pre-run eating

January 14, 2006 1:42 AM

Should I eat breakfast before or after my morning run?

This year I'm going to try and run 20 - 30 minutes in the morning before work. Should I do this on an empty stomach or can I eat my bowl of muesli first? I don't have a lot of time between getting out of bed and having to head to work so "eat and wait an hour" wouldn't be an option for me.

posted by brautigan to health & fitness (15 comments total)

I'd eat after. I've read people say that you burn more on an empty stomach, don't know about tha but having a full belly will make it more likely you'll get cramps or side stitches or other issues.

Plus, as long as the run is short, you'll be able to replenish the energy you burned.
posted by Brittanie at 2:16 AM on January 14, 2006

Slosh slosh slosh, after! Just monch on a powerbar first thing in the morning, and by the time you're out the door, it will be ready to pounce on your low blood sugar level. Then eat a normal breakfast afterwords.
posted by |n$eCur3 at 2:20 AM on January 14, 2006

i eat after. if i eat before i feel uncomfortable and/or get a stitch. but really, it's whatever works for you.

(i do suggest you go the bathroom before you run, especially if you're a "regular" kind of person - there's nothing worse than needing to go once you're out there)
posted by andrew cooke at 4:21 AM on January 14, 2006

Used to do a lot of long distance running - always eat after, and be conservative with your water if you're doing short distances (1-2 miles, longer distances you'll want the fluids). Too much food/drink getting bounced around will make you likely to throw it up. If you're exerting yourself to the point where you feel like throwing up at the end of your run regardless, then eating will only make it far worse.

What I did was take my morning shower immediately after running, and by the time I was done with it my stomach had settled and I was starving from the energy expenditure. Breakfast was always delicious as a result. Give it a shot.
posted by Ryvar at 4:31 AM on January 14, 2006

I'd probably run after for that distance. You can, however, run before, I've run immediately after eating a hamburger and drinking several cokes, so it's doable. But you have more than enough glycogen on board to run that distance without eating first. And if you're going to run again the next day, the most important time to eat for glycogen replacement is right after the run.
posted by OmieWise at 5:28 AM on January 14, 2006

The advice I've heard about this is that exercise before breakfast will lead to efficient fat burning. But the exercise must be moderate, that is, nothing exhausting — you should be able to talk normally.

If you exercise too hard your body won't be able to burn fat fast enough. If there aren't any carbohydrates available to burn in this situation (which is the case after a night's sleep) your body will resort to using available protein for energy. Basically, it'll start burning muscle which obviously isn't very good.

If you're already quite fit and can run while mostly burning fat then you should be fine. Otherwise, I would say that a brisk walk or bicycle ride will be best, do the run in the evening before dinner instead.
posted by rycee at 6:17 AM on January 14, 2006

If you are able to eat before then you are not running very hard. Some toast or a power bar or whatever prior to the run will ease your stomach and provide some energy for the run.
posted by caddis at 6:21 AM on January 14, 2006

If there aren't any carbohydrates available to burn in this situation (which is the case after a night's sleep) your body will resort to using available protein for energy

your body stores energy in the appropriate muscles as glycogen. part of improving as a runner is increasing these stores. see for example here, point 5, which states:

Although there are other sources of fuel and even other sources of glycogen, muscle glycogen is your body's primary source of fuel during exercise. With low muscle glycogen stores your body will quickly need to turn to fat, which is a less efficient fuel, and will therefore slow down. This is especially true for marathoners who wish to avoid hitting the wall. Long runs teach your muscles to store more glycogen.

you can burn protein if you push too hard, but that will not happen automatically just because you run first thing in the morning (and, incidentally, you can tell when this happens because you smell bad in the shower afterwards from the by-products).
posted by andrew cooke at 6:40 AM on January 14, 2006

Odd. In cycling, the answer before long rides is not only eat, but EAT! Racing cyclists running long legs start the day with bizzare amounts of carbohydrates, and basically keep eating.

There is a marked difference in motion (ideally, the trunk of a cyclist moves as little as possible.)

If you are just starting, you will have limited glycogen stores, which will limit range without food. Some simple carbohydrates can help. Before gatorade and the like, the classic emergency cyclist fuel was flat coke or ginger ale, which went down easy and added loads of carbs, along with water.

So, a little simple something in that line can help. You'll know when you run out of fuel, you bonk -- your body has to shift to much less efficient fuel sources, and you'll feel it.

You'd think that OJ would be ideal, but the acidic nature of OJ makes it not very helpful on an empty stomach with limited blood flow.

Finally, in the not food line -- you haven't had any water in several hours. Fix that before you run. Dehydration will make you feel like hell far quicker than lack of glycogen.
posted by eriko at 9:05 AM on January 14, 2006

Runners carb load too. The difference is, you carb load, and then you wait half a day for your race. Carb loading before breakfast would not be good, and it would probably make you throw up.

I've run up to 8 miles before breakfast without any problem (I have dinner on the late side, and snack until I go to bed - that helps). More than that, though, and you start to get hungry/achy/tired. I vote run before.
posted by devilsbrigade at 9:58 AM on January 14, 2006

err. Carb loading during breakfast for a run right afterwards. I'm still asleep (no run today).
posted by devilsbrigade at 9:59 AM on January 14, 2006

I'm not sure if this translates, but before I swim in the morning, I have a banana. It's soft enough that it doesn't jostle and yet it gives you a nice little pick-me-up. Since swimming is the classic "wait a half hour" sport, I'd think a banana would be fine for running, too. Extra benefit: potassium to prevent cramps.
posted by dame at 10:35 AM on January 14, 2006

I would try it both ways and see which is easier. I mean, I just cannot run that long on a full stomach (it makes me feel sick), and I know people who cannot run on an empty stomach (it makes them feel weak). Your body might give you the best advice on this one.
posted by unknowncommand at 1:18 PM on January 14, 2006

Definitely eat after. It helps you avoid getting stitches too (that pain from your organs pulling inside as they bounce around).
posted by furtive at 4:05 PM on January 14, 2006

I'm happier eating after and running on an empty stomach doesn't affect my energy so this seems the best route for me. Thanks all!
posted by brautigan at 5:28 PM on January 14, 2006