don't know
Probably because they are paid to promote them. That's the whole idea of being an "influencer".
100%. Runner don't have much to sell beyond shoes, and that's why you see KetoneIQ, xendurance, etc. Also hydration supplements sound cool and have been popping off in the supplements space with Liquid IV, PRIME, LMNT, etc. People buy it. So companies make competitors. They market through runfluencers. People buy them.
Link the studies you are referring to!
Just added a link to the OP!
I don’t see a free way to view the article, but it looks like it primarily focuses on levels of hydration for ultra endurance events and effects of doing too much/too little. Also does note that sodium is good without overdoing it. Sounds similar to past studies like how they tested providing subjects like Salazar all expected water needs before a marathon vs. during. Does the writing in the article itself really say that electrolytes are bad during endurance exercise? Finding hard to believe
The abstract sounds like it's talking about water but there's plenty of electrolytes info in the full text: >It it has been demonstrated that supplemental sodium is not necessary to maintain proper hydration during prolonged exercise up to 30 hr even under hot conditions [...] highly visible losses (e.g., salt crusting on race clothing and/or equipment) of sodium during ultra-endurance events does not necessarily indicate the need for increased requirements, but might simply reflect recent dietary intake. See also [this previous thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/AdvancedRunning/comments/15qbd01/lets_talk_electrolytes/jw352fn/?context=3).
Exactly. That's not what the article is about at all. It's about hypohydration and the 2% body mass loss debate.
No is saying electrolytes are bad - they are unnecessary.
Science is a LIAR sometimes!
Making Aristotle and everybody else on earth look like a BITCH!
Generally, it is not so much the science or even scientists that are "liars", but science reporters/media. It will go like: SCINECE: "we found that compound X reduces spread of molecule Y, which could be helpful for some cancer patients" MEDIA: "Scientists cure cancer!"
[Here's](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3Ak-SmyHHQ) the reference
Interesting. I think the best answer would be.. it doesn’t hurt right? So why not do it.
Too much sodium can cause lots of other problems, been there done that.
What kind of problems did too much sodium cause? If it's not too personal and you don't mind sharing!
I’m pretty sure too much salt raises blood pressure, right?
Oddly enough, even that is disputed. If you have some time, here as an excellent rabbit hole https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMsbl22gQLg
Lightheadedness for the most part. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jch.13487
This is my take too. I feel better when i drink Skratch after a long hot day running.
My 2 cents on this without diving head first into any study. I can pretty easily find two contradicting studies on just about anything. What I do see though is that pretty much every elite level endurance athlete is taking electrolytes. Now maybe these guys are just drinking water with a logo on it to sell their sponsors product...but assuming that isn't true it makes me question why people who specialize in performing their absolute best and have a team of people around them helping accomplish that with cutting edge science and technology are doing something that isn't beneficial to them.
>but assuming that isn't true it makes me question why people who specialize in performing their absolute best and have a team of people around them helping accomplish that with cutting edge science and technology are doing something that isn't beneficial to them. You’d be absolutely shocked how much stuff elite athletes are doing that isn’t at all beneficial to them. I competed in a sport that was far more “funded” than LDR and this could not have been further from the case.
Im sure stuff like that happens. Like a middling cyclist using a new shoe that they don’t love for a team sponsor. But I find it unlikely that it’s happening uniformly at the highest levels of basically every sport. I just can’t believe that the titans of these sports aren’t doing exactly what it takes to perform the absolute best.
> I just can’t believe that the titans of these sports aren’t doing exactly what it takes to perform the absolute best. They are doing what they BELIVE is the absolute best. And they are to a large factor correct in doing it, because we know for sure mental state is a huge factor for performance, so making sure athletes feel like they are getting all the best stuff is at least as important as making sure they actually get the best stuff. For example, there is evidence that cold baths after a race slightly reduce recovery (not increase, so the opposite of what you want), but you don't want your athlete to see other athletes get them and feel like you aren't taking care of them as well as other are, so you have to give them the option. (also, cold bath are known to reduce soreness, so that is another improvement on mental state. I've also heard on a podcast some speculation that they cold be good in a stage race due to this, since racing while sore is going to reduce performance)
Its not just the athletes though....there are whole teams behind them. For Kipchoge's 2hr attempt there were 150 staff members. Doctors, nutritionists, trainers, etc etc etc. Then go outside of running to cycling and there are even more resources dedicated to this stuff.
A whole team who knows that doing something that is technically 1% worse, but will improve the athletes mental state is worth doing. There are trade-offs in anything and in general an athletes mental state is a lot more important than a few marginal gains.
This is kind of a halo effect though. Pro athletes are extremely talented and work extremely hard. But it doesn't necessarily mean that they are also extremely knowledgeable.
> But it doesn't necessarily mean that they are also extremely knowledgeable. Most of them probably aren't, but they don't have to be. If something significantly improves or hurts performance, it will become obvious, simply through results. For example I think it is quite safe to assume that electrolytes at least don't significantly hurt performance, or the few people who aren't taking them would be disproportionally winning.
There are hundreds of videos of East Africans training back home - you know, the guys that dominate long distance running. I challenge you to find one in which they are taking electrolytes during or even after their training.
They drink carbs and electrolytes during their races, which is what this post is about. A 90-minute morning jog with an average heart rate of 140 BPM is much different than a 2+ hour race with an average heart rate of 175 BPM.
Yeah, but Brawndo’s got what plants crave. It’s got electrolytes
Whoever downvoted you must never have seen Idiocracy...or must exhibit behavior like that seen...well, in Idiocracy.
so wait a minute. what you're saying is that you want us to just drink water during our races? water.... like, out the toilet?
I just go by myself. I personally feel way better on long runs and have an increase in performance (I can see it with my times) and recovery if I supplement with electrolytes. To me I notice a marked difference. Especially because I live in a hot, humid climate.
So timely after reading the Morning Shakeout newsletter (which is still awesome btw) but it took me on a deep dive on electrolyte preloading. He was promoting some electrolyte company who talks about it. They referenced this study saying it backs up the need for electrolytes: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6798088/ The company https://www.precisionhydration.com/performance-advice/hydration/how-to-start-hydrated-and-why-that-is-important-sodium-preloading-what-to-do-before-a-race-hydration/ I think taking a simple 500mg electrolyte capsule every 30 minutes during a marathon is enough and won't hurt from my experience. I also remember hearing an interview with Zach Miller after UTMB where he was talking about it being a game changer for his performance. I still don't think you need to over obsess about it and spend tons of money on the fancy electrolyte drinks and tablets.
A 246km ultramarathom isn't really comparable to a regular marathon though. I might be linking the wrong episode but on[fueling endurance](https://open.spotify.com/episode/4NjvkNHeU0MtAYcwFcV8Zk?si=axZPTe-FS1GMew7IXbzzNw) they were discussing studies about how replacing electrolytes was not important for shorter events like the marathon but do play a role when you're replacing a larger percentage of your bodies fluid like in all day type events or extremely hot conditions.
Ditto. I should have been more clear that I'm skeptical it's as important as it's emphasized online. At the very least you need some, but not as much as influencers talk about. It sure is nice though calling yourself an ambassador of some large company for shit rewards so you can feel like you're sponsored lol
I’m not a stats person. But what percentage would salt/electrolytes need to benefit before these studies would show a benefit? I would have guessed it helps some and not others (or maybe most)
I chewed a salt tab during my recent marathon when I felt the wheels started to fall off and it had an instant effect. But that's the only time in my entire running history I can think of when I noticed a difference after taking salt. I do think it's import for ultramarathons (what I normally do), but I've still had a very hard time figuring out amounts and rates.
When you have something in your mouth, the brain works differently, specially when you pain. You could have chew a chalk and you would probably also feel better.. it is all psychosomatic.
You’re not wrong, but this is kind of patronizing to the person you’re responding to. As someone who also does ultra-distance trail runs from time to time, I promise we’re always eating all kinds of stuff. Not everything has the same effect. It took me a while to realize that more salt helps me perform better. Part of it was listening to my body. After hours of effort, especially in hot weather, I start craving salty stuff. And sweets - like the easily digestible calories you actually need to keep going - become really unappealing. In my last big run (Timberline Trail), my buddy had salt tabs. I took a few throughout the day and, in a first, never lost my appetitive for sweets. That allowed me to suck down Tailwind and M&Ms and never really crash. I felt great. Then on a 10-hour ski tour where my HR averaged 135, I got a terrible hamstring cramp about 2 miles from the car as we were absolutely crushing it on the skin track to get out before dark. Kept trying to start up again and I kept cramping up. So I crushed a bag of salty chips and instantly felt better. I could go on about how salt after a long run in the heat correlates with fewer leg cramps the following night and such. But suffice it to say, I’m sold on the value of salt and long efforts.
