Caffeine and sports performance: should it be banned?

Being a coffee drinker, I always look out for articles that shed my habit in a favorable light. Studies generally show that drinking less than 6 cups of coffee a day can have favorable health benefits. Anything more than that is usually a bad deal. Moderation is key.

I won't go into details about the health effects of coffee intake (perhaps later). What I want to explore here is rather the benefits of caffeine and coffee for sports performance, training, and exercise in general. Since I train quite a lot (and some of you surely do too), I think this is something interesting to know about, and coffee can be another tool to add to one's arsenal.

The effects of caffeine and coffee on sports performance in general are favorable, with a few more murky results. First lets see what science has to say about what caffeine may be enhancing, exactly.

For starters, caffeine has been shown to increase the pain and perceived effort thresholds during exercise, and very interestingly, in both habitual and non-habitual drinkers. Post-exercise pain can also be decreased with some java, by a hefty percentage too.

The effects on endurance performance are pretty well documented. Time to exhaustion as well as time-trial performance are usually enhanced (though sometimes with a lot of variability), especially during sleep deprivation.

For anaerobic exercises where the onset of exhaustion is within a short period of time, such as sprints, there is also evidence for caffeine's action as an ergogenic. Few studies exist for strength training, and usually the results are more "equivocal". Some studies show that in well-trained subjects there is an increase in maximal force generation, muscular endurance, and "vigilance", while others state that there is no significant strength increase for one-rep max lifts. There is certainly a consensus, however, that further study is necessary.

Then of course come the studies that are sport-specific, for sports such as soccer and rugby, which are classified as high-intensity intermittent exercises. As these involve endurance, strength, and anaerobic performance, one can see how caffeine would be considered an ergogenic in these cases.

The specific mechanism of caffeine's action is still questionable (that, and I will spare you all several paragraphs of physiology).

It's important to note to take everything with a grain of salt, especially since there are so many factors that influence the design of a human study.

Also, caffeine is not necessarily the same as coffee. Coffee has a whole slew of other ingredients besides caffeine, and it's effects are a little harder to study.

So if caffeine is such a performance enhancer, why isn't it banned from professional competition? Well, it actually WAS banned until 2004. Apparently it was just too hard to regulate.

The World Anti Doping Agengy, which "fight[s] against doping in sports" has a list of substances that are prohibited in sports.

Interestingly "gene doping" is on the prohibited list, or any pharmacological substance which may "alter gene expression". Also, alcohol is prohibited in competition for some sports where operation of machinery or a complex tool such as a bow is required. One can see why.

Stimulants, of which caffeine is one, are also well-represented on the list.

How does WADA decide what gets put on the list?

A substance shall be considered for inclusion on the Prohibited List if the substance is a masking agent or meets two of the following three criteria:

(1) it has the potential to enhance or enhances sport performance;

(2) it represents a potential or actual health risk;

or (3)it is contrary to the spirit of sport.

None of the three criteria alone is a sufficient basis for adding a substance to the Prohibited List. Using the potential to enhance performance as the sole criterion

would include, for example, physical and mental training, red meat, carbohydrate loading and training at altitude. Risk of harm would include smoking.

Requiring all three criteria would also be unsatisfactory. For example, the Use of genetic transfer technology to dramatically enhance sport performance should be prohibited as contrary to the spirit of sport even if it is not harmful. Similarly, the potentially unhealthy abuse of certain substances without therapeutic justification based on the mistaken belief they enhance performance is certainly contrary to the spirit of sport regardless of whether the expectation of performance enhancement is realistic.

Some think that as more and more evidence arises for caffeine's sports-enhancement benefits, it should go back on the list. (Though one would have to be a very serious coffee drinker to gather some of caffeine's benefits).

It's very hard to say whether it will ever go back on, since studies show that low to moderate consumption can have a performance boosting effect and coffee is such a prevalent part of society. I do think ideally, if the evidence keeps growing for its effects, then at least competitors at the highest levels (Olympics, Super Bowl, and other national or world championships) should be tested. Though perhaps a substance should be a "controlled" one to be on the list. Otherwise take specially formulated electrolytes - there are certainly benefits to be reaped from these during competition, and surely overdoing these would have deleterious effects on the athletes, but these are not going to be banned any time soon.

We have to realize though that there are many factors that are taken into consideration when such lists are formulated and when athletes are tested, and what ideally should be done is usually far from what is actually done. We all want to think that at the highest level of competition the field is as level in terms of doping and other unfair advantages as it can be. However, there are many other factors that account for performance, and they're all part of what's called TRAINING. Of course not everyone has the same access to coaches, equipment, nutrition, masseuses, or genetic benefits. Prohibiting a number of performance enhancing substances is the best that we can do.

Personally, I will keep drinking my coffee for its social reasons (coffee hour!), delicious taste, and the apparently significant kick it can give my training even if it doesn't always make me feel buzzed. No caffeine pills for me though. As for anyone else reading this who trains and is NOT a coffee drinker - just know that you may be missing out on some nice boosts without many deleterious effects.