Beta Fuel Sachets 80g

The SIS Beta Fuel Sachets are used by Elite athletes and is the most scientifically superior energy drink on the market. This product has been optimised with a brand new 1:0.8 ratio of 80g carbohydrate, which will improve your body's carbohydrate usage efficiency and will enhance your power output. It is also designed to go easy on the stomach. The handy sachet is light and compact so that you can carry it with you on the ride. It is also easy to access the fuel quickly whenever you need it.

Why Should You Use Beta Fuel Dual Source Energy Drink

As an endurance athlete, meaning your events typically last more than two hours, you need to take in between 80-120g of carbohydrate per hour. The Science in Sport Beta Fuel Dual Source Energy Drink delivers an optimised 80g of carbohydrate in a single, convenient isotonic fuelling solution with minimal risk of GI discomfort that enables you to maintain optimal performance.

New 1:0.8 Ratio Replaces 2:1 Ratio

– A 1:0.8 ratio of maltodextrin to fructose increases the percentage of ingested carbohydrate that is oxidized (known as efficiency) from 62% to 74% when compared with a ratio of 2:1
– A 1:0.8 ratio of maltodextrin to fructose reduces self-reported symptoms of stomach fullness when compared with a ratio of 2:1

The Science Behind the Beta Fuel Has Evolved

Through our Performance Solutions team, we have worked closely with elite athletes in the research and development of the new Beta Fuel range to bring you a scientifically superior fuel in a range of formats that allow you to use +17% more carbohydrate (O’Brien et al, 2013).

– A ratio of 1:0.8 enhances exogenous CHO oxidation compared with 2:1 ratio by 17% (O’Brien et al) and 10% (O’Brien et al)
– A ratio of 1:0.8 enhances mean power output during 10 maximal sprint efforts by 3% compared with 2:1 ratio (O’Brien et al)
– A ratio of 1:0.8 increases % of ingested CHO that was oxidised (efficiency) from 62% (2:1) to 74% (1:0.8) (O’Brien et al)
– A ratio of 1:0.8 reduces symptoms of stomach fullness and nausea when compared with a ratio of 2:1 (O’Brien et al)