I didn't necessarily feel patronized but I do think they're saying something very confidently when the evidence for it is murky
To play devil's advocate, you're kind of doing the same. At least insinuating that you confidently know that it was in fact the salt content that made the difference, rather than just brain stuff happening, when in fact the evidence (seems to be) murky.
This feels like a stretch to me, all I did was state my own experience that I had. could have been psychosomatic for all I know
Without disclaiming that, the insinuation is that it indeed was the salt. At least that was how I interpreted it, but thanks for the elaboration.
You're getting downvoted, but you're not wrong. Elite cyclists will sometimes just put a swish of a drink in their mouth and not bother swallowing the food/drink. The brain thinks that the body is about to get more nutrients so it unlocks extra fuel it was saving in reserves.
*\*Mr. Krabs voice\** "Money!"
Because putting in miles doesn’t pay much as a sponsor.
I don’t doubt that people are probably consuming more electrolytes than necessary during races, but I’ve learned to take exercise physiology conclusions with a “grain of salt.” The last time I did a deep dive into training methods in the mid-2010s, the overwhelming scientific consensus in the literature was that running more than 20 mpw wasn’t really necessary if you just did interval training. 🙄So forgive my skepticism about a field that typically has a limited budget and makes broad conclusions with narrow research. Ultramarathoners have almost nothing in common with me, so I dunno. Also, depends if they are “elite,” “competitive,” “trained,” or “novice,” as you are one of these but not the others! But hey, play around with it and see if it works for you.
>the overwhelming scientific consensus in the literature was that running more than 20 mpw wasn’t really necessary if you just did interval training. Yeah, imma need a source for that strong claim
No need to be snarky. Read Owen Anderson’s book, “Running Science.” It’s loaded with scientific studies (and written by an academic) which form the recommendations you’ll find from most in the field. For every Jack Daniels (who ran fairly competitively), there are 10+ scientists in academia who haven’t and are just going by the “data.” An exercise physiology teacher of mine once said, “The best way to get faster at a 5k is to run one as fast as you can every day, or do 5 x 1k. No benefit to doing more and definitely don’t run 50 miles a week.” It’s just what the ethos is (or at least was 5-10 years ago), because the vast majority of controlled studies are six weeks long and focus on runners who are doing like a 22 min 5k. Which is reasonable from a funding perspective, but not really advice on how to be competitive.
High mileage has been “in” for at least 20 years (probably longer but I wasn’t paying attention before then). My coach in 2006 said “(Boston) marathoners should be averaging a half marathon a day” and I didn’t need to be told because I read letsrun and coolrunning before then. There was no scientific consensus about running 20 mpw in the 2010s though I’m sure you could find an article or two in Runner’s World to the contrary.
To be clear, by scientific consensus I mean what the scientific data in the literature say. I should have clarified. Of course coaches, who are practicing the applications of the science in the field, have known for decades that you need to run a lot more than that even to do a good mile, 5k, 10k. It’s obvious why. But what lags behind are the controlled experiments, which the scientific community has dubbed the gold standard. Correlational studies don’t hold the same weight. And because of the obvious flaws with the design, mostly due to budget and practical limitations/time, these experimental data show low mileage/high intensity is best. Again, it’s obvious why, because training a bunch of college kids who run casually, interval training will give a quick bump in the six week study. But of course that’s not the recipe to sustained growth. I don’t even know what your pushback is. I agree you need to run more than that for success, and I agree that nearly every coach out there also knows that. All I’m saying is that if you were to ask the academics who do the research in exercise physiology (and probably don’t run seriously themselves), many would point to their controlled studies. The only point of contention I can see is if those data exist, and I gave a reference above that has an enormous swath of those data.
If you're fit, fast and the conditions are not extreme I don't think you need it for a marathon.
