Check out my other tools:
→ Sports supplement tool ←
→ Dietary supplement tool ←
→ The Train Smart Framework ←
→ Sports supplement tool ←
→ Dietary supplement tool ←
→ The Train Smart Framework ←
The Recovery Magic Tool from Thomas Solomon PhD.
A systematic research summary of recovery approaches used by athletes.
Last updated on: 5th July 2022.
Next update coming: Jan 2023.
Next update coming: Jan 2023.
Optimal recovery is found with a well-planned and monitored training load combined with good nutrition, sleep, and rest. But folks “do their recovery” with many other popular lines of recovery “magic”. As a supplement to my recovery magic article, this tool is an up-to-date summary of all known scientific evidence for the most popular lines of recovery magic, derived from systematic reviews of the literature. It is designed to be a useful resource for scientists, practitioners, coaches, and athletes to help inform their choices for using recovery approaches that supplement good nutrition, sleep, and rest. I will aim to keep it up-to-date as new evidence emerges.
NOTE: If this is your first visit to this page, I strongly recommend reading the intro as it contains important info. But, to skip that and jump to the tool, click the arrow.


“It definitely works!”
I've lost count of how many times I’ve heard the classic “I've used this and it was awesome” narrative spewing from social media influencers. Regrettably, such narratives are also spouted from the mouths of “reputable” athletes, coaches, and other practitioners including scientists, nutritionists, psychologists, physiologists, and medical doctors on podcast/radio/TV interviews when talking about a new pill/potion/device. Frustratingly, these folks never say what “it” works for nor what “it” is being compared to and, most importantly, whether using “it” made them objectively faster, stronger, or healthier. When you see such narratives, think to yourself:






High-quality robust scientific evidence comes from studies with a randomized controlled trial (RCT) design. But, “cherry-picking” a study to confirm a bias is not a valid pursuit for informing practice. A systematic review examines all the “cherries” in a standardised way and, when the studies included in a systematic review are of high enough quality, a meta-analysis of all the available data can be completed. This produces an overall effect size along with a 95% confidence interval (the range of values the real effect size is likely to be found if the intervention is repeated) and a heterogeneity score (how variable the effect is). In simple words, a meta-analysis analyses all the “cherries” simultaneously to produce a useable effect size based on all available scientific evidence, enabling good decisions to be made.
Because many athletes indulge in a smorgasbord of “recovery” devices/pills/potions, I want to bring clarity where there is obscurity in the often snake-oil doused world of recovery magic. So, to help you understand whether “it” actually does improve recovery when compared to other things, I have created a resource that summarises the evidence from all known systematic reviews. This will help inform your decisions in using various recovery modalities, and I will aim to keep each topic up-to-date when scientific advances are made.
Before diving in, remember that “feeling” ready to go is different from actually being ready to unleash your maximal potential. And, before making any decisions, always conduct a cost-benefit analysis, where “cost” includes a combination of financial costs, time costs, moral costs, risk of contamination, potential performance impairment, and harm to health:


