Single-ingredient oral ordinary thiamine,
does it really help with Endurance time-trial completion time in trained adults?
research showsNo directly eligible controlled result was verified within the recorded search and access scope. The current value is ? / score null. This is not a finding of no effect or no human research.
ads claimA shared B1 label does not justify treating ordinary thiamine, derivatives, combinations and injections as the same efficacy claim.
Four separate assessment dimensions
| Effect direction and size | No directly eligible controlled result was verified within the recorded search and access scope. The current value is ? / score null. This is not a finding of no effect or no human research. |
|---|---|
| Evidence certainty | Not graded at stage zero |
| Applicability | The question remains one sport, one standardized completion endpoint and one principal time. The empirical sport, salt, dose, duration, protocol and time remain unverified because no eligible trial was verified. |
| Safety | Caution. Product-specific oral hydrochloride GI/hypersensitivity information is separate[S09]. Predominantly parenteral reactions are not assigned an oral incidence. An absent UL is not evidence of unlimited safety[S08]. |
No directly eligible controlled time-trial result was verified. The supplied current-value rule requires ?/null and six downstream axes unscored. This is not an assertion of no human research, so no_human_study=false. Native null-schema errors and the raw pre-validation B suggestion are retained; B is not adopted.
Useful facts when choosing a product
- Base, hydrochloride and mononitrate remain distinct; no salt-to-base dose conversion was invented.
- Study exposures are not personal dosing advice or anti-doping clearance.
Chamgap Semantic Classification Code
Permanent code issued
S.thiamine.oral-single-ingredient-form-dose-duration-unverified.trained-adults-endurance-time-trial.improve.placebo-no-added-thiamine-matched-controlSubstances > Ordinary thiamine (vitamin B1) > Oral single ingredient with form/dose/duration unverified > Endurance time-trial completion time in trained adults > Improvement > Placebo, no added thiamine or matched control
The current value is ? with a null score. Derivative, combination and time-to-exhaustion results are not treated as a direct ordinary-thiamine time-trial effect. The code identifies the intervention and claim; it never contains the evidence grade, score, or safety result.
Exact Claim Classification
These independent facets prevent evidence from different forms, routes, populations, effects, and comparators from being mixed.
| Intervention class | S · Supplement or nutraceutical |
|---|---|
| Canonical ingredient or intervention | Ordinary thiamine; base, hydrochloride, mononitrate separately; no derivatives |
| Source or part used | Single active manufactured ingredient; actual source unverified |
| Formulation or processing | Single-ingredient ordinary oral thiamine; exact salt/product unverified |
| Route | oral |
| Dose | Eligible-study dose unverified |
| Duration | Eligible-study duration unverified |
| Population | Trained adults; actual sport and training qualification to be verified |
| Effect or condition | Improve standardized endurance time-trial performance |
| Primary endpoint | One fixed-distance or fixed-work endurance completion time; lower is better; exact sport/protocol/principal time unverified |
| Comparator | Placebo/no added thiamine/otherwise matched control |
| Duplicate-detection key | S|thiamine|oral-single-ingredient-form-dose-duration-unverified|trained-adults-definition-unverified|endurance-time-trial-completion-time|placebo-no-added-thiamine-matched-control |
What the research actually shows
The question remains one sport, one standardized completion endpoint and one principal time. The empirical sport, salt, dose, duration, protocol and time remain unverified because no eligible trial was verified.
Why this is classified as ?
No directly eligible controlled time-trial result was verified. The supplied current-value rule requires ?/null and six downstream axes unscored. This is not an assertion of no human research, so no_human_study=false. Native null-schema errors and the raw pre-validation B suggestion are retained; B is not adopted.
Counterpoint. A non-significant P value is not equivalence or proof of no effect. An unknown parenthetical dispersion and absent paired variance cannot supply a fabricated confidence interval.
Rejudgment record. No verified directly eligible result — Supplied current-value rule; native calculator exception retained
Review performed and remaining limitations
The target effect, CI, P value and analyzed denominator are all unverified/null. Indirect numbers are not the primary effect.
Preliminary RoB 2-informed review — not a complete formal assessment
| Randomization | Unscored: no directly eligible trial selected |
|---|---|
| Deviations from assigned interventions | Unscored: no directly eligible trial selected |
| Missing outcome data | Unscored: no directly eligible trial selected |
| Outcome measurement | Unscored: no directly eligible trial selected |
| Selection of the reported result | Unscored: no directly eligible trial selected |
Reasons for the certainty judgment — not formal GRADE
| Risk of bias | Unscored; no borrowing from indirect evidence |
|---|---|
| Inconsistency | Unscored; no borrowing from indirect evidence |
| Indirectness | Unscored; no borrowing from indirect evidence |
| Imprecision | Unscored; no borrowing from indirect evidence |
| Publication bias | Unscored; no borrowing from indirect evidence |
Search scope and limitations. search/web_queries.json; search/native_search_log.json; search/access_log.json
Evidence Table
| Study | Design | Sample | Funding | Endpoint | Result | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Webster 1998 derivative-combination trial in highly trained cyclists | Randomized double-blind counterbalanced crossover study in six highly trained cyclists | 6 participants | Unverified in the accessed abstract; not directly eligible evidence | 2,000-m completion time after a 50-km preload | Placebo 178.2 (8.4) s and combination 170.7 (10.2) s, P=0.58. Parenthetical dispersion and paired variance were unverified; the derivative combination was not scored as ordinary thiamine alone. | Excluded from target grading because it used a derivative combination |
| Webster et al. 1997 TTFD exercise-performance crossover trial | Randomized double-blind crossover study in 14 participants | 14 participants | Unverified in the accessed abstract; not directly eligible evidence | Cycling time-trial completion time | Placebo 204.5 (5.5) s and TTFD 200.9 (4.3) s, P=0.61. TTFD is a derivative and the training criterion was unverified, so this was not substituted for ordinary thiamine alone. | Excluded because of derivative and population-boundary mismatch |
| Lee et al. 2023 vitamin-B-complex time-to-exhaustion crossover trial | Randomized double-blind crossover study in 32 healthy non-athletes | 32 crossover participants; not double-counted as 64 | Company funding, product provision and author conflicts are preserved in the package audit | Time to exhaustion, not a time trial | The favorable multinutrient time-to-exhaustion result was not substituted because population, intervention and endpoint differed. | Excluded because it was multinutrient, non-athlete and used another endpoint |
Receipt — 11 References
Evidence access cutoff: 2026-09-16. Each citation states its actual access level (full-text transcription, abstract, index, or other) and remaining limitations. Bibliographic checking does not certify the study results or treatment efficacy.
Technical integration by: Codex · Evidence date: 2026-09-16 · Corrections: none
Cite this verdict
[Chamgap] Does oral ordinary thiamine alone shorten endurance time-trial completion time in trained adults? — Evidence Grade ?. 11 cited sources checked. Source: https://chamgap.com/en/verdicts/sports/oral-thiamine-trained-adults-endurance-time-trial/ · CC BY 4.0CC BY 4.0 — free to use with attribution; do not distort grades, numbers, or verdict meaning.
What this document does and does not do
Chamgap is an information source. It reports what research has and has not confirmed; it does not tell readers what to take or buy. That decision belongs to readers and, when needed, medical or legal professionals. This verdict reflects literature available up to the search date and may change as new research appears. Nothing here is medical advice.