Coffee on the run

Recently I've talked with several long distance runners --­­ think half-marathon or marathon -- and have been surprised to hear how many down a mug of coffee before they race.

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


Recently I’ve talked with several long distance runners —­­ think half-marathon or marathon — and have been surprised to hear how many down a mug of coffee before they race.

After all, doesn’t coffee cause dehydration, something runners would like to avoid?

A PLOS ONE study published in early January suggests the answer is no, at least for those people who regularly drink the beverage.


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.


U.K. researchers found drinking around four cups of coffee per day was no more dehydrating than drinking the same amount of water for the 50 male coffee drinkers included in their study.

That’s good news for many of us who enjoy the drink, runners or not. But when it comes to running, some of the runners referenced coffee’s ability to enhance performance due to its caffeine content. I decided to do a little investigating to see if my morning mug is actually helping my daily workout.

Consuming caffeine appears to improve performance for running and other endurance sports, such as cycling, according to one 2008 review. Most of the studies used to draw this conclusion looked at doses of caffeine around 2 to 3 milligrams per kilogram body weight. That’s about the same amount of caffeine in 4 8-ounce cups of coffee consumed by a 150-pound person.*

Caffeine may also be beneficial for intense bouts of running, cycling, or swimming, up to 20 minutes in length, while the review found less evidence for consuming caffeine to beef up one’s abilities in team sports.

However, just because caffeine has been shown to benefit performance doesn’t mean caffeine in the form of coffee will be equally effective.

One of the authors on the PLOS ONE coffee-and-dehydration study, Asker Jeukendrup, investigated this question in another PLOS ONE study published in 2013.

Jeukendrup and his U.K. colleagues found that caffeine in the form of coffee produced similar improvements in endurance exercise as pure caffeine, at least for higher doses (equivalent to 5 milligrams per kilogram body weight or around eight 8-ounce cups of coffee for a 150-pound person). However, previous studies found coffee to be less effective.

Wherever the research falls, anecdotally, the runners I know suggest pre-race coffee is a go.

For more on the topic, check out the American College of Sports Medicine’s Current Comment Fact Sheet on the issue.

*Coffee varies in its caffeine content, but the USDA cites an 8-ounce cup as having 95 milligrams of caffeine. Of course, the cup of coffee you buy may be more than 8 ounces; a “tall” at Starbucks is 12 ounces.

Julianne Wyrick is a freelance science and health writer currently completing the health and medical journalism graduate program at the University of Georgia. Six years ago she took a chemistry class from a former food scientist, and she's been fascinated by the science of food ever since. She has a bachelor's degree in biochemistry from Asbury University and has interned as a science writer at Fermilab and Alltech, an animal health and nutrition company. While completing her master's, she currently writes about science for UGA's Office of Research Communications. She's also recently written about science and health for Symmetry magazine and Georgia Health News. Find her on the web at juliannewyrick.com or on Twitter @juliannewyrick.

More by Julianne Wyrick

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe