Women lifters who binge drank had higher glucose despite similar performance
In short
In a cross-sectional study of 48 young women, trained binge drinkers had fasting glucose of 103.17 mg/dL versus 88.92 mg/dL in trained low-alcohol drinkers (p=0.008), with no detected differences in bone density, muscle quality or physical performance. Binge drinking for at least one year was associated with poorer metabolic health; unchanged lifting numbers or a stable Muscle Index cannot establish that drinking is harmless.
Higher blood glucose did not come with worse physical test results in the women who lifted and binge drank. Researchers compared 48 young adult women, with 12 each in four groups: sedentary low-alcohol drinkers, sedentary binge drinkers, trained low-alcohol drinkers and trained binge drinkers. The useful question for a lifter is what a performance log might miss.
How far apart were the glucose readings?
- Fasting glucose: 103.17 ± 10.21 mg/dL in trained binge drinkers versus 88.92 ± 12.09 mg/dL in trained low-alcohol drinkers (p=0.008).
- Post-meal glucose: 137.58 ± 21.54 mg/dL in trained binge drinkers versus 103.83 ± 19.82 mg/dL in trained low-alcohol drinkers.
- The trained low-alcohol group had lower post-meal glucose than every other group, including sedentary low-alcohol drinkers (148.50 mg/dL) and sedentary binge drinkers (139.25 mg/dL); all p<0.05.
Did body composition or performance tell the same story?
Body fat was 29.28% in trained low-alcohol drinkers and 29.03% in trained binge drinkers. Bone mineral density, muscle quality and physical performance showed no detected differences between those groups. The trained low-alcohol group had 48.31 kg of fat-free mass, versus 38.08 kg and 40.37 kg in the two sedentary groups (both p<0.05). Training may soften the body-composition effects associated with binge drinking, the authors suggest. Performance testing included jumps, grip strength and push-ups, rather than squat, bench and deadlift 1RMs.
Can a stable Muscle Index reassure you about drinking?
Your Big 3 log and Muscle Index describe strength. Neither measures glucose, so holding your numbers is insufficient evidence that drinking carries no cost. Our article on alcohol and short-term strength loss addresses another part of the question. This study compared groups; it did not track how their lifts changed the morning after drinking.
With only 12 women per group, this small cross-sectional study links at least one year of binge drinking with poorer metabolic health. It cannot show that alcohol caused an individual's glucose to rise or document deterioration over time. The findings should not be generalized to men.
Frequently asked questions
Did glucose differ with binge drinking among women who trained?
Trained binge drinkers had fasting glucose of 103.17 mg/dL versus 88.92 mg/dL in trained low-alcohol drinkers (p=0.008). Post-meal values were 137.58 and 103.83 mg/dL respectively, and the trained low-alcohol group had lower values than all other groups.
Did binge drinkers also have worse muscle measures or performance?
No differences were detected between the trained groups in bone density, muscle quality or physical performance. Body fat was also similar at 29.28% for low-alcohol drinkers and 29.03% for binge drinkers, but that does not establish safety.
Does this study prove binge drinking raises glucose?
No: this cross-sectional comparison of 48 young women cannot establish causation. It links at least one year of binge drinking with poorer metabolic health, and its findings cannot be generalized to men.
Does a stable Muscle Index mean drinking is harmless?
The Muscle Index and Big 3 records measure strength rather than metabolic health. This study did not test Big 3 1RMs either, so a stable score cannot serve as evidence that drinking is harmless.
Source: PubMed