The effect of Ad Libitum Consumption of a milk-based liquid meal Supplement vs. A traditional sports drink on fluid balance after exercise

The aim of this study was to compare the effect of ad libitum intake of a milk-based liquid meal supplement against a carbohydrate-electrolyte sports drink following exercise induced fluid loss. Seven male participants (age 22.3 ± 3.4 years, height 179.3 ± 7.9 cm, body mass 74.3 ± 7.3 kg; mean ± SD) completed 4 separate trials and lost 1.89 ± 0.44% body mass through moderate intensity exercise in the laboratory. After exercise, participants consumed ad libitum over 2 h a milk-based liquid meal supplement (Sustagen Sport) on two of the trials (S1, S2) or a carbohydrate-electrolyte sports drink (Powerade) on two of the trials (P1, P2), with an additional 1 hr observational period. Measures of body mass, urine output, gastrointestinal tolerance and palatability were collected throughout the recovery period. Participants consumed significantly more Powerade than Sustagen Sport over the 2 h rehydration period (P1 = 2225 ± 888 ml, P2 = 2602 ± 1119 mL, S1 = 1375 ± 711 mL, S2 = 1447 ± 857 ml). Total urine output on both Sustagen trails was significantly lower than the second Powerade trial (P2 = 1447 ± 656 ml, S1 = 153 ± 62 ml, S2 = 182 ± 118 mL; p < .05) and trended toward being lower compared with the first Powerade trial (P1 = 1057 ± 699 ml vs. S1, p = .067 and vs. S2, p = .061). No significant differences in net fluid balance were observed between any of the drinks at the conclusion of each trial (P1 = −0.50 ±0. 46 kg, P2 = −0.40 ± 0.35 kg, S1 = −0.61 ± 0.74 kg, S2 = −0.45 ± 0.58 kg). Gastrointestinal tolerance and beverage palatability measures indicated Powerade to be preferred as a rehydration beverage. Ad libitum milk-based liquid meal supplement results in similar net fluid balance as a carbohydrate-electrolyte sports drink after exercise induced fluid loss.