Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 71Doping in SportsSmoking Behavior and CessationSports Performance and Training

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 63 of the 63 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 125 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Nicotine: Sporting Friend or Foe? A Review of Athlete Use, Performance Consequences and Other Considerations

Open access
Mündel, Toby·2017·Sports Medicine

Abstract

Nicotine use amongst athletes is high and increasing, especially in team sports. This narrative review examines the rationale behind its use and evidence of its effect on physical performance, and considers important factors that should determine future research efforts. To date, ten studies have assessed muscular strength and power, sub- or maximal endurance and high-intensity exercise when nicotine (medication) or smokeless tobacco was used as an intervention. Two studies observed an ergogenic effect, one an ergolytic with the remaining seven reporting no change. These studies have notable limitations and confounding factors that include participant tolerance to nicotine, interindividual responses, the nicotine delivery system used and failure to adhere to rigorous experimental/scientific design. Further research is encouraged to address these limitations and determine the extent to which anti-doping and governing bodies should consider promoting, coordinating and monitoring any effort against nicotine and nicotine-containing substances in sports.

Overview

CoChat Summary

TL;DR

This narrative review examines nicotine use among athletes and the evidence for its effects on physical performance, noting that WADA only monitors nicotine and that use is high in several team, strength, and winter sports. Across ten performance studies yielding 16 measures, most showed no effect, with a small number ergogenic or ergolytic, and the evidence base is limited by methodological issues.

Key findings

  • Nicotine is not prohibited by WADA; it was placed on WADA’s Monitoring Program in 2012. Active in-competition consumption of nicotine/nicotine-containing substances is reported in approximately 25–50% of athletes in professional team/strength sports (e.g., American football, ice hockey, wrestling, bobsleigh, gymnastics, rugby, skiing).
  • Urine analyses: at the 2009 men’s World Ice-Hockey Championships (n = 72), traces of nicotine or its metabolites were present in every sample, with active use in at least 36% (metabolites in 53%). A 1-year Swiss laboratory monitoring study of 2185 samples across 43 sports found traces in 23% and active consumption in 15%; cumulative exposure >25% occurred in American football (56%), ice hockey (32%), wrestling (32%), bobsleigh (31%), gymnastics (29%), rugby (28%), and skiing (26%).
  • Ten studies assessed performance with nicotine or smokeless tobacco, yielding 16 performance measures: 12 showed no significant effect, 2 an ergogenic effect, and 2 an ergolytic effect. At the study level, the abstract reports two ergogenic, one ergolytic, and seven no-change studies.
  • Nicotine’s proposed modes of action include psychostimulatory effects via central reward pathways and sympathomimetic effects via catecholamine release; it is a nicotinic acetylcholine receptor agonist.

Methods

  • Narrative review of quality-assured, peer-reviewed publications available through the end of June 2017, primarily using PubMed and Google Scholar, with manual checking of second- and third-order reference lists. Studies were excluded when interventions exclusively involved tobacco smoking or smokers.
  • Ten included studies had performance outcomes using larger muscle mass/whole-body exercise; five used smokeless tobacco and five used nicotine (transdermal, sublingual tablet, chewing gum, vaporiser, lozenge). Average sample size was 17 (SD = 9, median = 16, range = 9–40); seven studies used males only, none exclusively females; participants were young (mean age ≤25 years), healthy, recreationally/competitively active but not (sub-)elite; seven studies included nicotine-naïve participants.
  • Main analysis was a narrative synthesis subdivided into muscular strength and power, submaximal/maximal endurance, and high-intensity exercise/intermittent sprints.

Limitations

  • Stated: the current evidence base is limited in both quantity and quality; notable limitations and confounders include participant tolerance to nicotine, interindividual responses, the nicotine delivery system used, and failure to adhere to rigorous experimental/scientific design.
  • Stated: future research should address double-blind placebo-controlled designs with manipulation checks, criterion validity of performance tests, expert performers, female athletes, tolerant users (withdrawal/re-introduction), naïve users (desensitization), and environmental/diet interactions.
  • Evident from the text: samples were small (average 17, range 9–40), mostly male, young, healthy, and not (sub-)elite; NRT studies used fixed doses; only five performance studies reported side effects; some studies did not explicitly report performance time/work; and cross-sectional prevalence data are self-reported and cannot distinguish nicotine sources.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s40279-017-0764-5

Cites

63 of 63 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 Valid · 3 Not valid · 75 Not checked · 26 Own results and interpretations

46 more claims

Create a free account to see all 104 claims and to verify the 122 references still open.

See all claims — free account
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 47
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 16
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1

Create a free account to see these claims.

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

1 of 1

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 71

Metadata

Authors
Mündel, T.
Affiliations
Massey University (NZ)
Corresponding author
Mündel, Toby
Venue
Sports Medicine
Published
2017-08-08
Volume
47
Issue
12
Pages
2497-2506
ISSN
  • 0112-1642 (ISSN-L)
  • 1179-2035
OpenAlex
W2743899973
Cited by
71
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 5
FWCI
1.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Sports Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Doping in Sports
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Sports Performance and Training
Keywords
nicotine, athletes, physical performance, ergogenic aids, smokeless tobacco, anti-doping, doping control, endurance, high-intensity exercise, nicotine tolerance, team sports
MeSH terms
Doping in Sports, Humans, Musculoskeletal System, Nicotine, Sports, Muscle Strength, Athletic Performance, Athletes, Performance-Enhancing Substances

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-13, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-13 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.