[s7eve]

I can't see where I have disagreed with what you are saying so lets just agree to agree

Except for the last paragraph, I'm 32, I paid for my first Gym membership at BJ's Gym out of money I earned washing cars and my $4 an hour job on Saturdays when I was 14, I did not discover the internet until the late 90's early 00's and only got connected myself about 3 years ago, my research has included magazines, a library of books and many years of practical application, the internet has only formed a fraction of my study but it is an invaluable resource. I always trained for strength and I always accomplished the goals I set out to achieve, I have also offered advise to a number of friends and they have used that advice to achieve their goals. I have had a number of friends that both compete professionally and on an amateur level including two Gym owners one of which last time I checked (a few years back now) still held an Australian powerlifting record.

Let's review what I said,

Almost every elite level athlete uses creatine.
I believe creatine helps you train harder.

So we actually agree.

However to be fair I should be unbiased and present all sides of the argument, there is independent credible scientific research that suggests the same results can be achieved with or without creatine, there are a minority of successful natural body builders that are against any supplements (with the exception of protein ) Tom Venuto for example. The industry is saturated with misinformation and false studies in the name of corporate profit margins, the industry is firm on the benefits of creatine, science is divided.

My intention in this thread is to help others with what I have learned, it does not help anyone if I'm presenting biased unsubstantiated opinion so I tried to present the entire picture as I know it. I do not claim to know it all, I've found out many times that what I thought was correct, was in fact not correct, I know that I can learn a lot more. I'm just happy to help others with what I know and I'm more than happy to be corrected and educated, I hate being ignorant.

[ElDuderino]

Originally Posted by s7eve

On a personal level I feel that creatine helped me but I have no scientific basis for that claim and as I mentioned may be a placebo effect. Personally I'm inclined to believe that Creatine is beneficial as it is used in practically every sport at elite level however I'm not inclined to accept the claims such as the ones in your post (no offence) unless they are backed up with credible scientific evidence. If you can post a link to an independent double blind study that would sure help this lazy arse

No problem man.

Creatine Part 1

This website goes pretty in-depth in its discussion of creatine monohydrate, including several independent studies. There are also several articles on creatine on bodybuilding.com that are worth a read.

[Labrie]

Originally Posted by s7eve

I can't see where I have disagreed with what you are saying so lets just agree to agree

Maybe it was just the way I read your post. It seemed to me that you only take published studies as proof of something working or not working, whereas I, try the product and determine for myself whether it works or not. Also the fact that you stated "Creatine will not help with muscle growth" kind of got to me. Probably because I was stressed out as I had just got off work but anyhow, I didn't intend to insult you, so if you feel offended somehow I do apologize.

[guitarplayerone]

creatine definitely helps me with strength and size gains. I'll try to get some pix up... idk what my measurements are, but my one-rep max went up 60 pounds in the past two months, now at 225.

5'11
172 lbs
guessing 10%ish bodyfat, machine said I was at 7.6%, but I think I'm fatter than that. abs visible, etc

1-1.5 g protein per pound bodyweight worked wonders. 2g if low carb dieting.

I carb cycle atm, I was bulking for three months, gained a few pounds of mass, going from 156. definitely gained inches (not an inch) on the arms, etc.... gained tons of vascularity

a natural endomorph, I ate 3000 cals per day when bulking, 2000 when cutting. (sometimes less unfortunately)

protein powder helped cut too

[s7eve]

Originally Posted by Labrie

Also the fact that you stated "Creatine will not help with muscle growth" kind of got to me.

I'm going to respond to why I said that, please don't take it as arguing with you. I feel that it is important to research this again now, there is so much information and yes the research is all coming from the net this time, I've only just started obviously my view will develop as I continue to research.

Originally Posted by ElDuderino

No problem man.

Creatine Part 1

This website goes pretty in-depth in its discussion of creatine monohydrate, including several independent studies. There are also several articles on creatine on bodybuilding.com that are worth a read.

This is the type of article that I was referring to earlier, I feel it needs to be examined more closely as it is obviously biased. Why?

Daniel Gastelu is not only president of Supplementfacts and a writer on bodybuilding.com, he also sells supplements, he is not going to write a negative article about his products now is he. The same can be said about bodybuilding.com due to this claim, "World's Top Bodybuilding Cyberstore Guaranteed Lowest Prices!".

There is a fault with my statement, I did not go into enough detail. Yes creatine will help muscle growth as shown in the studies in the article, the problem with those studies is that they are tailored to a positive result, let me explain.

Extensive research has been performed on creatine over a long period of time, there are certain studies on creatine that have been repeated many times over and if I was to perform the study in the same way I would achieve the same result, with that in mind I know that if I wish to show that creatine is effective for increased muscle growth all I need to do is a double blind study over a relatively short period of time and collect the results before the subjects stop taking creatine. So yes creatine does increase muscle size and yes it does enhance performance however in my hypothetical study and the studies in the article it can only be concluded that creatine will be effective in the short term.

