I have a friend who is a runner and he uses an inhaler for workouts and races but he isn't asthmatic. He swears it is a performance enhancer but I always thought that if you didn't have asthma than it wouldn't do anything for you. Can anyone shine some knowledge on me. Is he getting an actual advantage or is it all in his head?
yes. will also change body composition after awhile. pretty easy to get one from any doctor if you want to try for yourself. don't know why any runner would want to risk their health with the side effects though unless they were on a scholarship.
yes wrote:
yes. will also change body composition after awhile. pretty easy to get one from any doctor if you want to try for yourself. don't know why any runner would want to risk their health with the side effects though unless they were on a scholarship.
Really? Unless they were on a scholarship?
Wow. That's absurd.
just saying i don't get how ppl take salbutamol for recreational running and fitness when at least a scholarship athlete is getting something in exchange for health risks and side effects.
yes wrote:
just saying i don't get how ppl take salbutamol for recreational running and fitness when at least a scholarship athlete is getting something in exchange for health risks and side effects.
no, you're saying a scholarship is worth using illicit substances that can jeopardize your health. and that is a heinously stupid thing to say and an even worse mentality to have.
probably all in his head. but i am not 100% sure of it though.
I wonder the same thing. I see so many high school kids using inhalers. I know the national incidence of asthma has risen, but surely it can't be that high yet. Also, when younger kids start running track in middle school, they confuse being breathless because they're out of shape with having a breathing problem. The at the next practice they show up with an inahler. Sickening.
*Then
nordicmama wrote:
Also, when younger kids start running track in middle school, they confuse being breathless because they're out of shape with having a breathing problem. The at the next practice they show up with an inahler. Sickening.
1. Totally true.
2. Also, when college kids start running heavy mileage, they confuse being tired because they have surpessed their ability to recover with having a thyroid problem. Then at the next practice they show up with thyoid meds. Sickening.
yes wrote:
just saying i don't get how ppl take salbutamol for recreational running and fitness when at least a scholarship athlete is getting something in exchange for health risks and side effects.
crazy talk wrote:
no, you're saying a scholarship is worth using illicit substances that can jeopardize your health.
No, he's not.
He's saying that is makes more sense to do it for a scholarhsip than for 3rd place in your age group at the local Run for Tennis Elbow.
This seemed obvious to me.
12 participants? In a three-way crossover RCT? Completely inadequate power to detect any differences.
So many ex phys studies are a joke. The worst part is that people read the conclusion of something like this and actually present it as fact in discussions.
and get published*
It seems like we have a disagreement, with half the people saying there would be no benefit and the others saying it would help. Does anyone have any more thoughts or studies?
rupp-certified saladbar wrote:
12 participants? In a three-way crossover RCT? Completely inadequate power to detect any differences.
So many ex phys studies are a joke. The worst part is that people read the conclusion of something like this and actually present it as fact in discussions.
What exactly is the power of this study, if in your estimation it is inadequate, and what would in your opinion be an adequately powered RCT?
For further reading here is a review of 20 randomized trials on inhaled beta agonists:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2657501/If there is any effect at all on aerobic performance it's not easy to find.
The study was small, but still it didn't show any ergogenic effect from immediate dosage -- endurance time wasn't significantly improved. If you're going to say something has a benefit, you should be able to show it. The paper references other studies with similar conclusions.
I don't see why an inhaler would have worthwhile benefit for a well trained, healthy athlete anyway.
Anyway, it doesn't look like this (or albuterol) has an immediate benefit, which means people like your friend who just use it prior to workouts aren't likely to get much out of it.
That's not the same as athletes who use it daily, though. It looks like that might have an effect.
fax yo wrote:
No:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1746141/
i have dozens of pdf's of studies on beta-2 antagonists on my computer that say yes. also used them myself. they work but side affects are nasty in my opinion. i don't agree with coaches and doctors who insist athletes get inhalers for exercised induced asthma. see it lots in youth soccer as well.
yes wrote:
i have dozens of pdf's of studies on beta-2 antagonists on my computer that say yes. also used them myself. they work but side affects are nasty in my opinion. i don't agree with coaches and doctors who insist athletes get inhalers for exercised induced asthma. see it lots in youth soccer as well.
Where are all of these studies published? The authors of peer reviewed meta-analyses were unable to find them anywhere, that's for sure.
yup23 wrote:
and get published*
Anything can get published somewhere. Welcome to science publishing.