Eur J Clin Nutr. 2018 Jun 19. doi: 10.1038/s41430-018-0187-x. [Epub ahead of print]

Chocolate milk for recovery from exercise: a systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials.

Amiri M1,2, Ghiasvand R3,4, Kaviani M5, Forbes SC6, Salehi-Abargouei A7,8.

Author information

1

Nutrition and Food Security Research Center, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran.

2

Department of Nutrition, School of Public Health, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran.

3

Food Security research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.

4

Department of Community Nutrition, School of Nutrition and Food Science, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.

5

Faculty of Pure & Applied Science, School of Nutrition and Dietetics, Acadia University, Wolfville, NS, Canada.

6

Department of Physical Education, Faculty of Education, Brandon University, Brandon, MB, Canada.

7

Nutrition and Food Security Research Center, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran. abargouei@ssu.ac.ir.

8

Department of Nutrition, School of Public Health, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran. abargouei@ssu.ac.ir.

Abstract

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES:

Chocolate milk (CM) contains carbohydrates, proteins, and fat, as well as water and electrolytes, which may be ideal for post-exercise recovery. We systematically reviewed the evidence regarding the efficacy of CM compared to either water or other "sport drinks" on post-exercise recovery markers.

SUBJECTS/METHODS:

PubMed, Scopus, and Google scholar were explored up to April 2017 for controlled trials investigating the effect of CM on markers of recovery in trained athletes.

RESULTS:

Twelve studies were included in the systematic review (2, 9, and 1 with high, fair and low quality, respectively) and 11 had extractable data on at least one performance/recovery marker [7 on ratings of perceived exertion (RPE), 6 on time to exhaustion (TTE) and heart rate (HR), 4 on serum lactate, and serum creatine kinase (CK)]. The meta-analyses revealed that CM consumption had no effect on TTE, RPE, HR, serum lactate, and CK (P > 0.05) compared to placebo or other sport drinks. Subgroup analysis revealed that TTE significantly increases after consumption of CM compared to placebo [mean difference (MD) = 0.78 min, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.27, 1.29, P = 0.003] and carbohydrate, protein, and fat-containing beverages (MD = 6.13 min, 95% CI: 0.11, 12.15, P = 0.046). Furthermore, a significant attenuation on serum lactate was observed when CM was compared with placebo (MD = -1.2 mmol/L, 95% CI: -2.06,-0.34, P = 0.006).

CONCLUSION:

CM provides either similar or superior results when compared to placebo or other recovery drinks. Overall, the evidence is limited and high-quality clinical trials with more well-controlled methodology and larger sample sizes are warranted.