AUTHOR=Mündel Toby , Houltham Stuart D. , Barnes Matthew J. , Stannard Stephen R. 

TITLE=Nicotine Supplementation Does Not Influence Performance of a 1h Cycling Time-Trial in Trained Males

JOURNAL=Frontiers in Physiology

VOLUME=Volume 10 - 2019

YEAR=2019

URL=https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/physiology/articles/10.3389/fphys.2019.00292

DOI=10.3389/fphys.2019.00292

ISSN=1664-042X

ABSTRACT=The use of nicotine amongst professional and elite athletes is high, with anecdotal evidence indicating increased prevalence amongst cycling sports. However, previous investigations have not used high-validity or -reliability protocols nor trained cyclists. Therefore, the present study sought to determine whether nicotine administration proved ergogenic during a self-paced ~1h cycling time-trial (TT). Ten well-trained male cyclists (34 ± 9 y; 71 ± 8 kg;  O2max: 71 ± 6 ml·kg-1·min-1) completed three work-dependent TT following ~30 min administration of 2 mg nicotine gum (GUM), ~10 h administration of 7 mg·24 h-1 nicotine patch (PAT) or color- and flavor-matched placebos (PLA) in a randomized, crossover and double blind design. Measures of nicotine’s primary metabolite (cotinine), core body temperature, heart rate, blood biochemistry (pH, HCO3-, La-) and Borg’s rating of perceived exertion (RPE) accompanied performance measures of time and power output. Plasma concentrations of cotinine were highest for PAT, followed by GUM, then PLA, respectively (p < 0.01). GUM and PAT resulted in no significant improvement in performance time compared to PLA (62.9 ± 4.1, 62.6 ± 4.5 and 63.3 ± 4.1 min, respectively; p = 0.73), with mean power outputs of 264 ± 31, 265 ± 32 and 263 ± 33 W, respectively (p = 0.74). Core body temperature was similar between trials (p = 0.33) whilst HR averaged 170 ± 10, 170 ± 11 and 171 ± 11 beats·min-1 (p = 0.60) for GUM, PAT and PLA, respectively. There were no differences between trials for any blood biochemistry (all p > 0.46) or RPE with mean values of 16.7 ± 0.9, 16.8 ± 0.7 and 16.8 ± 0.8 (p = 0.89) for GUM, PAT and PLA, respectively. In conclusion: i) nicotine administration, whether via gum or transdermal patch, did not exert an ergogenic or ergolytic effect on self-paced cycling performance of ~1hr; ii) systemic delivery of nicotine was greatest when using a transdermal patch; and iii) nicotine administration did not alter any of the psycho-physiological measures observed.