Is Exogenous Lactate the "Holy Grail" of sports fuelling?
For years, we’ve been focused on >120g/h CHO intake. But how can we explore new limits?
Lactate is not a waste. It´s the most efficient and preferential fuel in the human body.
A thread on the next metabolic frontier🧵
Scientific knowledge around Lactate has evolved significantly over the last 50 years. Thanks to scientists like Brooks, Rabinowitz, Gladden...
We now know Lactate is not only a major energy source, but also a gluconeogenic precursor and a signalling molecule.
However, the knowledge we've got is mostly focused on Endogenous Lactate, understood as the Lactate our cells produce through glycolysis under specific energetic demands. But endogenous ≠Exogenous. Our knowledge on the later one is limited.
The difference is the metabolic cost!
Endogenous Lactate production is a "rescue" mechanism. It costs 2 ATP during the investment phase of glycolysis and releases a proton (H+). It requires a cost.
Exogenous Lactate is like an external free gift. It arrives at the mitochondria with 0 upstream glycolytic energy debt.
When CHO are fuelled during exercise, one of the main targets is the internal production of more Lactate, mostly through Fructose. Simply because Lactate is a preferred fuel for the cells and a more polyvalent carbon transporter across the body.
So, we mostly 120g/h CHO to drive high glycolytic rates & maximize internal lactate flux for the oxidative machinery (mitochondria), which is translated in higher energy transformation.
But why take the long way home? What if we could optimise this by fuelling Exogenous Lactate?
If the goal is to provide mitochondria with Pyruvate, why not bypass the Phosphofructokinase (PFK) rate-limiting step and ingest the downstream metabolite (Lactate) directly?
Even more considering the fuelling capacity is limited by absorption rate, which is the real bottleneck.
SGLT1 (Glucose) and GLUT5 (Fructose) transportes are saturated. Lactate utilizes MCTs, which saturation is not a problem. By introducing exogenous lactate, we could tap into a parallel transport system, potentially increasing total exogenous energy ox. beyond the 120g/h ceiling.
One of the main potential "negative" effect from high CHO fuelling is the impact on muscle glycogen utilisation. When high rates of CHO are ingested, CHO ox. becomes higher and endogenous glycogen stores seems to be depleted faster.
Moreover, Exogenous Lactate provides energy with a significantly blunted insulin response.
This can be translated into high energy throughput while maintaining the fat ox. pathways that are usually "shut off" by CHO loading. Metabolic flexibility through substrate selection.
But what about the evidence in performance output, over metabolic outcomes?
Although literature is scarce, mostly related to the lack of safe and efficient supplement solutions, data on animals and some human studies are interesting.
1️⃣ Reduced RPE: Lower perceived effort at the same power output.
2️⃣ Extended Time-to-Exhaustion: Significant increases in endurance capacity.
3️⃣ Power Maintenance: Higher power output in the final stages of exercise when compared to equicaloric glucose.
All these results are still very limited and good conclusions cannot be taken. However, coming back to biochemistry, there are mechanisms that can help us understanding how performance gains can be obtained.
At high intensity, Endo Lactate can stop the cell, but ExoLactate?
The conversion of Lactate→Pyruvate via LDH reduces NAD+ to NADH.
By ingesting lactate, reducing equivalents can be provided directly to the mitochondria. This could maintain a favorable NAD+/NADH ratio, driving the ETC more efficiently than glucose-derived pyruvate.
And also maintaining the pH equilibrium of the cell, which is translated into higher Glycolytic rate regulation - a pathway that is absolutely key for high intensity exercise.
How does this pH regulation happen?
MCT1 is a symporter: it moves one Lactate molecule and one H+ into the mitochondria. Exogenous lactate can act as a metabolic proton sink. It can remove acidity from the cytosol and burn it inside the mitochondria, increasing the muscle's buffering capacity while providing ATP.
But what if all that Lactate machinery could also help not only acute modification of the cell, but with chronic adaptations in metabolism?
Lactate is a Mitokine. Chronic exposure to exogenous lactate upregulates PGC-1α, the master regulator of mitochondrial biogenesis.
Daily use could signal the body to increase mitochondrial density and MCT expression transforming the athlete into a more efficient oxidative machine.
Imagine having a mimetic of exercise intensity through exogenous lactate supplementation? That would be BIG!
It all sounds very exciting but the biggest problem has not been addressed yet:
We cannot provide Exogenous Lactate in a safe and efficient way orally yet. At least on the amounts that could make a real difference (10-20g/h).
