Skip to main content
Supplement Research and Comparison WebsiteBest Price Guarantee
Supplement Research and Comparison Website

Study Design

Type
Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT)
Population
generally healthy adult, nonelite runners who typically ran ≥24 km/week, ran or cross-trained 3-5 days per week, and had a maximal oxygen intake (V̇O2 max) in the 60-85th percentile
Methods
randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel trial; baseline and following 6 weeks of supplementation with a probiotic (Lactobacillus helveticus Lafti L10, 5×10^9 CFU/capsule/day) or placebo; submaximal treadmill running tests at 85% of V̇O2 max; participants self-reported GI and cold/flu symptoms and physical activity via daily and weekly questionnaires
This randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel trial investigated whether generally healthy adult, nonelite runners would have a greater time-to-exhaustion during submaximal treadmill running with probiotic versus placebo supplementation. It was hypothesized that the probiotic would impact training progression by reducing gastrointestinal (GI) and cold/flu symptoms. Participants who typically ran ≥24 km/week, ran or cross-trained 3-5 days per week, and had a maximal oxygen intake (V̇O2 max) in the 60-85th percentile were enrolled. V̇O2 max was used to establish individualized workload settings (85% of V̇O2 max) for the submaximal endurance tests at baseline and following 6 weeks of supplementation with a probiotic (Lactobacillus helveticus Lafti L10, 5×109 CFU/capsule/day) or placebo. Participants self-reported GI and cold/flu symptoms and physical activity via daily and weekly questionnaires. Outcomes were tested using a linear model to determine if mean response values adjusted for baseline differed between groups. Twenty-eight participants (n = 14/group), aged 25 ± 5 years (mean ± SD) with a body mass index of 23 ± 3 kg/m2, completed the study. At the final visit the probiotic group had a lower time-to-exhaustion versus the placebo group (P = 0.01) due to an increase in time-to-exhaustion with the placebo (1344 ± 188 to 1565 ± 219 s, P = 0.01) with no change with the probiotic (1655 ± 230 to 1547 ± 215 s, P = 0.23). During the intervention, the probiotic group completed fewer aerobic training sessions per week (P = 0.02) and trained at a lower intensity (P = 0.007) versus the placebo group. Few GI and cold/flu symptoms were reported with no differences between groups. Time-to-exhaustion increased in the placebo group, possibly due to differences in training habits.

Research Insights

SupplementDoseHealth OutcomeEffect TypeEffect SizeSource
Lactobacillus helveticus L10Increased Exercise EnduranceHarmful
Small
View source

At the final visit the probiotic group had a lower time-to-exhaustion versus the placebo group (P = 0.01) due to an increase in time-to-exhaustion with the placebo ... with no change with the probiotic

Lactobacillus helveticus L10Increased Physical ActivityHarmful
Small
View source

During the intervention, the probiotic group completed fewer aerobic training sessions per week (P = 0.02) and trained at a lower intensity (P = 0.007) versus the placebo group.

Lactobacillus helveticus L10Reduced Cold SymptomsNeutral
Small
View source

Few GI and cold/flu symptoms were reported with no differences between groups.

Lactobacillus helveticus L10Reduced Gastrointestinal SymptomsNeutral
Small
View source

Few GI and cold/flu symptoms were reported with no differences between groups.

Back to top