Capsaicin Supplementation during High-intensity Continuous Exercise: A Double-blind Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract To investigate the effect of acute capsaicin (CAP) supplementation on time to exhaustion, physiological responses and energy systems contribution during continuous high-intensity exercise session in runners. Fifteen recreationally-trained runners completed two randomized, double-blind continuous high-intensity exercises at the speed eliciting 90% V̇O2peak (90% s V̇O2peak), 45 minutes after consuming capsaicin or an isocaloric placebo. Time to exhaustion, blood lactate concentration, oxygen consumption during and 20-min post-exercise, energy systems contribution, time to reach V̇O2peak, heart rate and the rate of perceived exertion (RPE) were evaluated. There was no significant difference between conditions for time to reach V̇O2peak (CAP:391.71±221.8 vs. PLA:298.20±174.5 sec, ES:0.58, p=0.872), peak lactate (CAP:7.98±2.11 vs. PLA:8.58±2.15 µmol, ES:−0.28, p=0.257), time to exhaustion (CAP:654.28±195.44 vs. PLA:709.20±208.44 sec, ES:−0.28, p=0.462, end-of-exercise heart rate (CAP:177.6±14.9 vs. PLA:177.5±17.9 bpm, ES:−0.10, p=0.979) and end-of-exercise RPE (CAP: 19±0.8 vs. PLA: 18±2.4, ES: 0.89, p=0.623). In conclusion, acute CAP supplementation did not increase time to exhaustion during high-intensity continuous exercise nor alter physiological responses in runners.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".