Historically, taking >20g/h of traditional Sodium Lactate meant massive sodium loading, causing osmotic imbalance and severe GI distress.
The effective dose has been trapped behind a stoichiometric limitation. No technological solution.
But technical barriers are here to be broken by science. If that is accomplished soon, we will probably be in front of the next generation fuelling for sports and performance. And of course, for some other conditions related to health (diabetes, metabolic syndrome?).
Lactate is the most preferential source of energy for the body. Faster than glucose and fructose, more efficient and with higher impact on metabolism - not only energetically.
Next fuelling generation is coming. Its name could be Exogenous Lactate. It´s only about time...
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1. How off are we from the "REAL NUMBER" in sports (TDF for example)?
Just imagine what we call 200w is not really the real number. Imagine it´s 250w. We're 50w off. Is it problematic? Well, if sensitivity of the measurement is good, probably it would not.
A 🧵without pictures.
2. We can definitely operate well - predictions, analysis, etc. being always 50w off. However, when other factors come to the table, that error will be more notorious. For example, when aerodynamicists add this number to their equations. The % error increases with consequences...
3. Nothing new. Well, in nutrition and energy expenditure, unfortunately, we are quite far off the real number. In many cases, more than 1500 kcal!!
This means that we can be up to 40% off between our calculations and the real number!!
1/13 How much energy (Kcal) do trail runners expend in reality? A thread after testing pro athletes with DLW.
6 months ago, I changed my job to take a new opportunity. I changed sport discipline as well. Left cycling behind, and opened a new chapter in trail running and running.
2/13 Cycling is my life (the sport I grew up with) and it will be always be. I have learned almost everything I know in cycling. But growing up in Basque Country means mountains are part of our lives. Trail running as a sport has been always there.
3/13 Even, I did my first research and explored the high CHO intakes in Trail running () back on the days.
I have been using this slide for >5 years to explain the nutritional approach we have been researching last years (and we still keep doing it).
- The core of it all is metabolism.
- The goal: To make athletes´ careers sustainable.
Sometimes it has been misunderstood.
A thread:
We have investigated the effects of carbohydrate intake during exercise. Although it has been understood (misunderstood at times?) as the ultimate goal, the real one has been always to frame it within "nutrition guidelines" (as a whole).
Fuelling during exercise is only an excuse
Unfortunately, the message has gone maybe too far.
Some people have understood the approach is:
- The more sugars, the better.
- Always sugars.
- More sugar.
- And simple sugars.
Reality is completely different. Do you want to know how the approach is really?
I've been fortunate this week to chat with 2 professionals in sports science & communication for their respective podcasts. One recurring question was about the intake of 120g CHO/h during exercise and our studies. A perfect opportunity to provide a bit of context to the topic.
Taking advantage of the opportunity, I thought it would be cool to explain it here through a small thread.
1) What we did is to study a specific effect in a very specific context.
In other words, we've investigated that when a person capable of digesting, absorbing, and converting a high intake of carbohydrates during exercise—previously set by science @ 90g/h—ingests a certain amount, they can optimize related effects by ingesting a higher amount (120g/h)
1. Nitric Oxide (NO) pathway rise in interest in the health and performance fields. Diverse supplementation approaches ignite NO production, yielding multiple benefits, including adaptations from cell metabolism to whole-body physiology.
2. As physiologists, we have been always interested in the topic and some years ago we started a series of humble studies led by @MielgoAyuso, researching an emerging area: combined supplementation protocols to optimise NO pathway performance.
Let me introduce you:
3. We started publishing a systematic review and meta analysis in 2 main amino-acids participating in the NO pathway (Arginine and Citrulline).
When discussing human energy budget, I have been always interested in understanding which one comes first: Energy intake or expenditure.
IMHO, first you need to "show capacity" (⬆️ your mito. function) and then "ask for resources" (⬆️energy intake).
Why dogs 📸?
I have always looked at dogs (especially Balto😏), as they are a good example of what the mammalian metabolism can do. Sled dogs not only show an AMAZING mitochondrial function, but some interesting facts in energy budget.
Do you know how many kcal do they eat?
10.000 kcal/day (408kcal/kg/day) !!😳
Clearly, they not only NEED those kcal to go through 1000 miles in Alaska, but they ARE ABLE to metabolise that energy.
But, how is this in athletes? It's well known that better athletes are able to use more energy & do it more efficiently.