The Truth about Sports Drinks

Truth about Sports Drinks The article, “Does Gatorade actually work” (Tuller par. 1) seeks to establish if really sports drinks are the best alternative to curb dehydration. The main objective narrows down to investigating the effectiveness of Gatorade, one of the ubiquitous sports drinks. The study links the industries that produce sports drinks and the researchers/scientists. The article acknowledges the fact that there is possible dehydration during endurance exercises, and thus needs to be replenished; but how and with what is the question addressed in this article. The article seeks to prove that sports drinks are not the best for re-hydration during exercises; rather, this is a mere business strategy by manufacturing industries to promote their businesses. Water, formerly used, is suggested as the best still. A study was conducted to establish the viability of the research done on these drinks, and as the article notes, the results were surprising. The article further compares urine color examination and thirst as standards of testing dehydration.

Buy this excellently written paper or order a fresh one from acemyhomework.com

This article was basically authored in response to recent research conducted by the British Medical Journal, “The truth about sports drinks” (Cohen par. 1). This journal was authored because of the doubts of the viability of the sports drinks that are a recent “discovery”.

Cohen (par. 1) observed that earlier in 1970s, marathon athletes were strongly discouraged from taking fluids since it was believed drinks slow them down. The science of dehydration was not a matter of discussion then since little scientific significance was attached to it. How hydration science became popular is due to the question that the Cohen addresses. The results disqualified the use of sports drinks and the use of urine to test dehydration as not the best and instead, water for rehydration and thirst as a standard for testing dehydration is the best option.

The article generally brings out the research findings as they are and even substantiates from other resources in contrast. The author begins by acknowledging that he had earlier on believed that thirst is a sign of dehydration, but had succumbed to the new knowledge that it is not. Nevertheless, this notion has proved hard. Cohen (par. 7) argues that to deny the fact that thirst is the best way to test dehydration is as good as denying the fact that the body has an excellently good homeostatic mechanism of detecting when there is dehydration and responding to it appropriately. It is true that thirst would be an indicator of dehydration, but the contrary argument is something to reckon with as well. Yeargin (par. 1) argues that when someone voluntarily expresses thirst, then that is a true sign of dehydration. Nevertheless, another perspective observes that youths and children may be dehydrated and not express thirst during sports, thus thirst per se may not be the best indicator. While no scientific reason has been attributed to this, Yeargin (par. 3) gives a social reason that it may be due to preoccupation with playing that one forgets about thirst. This article cites many references against thirst, but the article does not heavily support the view against this. Even from the original source, apart from

the homeostatic response of the body to dehydration, the author does not provide substantial support or citations, thus further research is imperative to substantiate conclusions.

There is a linkage of sports drinks manufacturers to the academic researchers, sports people, and medical groups. Tuller (par. 2) notes there have been strong financial ties between these parties in a bid to promote their products; this renders the serious warnings about dehydration and electrolyte imbalance pass for distrust. Cohen (par. 15) heavily substantiates this point. There have been evidences of manufacturers introducing outreaches to schools and wiring the students to know that taking water for rehydration is not the best due to the principle of osmosis, and understandably so. Therefore, there remains the point that intake of isotonic fluids like sports drinks the best.

A research conducted by BMJ to investigate the genuineness of the researches conducted on sports drink discovered that they were subject to distrust; small sample sizes were used, most were poorly designed, data dredging was observed, and relative measures used were inappropriate. The manufacturing companies declined when asked to provide details of supply of the studies, except one (Cohen par. 21). There is a lot of evidence for the support of liaising between these parties, which renders the promotions and study findings about sports drinks questionable. The article further notes that an investigation on the European Food Safety authority that is charged with the responsibility of assessing claims of health in food established that the groups heavily relied on flawed information (Tuller par. 3). Therefore, an argument that the whole topic of sports drinks is a business strategy may be sound. Another finding established that the participants of most of the tests performed were endurance athletes and elites whose nutritional as well as training needs are particular, thus the findings may not be assumed to hold to a vast majority of those who perform heavy activities.

Cohen (par. 23) further notes that most of the researches conducted (which were financially linked to manufacturing companies), were either not declared or published in the long run, thus obscuring important results. Most of the research that questioned the viability of sports drinks in the medical sports journals is rejected. The article quotes Paul Laursen who wanted to perform a negative study on the role of hydration. It was discarded by reviewers as well as auditors for bogus reasons.

The preference of sports drinks over water with the rationale that the drinks are capable of replenishing lost electrolytes does not hold water. Evidence is not in support of this theory (Tuller par. 3). This point is borrowed from the research findings of the original source. As part of the business strategy, the sports drinks companies have sought to preach that water alone is not enough for hydration, and that sports drinks are preferable. Cohen (par. 34) particularly quotes the Powerade Company that has on its website a suggestion that water is insufficient since it lacks the performance benefits that sports drinks have. However, surprisingly, there is no trace of information to quantify the purported benefits. Another perspective records that electrolytes (which are ubiquitous contents of soft drinks), especially sodium and potassium, decrease urine output, promote water absorption from intestines, and encourage retention of water. Water is not considered the best because it causes bloating, thus suppressing thirst and drinking. Fluids that have a low osmolality, like water, lead to a drop in osmolality of blood plasma, thus reducing the urge to drink well before enough fluid is taken to reinstate losses (“The Effect of Different 298).

In an attempt to support the argument for water, the original source for this article links sports drinks with obesity. A half a liter of Powerade contains sugar of 19.6 grams, and the same volume of Lucozade has 32 grams of carbohydrate, and Gatorade contains 30 grams sugar.

Therefore, there are high chances of obesity with increased intake of sports drinks, particularly

among kids. Nevertheless, Coca Cola has refuted this, arguing that a controlled use of these drinks will not lead to obesity, just like an uncontrolled use of any other soft drink may lead to obesity. Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York City is said to have proposed a prohibition on soft drink bottles that are sold together with sports drinks (Cohen par. 43). While it has been noted that obesity rises with increase in the use of sports drinks, the rationale behind the vulnerability to obesity is not significantly substantiated here, and more investigations into the matter may give a better stand. Another health issue results from over-hydration that is said to result to serious complication, and even death, (Tuller par. 4). Milosevic, Kelly and Mclean (307) explain another health issue of sports drinks related to dental damage. These drinks normally have citric acid in them. Scientifically, acids potentially contain an erosive nature, thus they affect the teeth especially if held in the mouth for a long time.

The news article analyzed here was brief, precise and up to the point. The information is presented articulately, substantiated from varied sources and gives an accurate and explicit understanding of the original source of research in a summarized way. Besides, the language used is simple and comprehensive and but very attractive, thus motivating the reader even to have the urge to read the original research source.

Works Cited “The Effect of Different Forms of Fluid Provision on Exercise Performance.” International Journal of Sports Medicine, 14 (1993): 298 Cohen, Deborah. “The truth about sports drinks.” British Medical Journal 345 (2012): e4737 Milosevic, A., Kelly, M. J., and Mclean, A. N. “Sports supplement drinks and dental health in competitive swimmers and cyclists.” British Dental Journal 182 (1997): 303-308.

Tuller, David. Does Gatorade Actually Work? 2012, August. Web. Nov. 4, 2012, http://www.alternet.org/food/does-gatorade-actually-work Yeargin, Susan. “Three Dehydration Signs: Weight Loss, Dark Urine, Thirst.” momsTEAM .

2012. Web. Nov 5, 2012, http://www.momsteam.com/nutrition/weight-loss-dark-urinethirst-three-main-signs-athlete-is-dehydrated#ixzz2BcjGdQrE