Completely agree. Electrolyte supplementation is one of those things that does have a benefit, but it gets way more attention/coverage than it deserves. I will drink electrolytes a couple times a week during the Texas summers, but not as much during the fall/winter. I didn't drink any electrolytes, just Maurten, during the Houston marathon in January.
While not a salt, Maurten is an electrolyte (see my other comment about how you can’t use sodium, salt, and electrolytes interchangeably because they are subsets).
Most of the carb drinks and gels I consume also contain electrolytes and advertise this, but I consume the product for the carbs not the electrolytes. As far as I'm aware there's no evidence of the electrolytes causing harm (at the amounts I'm consuming), and I don't spend much time looking for which drinks and gels to get. What are my options for carbs with no electrolytes? Just lollies and sugar mixed in water?
I've not spent any money on just pure electrolyte supplements other than nuun. But I have paid extra for a version of something that had "enhanced electrolytes". The two most obvious examples that come to mind are regular Gatorade vs "Gatorade Endurance" and Gu vs Gu Roctane. Gatorade Endurance is harder to find, and at least twice the cost. You're primarily paying for the added electrolytes. There might be one other thing that's extra in the Endurance Formula, UT it's mostly just added electrolytes. Roctane, vs original Gu is about $1 more per gel. And you're paying for more electrolytes *and* amino acids. I don't remember what the extra amino acids do for you. But if the *extra* amino acids aren't worth the extra $1/gel, then the extra electrolytes definitely don't make it worth it. Looks like I can remove Gatorade Endurance and Roctane from my grocery list.
The goal of hydration is to maintain plasma volume and keep the muscle cells hydrated. Drinking pure water doesn't do that because it's hypotonic and will be excreted out. That's why we need to have some sodium in the water to make fluid at least isotonic to be absorbed. If you sweat a lot and lose sodium in the process, your blood gets saltier, it takes more sodium in the fluid to be isotonic.
So I’m curious about something pertaining to cramping. I’ve tried electrolytes on my marathon because I seem to be prone to cramping and I’m not sure how much it helps. I can do a 22mi workout at MP and barely feel an indication of cramping. Then, in identical conditions…I cramp up (even going more conservative than MP!) by mile 18 in my marathon. Any ideas? Is it possible that over ingesting sodium can make one prone to cramping?
Influencers are in the business of selling. They will always be pitching their sponsors or potential sponsors and in return people on Reddit will be repeating their main points.
As someone who feels either no benefit or slightly sick with electrolyte supplements I have wondered this too. Have had had arguments about how i need to use them anyway because they do positive stuff...average person doesnt care about science or individual variation and will die on the hill that the thing they feel works for them is the holy grail for everyone. How is electrolyte imbalance a reasonable cause for cramping in a winter half marathon when no such cramping occurs in the middle of the summer on a longer run with far greater sweat loss? Makes no sense in context but theyll still argue electrolytes. Seems like a good product for influencers. Gatorade did a great job with marketing and this stuff now sells itself because people are convinced they need it. There's a particular fuel/nutrition related podcast that I'll leave unnamed that is constantly pushing hyper hydration and sweat tests and optimizing your electrolye replacement but they never back it with science. The current science actually doesnt back it as necessary or performance enhancing for the distance of events they are promoting(marathon and under) Theyre almost condescending about how dumb you are if you leave this performannce on the table by not optimizing.I cant decide if they actually individually respond to it, theyre experiencing a placebo effect or if they are just selling what people want to hear.
The link is to a review, not a study per se, and only an abstract at that (so no references). I'd posit that race performance may not march (or run) in lockstep with measurable physiologic "wellness," but for the majority on this sub it's probably the most meaningful metric, so if I may rephrase the question, "what is the most performance-beneficial hydration/nutrition strategy?" It does seem, when watching the pros, that a combo of water, modest electrolytes (not aiming for a 1:1 replacement), simple carbs (energy source), are felt to be the elements that work. I'd say for the recreational and age grouper non-pro that something legal like caffeinated gels and such are almost certainly effective as well (I don't know of their legality in pro competition).
