Each week in my Research Update, I distill the latest sports science research into practical insights to help you improve your training, performance, and recovery.
In this week's update:
- Whether knee arthritis actually changes how you run
- Why many sports nutrition gadgets still have major limitations
-
The endurance nutrition debate science still can’t fully settle
Knee Arthritis Doesn’t Impact Running Form Very Much
This study compared the running biomechanics of 97 runners over age 40, including runners with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis, asymptomatic osteoarthritis, and healthy controls. Using 3D gait analysis on an instrumented treadmill, researchers measured joint angles, loading rates, ground reaction forces, and knee joint moments during running. Despite the osteoarthritis diagnosis, there were surprisingly few biomechanical differences between groups. Runners with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis showed slightly lower knee flexion moments and ran with slightly less knee bend during loading, but most other measures, including impact loading, cadence, and knee adduction forces, were similar to healthy runners. The findings suggest that experienced runners with knee arthritis can maintain largely normal running mechanics despite structural joint changes.
My thoughts: This study challenges the age-old assumption that if you have arthritis in your knees, you shouldn't be running. From my discussions with many physicians, I hear the same thing: what you see on a scan can be very different from what someone actually experiences. A person with severe arthritis may run marathons pain-free, while another can barely get out of bed. I'm willing to bet a lot of runners have arthritis, but manage it well because they have well-conditioned, functional joints.
What’s also exciting beyond the results of the study, is that one of this paper's authors is Blonyx athlete, triathlete, and biomechanist Michaela Khan, who we recently chatted with in this interview.
The Limitations of High-Tech Nutrition Monitoring Devices
This review evaluated a range of technologies used to guide nutrition decisions in professional cycling, including power meters, continuous glucose monitors (CGMs), sweat and lactate analyzers, ultrasound muscle glycogen scanners, core temperature sensors, and portable metabolic systems. Power meters, when combined with good algorithms, provided useful estimates of energy expenditure. CGMs showed promise but had real limitations, including a 10 to 15 minute lag behind actual blood glucose and reduced accuracy during hard efforts and after eating. Most of the other technologies remain either insufficiently validated or not yet practical enough to meaningfully guide day-to-day fueling decisions for athletes.
My thoughts: For most cyclists, a power meter, good training platform, and some common sense are more valuable than the latest gadgets. It's useful to know that even professional teams are working with tools that have real limitations. So, don't just assume that your shiny, new device is telling the full story.
Science Can’t Agree on Low Carb Diets for Endurance Athletes
Two papers, published together in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition's Great Debates in Nutrition series, present opposing cases on whether a low-carbohydrate, high-fat diet hurts endurance performance. Louise Burke argues yes: carbohydrates are a more oxygen-efficient fuel, and her research in elite race walkers showed ketogenic adaptation increased fat burning but negatively impacted race performance. Timothy Noakes argues no: after a proper adaptation period of 4–6 weeks, trained athletes perform similarly on both diets, and he questions whether glycogen depletion actually causes fatigue. Both authors agree that carbohydrates during prolonged exercise can improve performance and that a genuine adaptation period is needed. The core questions around fat's higher oxygen cost and what actually causes fatigue in endurance events remain unanswered.
My thoughts: It's easier than you think to spot a nutritional fad. They arrive with gusto, the research isn't there yet, but marketers jump on them because there's a compelling story. Think CBD, functional mushrooms, nootropics, apple cider vinegar. Low-carb diets for athletes are another one. Yes, you can train your body to burn fat more efficiently, but does that lead to better performance? When reviews like this are still saying we don't know, that's usually a signal the answer is probably no. The supplements that stick around, creatine, protein, omega-3s, and vitamin D, do so because the evidence keeps building. That's the difference between a fad and a foundation.
That’s all for this week.
If you learned something new and are curious to know more, check out more articles and my growing list of weekly Blonyx Research Updates where I help you further improve your athletic performance by keeping you up to date on the latest findings from the world of sports science.
— That's all for now, train hard!
Looking for more ways to keep up with Blonyx?
Now, you can join the Blonyx Strava Club to track your progress, share training tips, and connect with athletes who share your athletic ambition.
You can also follow us on Instagram and Facebook for additional sports science information, announcements, exciting giveaways, and more!