Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Shows no significant change in performance between plant-based and omnivore diets, suggesting viability for athletes.
Some research suggests that transitioning from an omnivorous to a plant-based diet does not significantly change athletic performance for endurance or resistance athletes, implying comparability to animal-based diets for athletic goals. However, there is a relative paucity of these studies and widespread social media misinformation suggesting insufficient calorie, protein, and micronutrient intake of plant-based diets to meet the demands of athletic performance. This multi-site study, conducted in collaboration with the Menus of Change University Research Collaborative (MCURC), investigates the impact of plant-based diets in several university dining halls on athletic performance among recreational athletes. In this crossover study, recreational runners and resistance trainers were recruited from four universities: Stanford, Rutgers, Vanderbilt, and the University of Reading ( n = 36; runners = 16, resistance trainers = 20). Participants were assigned to complete two 4-week diet interventions, Omnivore and Plant-based, in random order. Primary outcomes for runners (12-minute timed run) and resistance trainers (3-rep maximum test for chest press, lat pulldown, and leg press) were collected at baseline and after each diet. Paired t-tests and linear regression models were used to compare performance between diets. Mean differences between Omnivore and Plant-based diets in 12-minute timed run (− 36.2 m; 95% CI: -130.3 to 57.9 m; p = 0.08) and composite machine strength (− 4.9%; 95% CI: − 8.5 to 0.6%; p = 0.4) were not significant. Recreational runners and resistance trainers may be able to adopt a plant-based diet without significant changes in athletic performance. These findings can support universities in offering plant-based food options for recreational athletes in dining halls. This study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov under registration number NCT06014307 on 08/23/2023.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Raygoza et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: