are nutrition gels just overpriced gummy bears?

Dextrose.

Life Savers Gummies. They're my fuel of choice for long training runs. I save gel packets for race situations.

I go to KFC and get those little packets of honey that have with their biscuits. They'll give extra if you ask.

Easy to tear open on a run, lasts indefinitely, and basically free.

you mean, please don't Trolli me!

I brought this up on Reddit because gels bother my stomach. A popular answer was Sour Patch Kids. Can confirm, they are both tasty and energy-boosting.

Halloween candies.

I think gels work better, but for regular weekly runs, Halloween sized candy works great.

Is your main complaint cost? Like most things, you're paying for convenience: packaging, flavor choices, etc. Besides, people are running 2:02 marathons now, so maybe scientific nutrition and fueling actually make a difference.

If I look at a package of organic Black Forest gummies, it’s the same ingredients as athletic gummies like honey stinger and clif. But Black Forest gummies are way cheaper. So yeah price is a big factor. I guess convenience is one thing. But a bag of honey stinger waffles isn’t any cheaper per ounce than their individually wrapped ones.

Ar you assuming that these overpriced sugary gels make people faster?
I am pretty sure they don't.
Shoes is a entirely different story.

Gummy bears! Bouncing here and there and everywhere. Bouncing here and there beyond repair. We are the gummy bears. Gummy bears!

if im remembering right, the corporate scientist response to this (i have no idea if its true or just marketing) is that the gels etc have different types of sugars, that get absorbed through different pathways, making the carb delivery more efficient. whereas candies will usually have one source of sugar, and even though its the same amount of carbs, the sugar in the candy doesnt get absorbed and distributed as efficiently because it is only going through one channel that gets backed up. now that i typed this out maybe matt fitzgerald talked about it in one of his books?

What about bringing this one with you on your marathon?

Image:gg-website-assets.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-...

Not really. Just pointing out that people are running 2:02 now, which makes the "2:08 without gels" claim kind of irrelevant because 2:08 is not the standard by which we are measuring marathons. I do think better understanding of nutrition, hydration, and fueling has helped the evolution of faster times, though.

Regarding my convenience comments - If you feel like simple sugars are good enough, then you can obviously go the route of collecting honey packets from KFC, or gummy bears, or whatever. Heck, you could even put a bunch of sugar cubes in a plastic bag, or pour a pint of maple syrup into a water bottle, and carry that during your run. If that's worth a savings of $1.40 to you, then do whatever works. I'll take the convenience for $1.40.

no, they are not. Candy and HFCS sugars will give you bad side stitches (as will a lot of gels). Gels with different sugar ratios/electrolytes/consistency work much better while exercising.

Trying to save $4/week on nutrition is not the way to help your budget.

How will you lose weight if you eat while you exercise?

They work great for training. In races, I'd shell out money for the good stuff. But in training, they work great.

I think the difference is in the type of sugar. Gummy bears, Sour Patch kids, etc., are sweetened mainly with fructose (assuming you are in the US, since I live in the US and subconsciously have a hard time imagining people existing in other countries). Honey also contains a lot of fructose. Gels and chews designed for endurance athletes will be primary glucose and dextrose.

Why does it matter? Different sugars are broken down via different metabolic pathways. Glucose can go straight to your muscles without having to pass through the liver. Fructose does have to pass through the liver, meaning it takes longer to turn it into ATP, and puts more stress on your liver, which is already pretty stressed trying to maintain homeostasis while you are redlining your body.

Other than the added salt, you're right, there's not a big difference in gels and gummy bears. Yeah, yeah, yeah.....I know, they have a slightly different type of sugar and some amino acids, blah, blah, blah. But most of that is marketing BS. Where's the randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled scientific data (not funded by the gel companies) showing you'll run faster? And how much faster?

Sure, maybe they're 2% better. I'll give them that. Maybe. I ate 3 GUs during my last marathon 2 days ago. But I can't say for sure that I ran any faster than if I just drank water and ate some gummy bears and salt tablets along the way. Or even just water, alone.

Most of this is psychological; the placebo effect. If you think what is in that foil packet and water bottle will make you run faster, then it probably will, regardless of what's in it.