Good science vs. bad science in fitness claims


As of September 2017, new Sweat Science columns are being published at Check out my bestselling new book on the science of endurance, ENDURE: Mind, Body, and the Curiously Elastic Limits of Human Performance, published in February 2018 with a foreword by Malcolm Gladwell.

- Alex Hutchinson (@sweatscience)


The latest Jockology column in the Globe and Mail is now available online:

Pretty much every fitness product claims to be “backed by science.” But a recent spate of lawsuits against the makers of Power Balance bracelets highlights how empty these claims can be. Even for companies trying to do the right thing, navigating the complexities of scientific evidence can be a challenge, as the following examples illustrate…

The examples are Power Balance bracelets, Athletic Propulsion Labs’ “banned” basketball shoes, Reebok’s “oxygen-enhancing” ZigTech clothing, Gatorade’s claim that drinks with electrolytes help reduce the risk of hyponatremia, and — my favourite these days — beet juice’s endurance-boosting effects. There’s also a nice supporting graphic from Trish McAlaster.

3 Replies to “Good science vs. bad science in fitness claims”

  1. I feel more balanced trail running with my hand-held water bottle(s)?
    Maybe there is some wacky science behind that one.

Comments are closed.