Regular Mini Doses of Caffeine More Energizing Than Morning Mug

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

A lot of people start their day with a big cup of coffee, hoping that the caffeine will invigorate them. But findings published today in the May issue of the journal SLEEP indicate that there might be a better way to stay awake for long periods. According to the report, low doses of caffeine administered at regular intervals may provide improved pick-me-up benefits.

James Wyatt of the Rush University Medical Center and his colleagues studied 16 men for 29 days while they stayed in private windowless suites free of time cues from the outside world. The researchers scheduled 42.85-hour days for the subjects, simulating the amount of time many doctors, truckers and emergency services personnel must stay awake. By disrupting the men's circadian rhythms, which promote sleepiness in a cyclical fashion, the scientists instead focused on the homeostatic push for sleep, which becomes stronger the longer someone is awake. Previous analyses of caffeine's ability to energize have shown that when people consume a large amount of caffeine in one sitting, the levels of the compound in their bloodstream will peak and then fall as the day goes on. "Unfortunately, the physiological process they need to counteract is not a major player until the latter half of the day," Wyatt explains.

In the new study, the scientists instead tested the effects of administering an hourly, low dose of caffeine equivalent to about two ounces of coffee to one group, while the second group received a placebo. The caffeinated men performed better on cognitive tests than the control individuals did, and dozed off less often. And though they received the same cumulative dose as subjects in previous, single-dose studies, taking many small doses minimized some of the negative side effects that caffeine can have, such as tremors.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The findings strengthen the hypothesis that caffeine blocks a receptor for adenosine, a messenger involved in the homeostatic sleep cycle, but they also indicate that caffeine can¿t replace the restorative effects of shuteye: although the caffeine-takers stayed awake more than the control group, they reported feeling sleepier. "While there is no perfect substitute for sleep, our results point the way toward a much better method for using caffeine in order to maintain optimal vigilance and attention," Wyatt says, "particularly when someone has to remain awake longer than the traditional 16-hour wake episode."

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe