Skip to the main content

Energy and exercise

Thiamine (vitamin B1)and Fatigue

Two sources here, and they say different things: one measured lower fatigue and one found no clear difference.

How sure anyone can be

Low certainty, level 2 of 4

Further research is likely to change this.

The most certain of the two findings here; each record carries its own.

The numbers reported

One source’s range, drawn against its own line of no difference and scaled to its own numbers.

-4.20.33.8

This range crosses the no-difference line, so these numbers fit a real difference and no difference at all equally well.

Bar the confidence interval — the range the true effect is likely to sit inNotch the number the source reportedLine where there would be no difference at all

Two sources, newest first

We do not pick between these or average them into one number.

What we read is the published abstract, not the full paper, so a blank below may still be printed in the paper itself. A fixed rule worked this out from the source’s own fields. Nobody checked this rating by hand.

  • Randomised trial, 2024 · 36 participants

    Low certainty, level 2 of 4

    High-dose oral thiamine versus placebo for chronic fatigue in patients with primary biliary cholangitis: A crossover randomized clinical trial.

    PLoS One. 2024;19(3):e0301354. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0301354. PMID:38551983.

    Number reported
    0.3
    Which way it went
    No clear difference
    Likely range
    -4.2 to 3.8
    Source’s own words
    points on the PBC-40 fatigue subscale, change during the thiamine period of the crossover analysis (placebo period: -1.4 points; positive = more fatigue)
    Who was studied
    Adult with primary biliary cholangitis and chronic fatigue
    Compared with
    placebo
    Amount taken
    600 to 1,800 mg/d oral thiamine
    For how long
    28 days
    Disagreement between studies
    Not in the abstract
    Kind of record
    Journal article
    How this rating was reachedstarts at High, 2 steps down: risk of bias and imprecision
    1. Starts at High
    2. Risk of bias brought it down to Moderatethe abstract reports no risk-of-bias or quality appraisal, so study limitations cannot be ruled outNot in the abstract
    3. Imprecision brought it down to Lowthe confidence interval includes no effectReported in the abstract
    4. Ends at Low2 steps down.
    Checked, nothing to step it down for
    indirectness
    Inconsistency
    One study, so there was nothing to disagree

    Imprecision stops at the first check that applies; others may apply too.

    AI-reviewed & signed — an AI agent re-read this finding against the saved source and checked that the quote, the numbers, the units and the direction match it. No person read it. The owner authorised the agent to sign the batch with the owner's key, and every build rechecks that signature against these exact bytes.

    Read the abstract on PubMed

  • Randomised trial, 2021

    Low certainty, level 2 of 4

    Randomised clinical trial: high-dose oral thiamine versus placebo for chronic fatigue in patients with quiescent inflammatory bowel disease.

    Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2021;53(1):79-86. doi:10.1111/apt.16166. PMID:33210299.

    Number reported
    -4.5
    Which way it went
    Lower
    Likely range
    -6.2 to -2.6
    Source’s own words
    points on the IBD-Fatigue Questionnaire, change during the thiamine period of the crossover analysis (placebo period: +0.75 points)
    Who was studied
    Adult with quiescent inflammatory bowel disease and chronic fatigue
    Compared with
    placebo
    Amount taken
    600 to 1,800 mg/d oral thiamine (dosed by sex and weight)
    For how long
    28 days
    Disagreement between studies
    Not in the abstract
    Kind of record
    Journal article
    How this rating was reachedstarts at High, 2 steps down: risk of bias and imprecision
    1. Starts at High
    2. Risk of bias brought it down to Moderatethe abstract reports no risk-of-bias or quality appraisal, so study limitations cannot be ruled outNot in the abstract
    3. Imprecision brought it down to Lowthe abstract does not state how many participants were pooledNot in the abstract
    4. Ends at Low2 steps down.
    Checked, nothing to step it down for
    indirectness
    Inconsistency
    One study, so there was nothing to disagree

    Imprecision stops at the first check that applies; others may apply too.

    AI-reviewed & signed — an AI agent re-read this finding against the saved source and checked that the quote, the numbers, the units and the direction match it. No person read it. The owner authorised the agent to sign the batch with the owner's key, and every build rechecks that signature against these exact bytes.

    Read the abstract on PubMed

What is still missing from these readings

  • One do not say how many people took part.

Something nobody wrote down is never a zero and never a guess.

Still to read for Thiamine (vitamin B1)

Eight of the 15 things on our list for Thiamine (vitamin B1) have no reading here yet:

  • Cognitive performance
  • Diastolic blood pressure
  • Fasting insulin
  • Flow-Mediated Dilation
  • HOMA-IR
  • Mood
  • Quality of Life Score
  • Systolic blood pressure

Still to read means nobody here has got to it, not that it was tried and did nothing or that no research exists. A pairing on no list is not a gap: we never set out to read it.

Read next

This is a library, not advice. No recommendation, no dose, no diagnosis, no ranking. We never ask about your symptoms, and nothing here is tailored to you.