PINES is a global organisation of qualified nutrition and exercise professionals dedicated to elevating the standard of sports nutrition with members coming from more than 40 countries. Its mission is to build and sustain a worldwide community that shares evidence-based knowledge, best practices and professional experience. 

At ECSS, PINES will host the ‘The Sports Nutrition Battles’ as a pre-Congress session. This session is designed around a structured debate format addressing current hot-button topics in sports nutrition: collagen, female nutrition and creatine. Each topic will be discussed by two invited experts, one presenting arguments in favour and the other presenting arguments against, followed by a moderated discussion aimed at critically evaluating the evidence and, where possible, moving towards a consensus or identifying key areas of disagreement.

Programme

1. 17:00 – Introduction
2. 17:10 – Low Quality or Highly Specific: The Collagen Protein Debate
3. 17:45 – Meaningful or Marginal: The Menstrual Cycle-Specific Nutrition Debate
4. 18:20 – Evidence or Excess: The High Dose Creatine Debate
5. 18:55 – General Discussion/Closing/Wrap-u

Date: Monday, 6 July
Time: 17:00 – 19:00
Location: UNIL Campus, Synathlon Building, Room 1216

CHAIR

Dr Thorben Aussieker
Scientific Officer PINES
OWL University of Applied Sciences
Lemgo, Germany
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

SPEAKERS

Tom A.H. Jannsen, MSc McMaster University Hamilton, Canada	Dr Christopher D. Nulty South East Technological University Carlow, Ireland

Low Quality or Highly Specific: The Collagen Protein Debate

In this debate, Tom Janssen and Chris Nulty will present up-to-date evidence in favour or against using collagen protein supplements: Collagen is widely promoted for joint, tendon and recovery benefits, yet its value in sports nutrition is debated. Critics argue it is a low-quality, incomplete protein, poor in essential amino acids and ineffective for stimulating muscle protein synthesis compared to proteins like whey. Supporters counter that collagen should be viewed as a targeted intervention. Rich in amino acids central to connective tissue and potentially beneficial when combined with loading and vitamin C, it may serve a highly specific role. The core question: inferior protein source, or specialised tool?

Alysha D'Souza, MSc McMaster University Hamilton, Canada	Dr Paulina Wasserfurth Technical University Munich Munich, Germany

Meaningful or Marginal: The Female Specific Nutrition Debate

In this debate, Alysha D'Souza and Paulina Wasserfurth will present up-to-date evidence in favour or against using collagen protein supplements:
Tailoring nutrition to the menstrual cycle has gained attention, with proponents arguing that hormonal fluctuations meaningfully affect metabolism, recovery and performance; warranting phase-specific fuelling strategies. Sceptics contend that while hormonal changes are real, their practical impact may be small, inconsistent, or too individual to justify structured adjustments. The key question: are cycle-based strategies a meaningful advancement, or a marginal gain in practice?

Dr Craig Sale Manchester Metropolitan University Manchester, UK	Dr Jedd Prett Manchester Metropolitan University Manchester, UK

Evidence or Excess: The High Dose Creatine Debate

In this debate Craig Sale and Jedd Prett will present up-to-date evidence in favour and against using larger doses of creatine: Creatine is well established for improving strength and lean mass, with 3–5 g/day typically sufficient to saturate muscle stores. Critics argue that higher doses offer no additional performance benefit and may simply increase cost or side effects. Supporters suggest that certain contexts, such as larger athletes or neurological applications, may warrant higher intakes. The key question: is high-dose creatine a meaningful advancement in practice, or simply more than physiology requires?