Abstract
Inorganic phosphate (Pi) supplementation has been reported to provide ergogenic benefits, though the research findings are inconsistent. Several confounding influences may explain these results, including mode of exercise, exercise intensity, dietary intake, daily biological fluctuations, type of supplement, administered dose of the supplement, washout period, length of loading period, fitness level of subjects, blood volume alterations, and sample collection and analysis techniques. This review provides a critical analysis of the methodological difficulties that may contribute to the equivocal research findings pertaining to Pi supplementation.