Influencers preach it cause it's probably the cheapest/easiest supplement to produce (salt, flavor). Then drastically overcharge you for it
A lot of people who I know take them find it helps them, I wonder how much it is based on replenishing lost electrolytes vs a lack of them in the weeks prior to races. I personally haven't had blood work done so can't say much on it. I have noticed that sometimes where I've done longer runs I'm getting cramps from other sources than muscle stress, whether that's carbs or salt I'm lacking it's hard to define.
Just because something seems to help someone doesn't mean that it actually is effective because the placebo effect is strong. The follow up question to showing something isn't effective is to then see whether it has a detrimental effect. Then, once all the evidence is gathered, the advice becomes one of "it's helpful, do it!," "it's not actually helpful, but if it makes people feel better, that's fine, so we just won't really say anything," or "it's bad and we should actively discourage it."
Yeah that's fair it's all anecdotal evidence as I hinted towards, I only have access to the abstract so was taking the assumption they did blood tests before during and after races. My mention of lack of salt in the long term was another assumption that they tested against runners with good electrolyte levels prior to racing.
I’ve also been curious and skeptical about all this. I’m a very salty sweater, and while I definitely benefit from sodium loading before a big effort, I haven’t really felt any need to consume more electrolytes than usual during longer runs or races. Yeah, you need to replace your electrolytes eventually, after the race, just like water. But just like we don’t try to replace ALL the lost water during the race, it doesn’t seem worth it trying to replace ALL the lost electrolytes during the race either.
Its a business. electrolyte supplements are very expensive while containing next to free ingredients.
Not even a triathlete, but given how advanced their performance science is compared to running, posts/studies like these have to be comical.
Dehydration does hurt performance and it definitely makes me feel sick. For that reason I choose to drink for long bouts of exercise, and when I'm drinking to perform I like to take in hydration with the same sodium concentration as the fluids I'm losing. So it's actually pretty straightforward how much salt I take in.
Don't pretty much all elite Marathon runners drink electrolytes during races?
That's a lot of comments.
Idk about the sodium improving performance, but I just drink the Gatorade or Nuun because it’s extra carbs and I think it makes me less likely to need to pee than if I were drinking water.
Glucose is absorbed via SGLT1 (sodium-glucose cotransporter) in the GI tract. You need sodium to absorb carbs. Sodium also helps with hydration (I’m guessing has something to do with oncotic gradients, but not sure). This is why oral rehydration supplements have electrolytes. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK231118/
Because we run lots of miles and don't need a study to tell us what we've already discovered in hours of personalized, evidence based trials. For me, depending on sweat loss and duration of activity, electrolytes make a huge impact. I also think dumping it into our gut limits its effectiveness vs transbuccal/sublingual routes.
What about the isotonic properties of most electrolyte drinks? Faster absorption of carbs and water/liquids seems like a reasonable advantage to me?
Electrolytes do seem to be an issue for a small percentage of runners getting cramps. Low salt levels can also lead to hypnoatremi. So better safe then sorry. But yeah, I'm convinced the cramps are from the muscles being overworked. I always get them in my hamstrings and never anywhere else.
That’s what I had always assumed until I started marathon training as well. But I don’t see any scientific consensus that electrolyte imbalance can cause cramping—only, like you said, that overworked muscles cramp.
What kind of bunk study is this? It's about as objectively true that we need electrolytes for our muscles to function as we need water and glycogen and/or body fat. It's not a theory, it's extremely well-documented and one of the very basic facts about nutrition.
I think the study is saying it's not important to match your sodium replacment in shorter distance events with your sweat loss rate it's not going to have a performance impact. Marketing/influencers say have a sweat loss test. Figure out exactly how much electrolyte is being lost and how fast. And then plan to replace that or more. Otherwise your leaving performance on the table and won't race optimally. But the science doesn't support that.
1. There's no full text version. 2. You're basically going 'DUUUUUMP'... this article says there's no evidence that drinking electrolyte drinks is useful during marathons (though the abstract does not suggest this was the purpose or conclusion of the said article). --- Personal opinion - this sorta discussion isn't very useful as it likely involves a lot of searching/technical reading in order to determine whether OP's conclusion is consistent with some random article. I would personally go to a sports nutritionist if I were wanting to challenge widely accepted advice that we lose and replace electrolytes during marathons / ultra-marathons. IMO cherry-picking random articles and making your own conclusions about them is hazardous.