The question is what effect does it have after long term use and what happens to someone who has made gains using creatine when they stop using it?

DISCLAIMER: I don't believe I have researched creatine enough to write an article on it and as such I should not have made the comment I did, it's too late now so I will write what I know and how I came to my conclusions. I have researched creatine in the past and am in the process of doing so again but I am by no means qualified or an authority as is no one else commenting in this thread. It's a level playing field. My conclusions have and will continue to be formed from personal experience, observation and primarily from researching studies on the subject by people who are qualified while examining the qualifications of the source and taking into account if they stand to profit from being biased.

What we know about Creatine.

The least effective time to take creatine is immediately before or during training. Doing so has often resulted in no gains or a negative result. Creatine is best taken post workout.

Creatine is most effective by loading. Heavy loading can achieve greater results in a short period but can produce greater side effects, moderate loading is just as effective as heavy loading over extended periods and produces less side effects.

Creatine has little to no effect on people of certain body types.

Creatine is most effective when taken in conjunction with high GI carbs.

Creatine use requires adequate hydration, the level of hydration required is an increased amount over normal consumption.

The body produces creatine naturally, when we boost our levels by supplementation over time the body will reduce it's production of creatine. An effective method of use that addresses this is cycling creatine use.

These facts have been well research and these facts can be used to tailor a study to achieve the results that is desired. When reviewing a study it is important to keep these in mind.

What I will not debate is that creatine is useful for competing athletes but since that is not applicable to the application in this thread I chose to ignore it.

Will using creatine help me to gain muscle and will I maintain that muscle when I stop using it, the question is am I better off using creatine for a period to gain muscle that I will retain after I stop using it or can I achieve the same result without creatine? Example: case (a) use creatine for x amount of time and continue to train for y amount of time after creatine is no longer used (b) train for x + y without the aid of creatine. Is there an increased result for (a) over (b) at the completion of x + y.

I concluded from my previous study that there is either no benefit or that the benefit is so small that it can be determined that using creatine is not effective, this is what I am now studying again.

One of the effect's of creatine is that the muscle will store more water increasing it's size and increasing the weight of the individual, this weight is often mistaken for increased lean muscle mass however it is actually an increase in water weight, when the individual stops using creatine they will lose this water weight and the additional size that the water provided.

When one stops using creatine they can expect to lose some strength and some muscle size, how much is debated. Creatine levels do not fall immediately after ceasing use of creatine so cycling can be effective to maintain the body's natural production and for continued supplementation.

Now I'm looking for longer studies that include the period after creatine use stops, I have come across one previously but I did not find it on the net and as of yet I have been unable to find it on the net, I will continue to look and hopefully I will have something to post soon.

I repeat that the blanket statement I made that creatine does not increase size should have been explained better or possibly not made at all, It does increase size while using it, there is more evidence to support this than the performance claims. I am not convinced it increases sustainable size, that is my studies of the subject have resulted in the conclusion that once you stop using it you will return to a size that is comparable to what you would expect if you never used it. Therefore I think it is useful for competition purposes but not for the goal of getting big if you don't plan to continue to use it. I think that is the debate that is applicable to this thread as the majority of people here I believe wish to improve their physique long term and do not intend to use supplementation long term to achieve that.

WARNING: Creatine use should only be considered after consulting a GP and should not be considered by people with a pre existing kidney condition.

[B Lopez]

I haven't done jack shit but camp and surf since this started

[ElDuderino]

Originally Posted by s7eve

This is the type of article that I was referring to earlier, I feel it needs to be examined more closely as it is obviously biased. Why?

Daniel Gastelu is not only president of Supplementfacts and a writer on bodybuilding.com, he also sells supplements, he is not going to write a negative article about his products now is he. The same can be said about bodybuilding.com due to this claim, "World's Top Bodybuilding Cyberstore Guaranteed Lowest Prices!".

But you left out the other information in his biography, such as how he is Director of Nutritional Sciences for the International Sports Sciences Association (ISSA), is an author, a "trainer of fitness trainers", and a sports nutrition and dietary supplement industry expert. He developed and authored ISSA's Specialist in Performance Nutrition certification program and course book, which is used to certify doctors, physical therapists, fitness trainers, strength coaches and nutritionists. He also is a graduate of Rutgers University, where he taught science courses.

I guess I'm not seeing where the bias is. Nowhere on any of his pages does he discuss any brand names, or have links to any products. Also, with bodybuilding.com, yes they sell products, but they do not write any of the articles. All of the articles are taken from outside sources, mainly bodybuilders, who all have personal experience using creatine, and nearly all of them cite independent research studies. If you read the articles you will notice that many of them discuss supplements that you should avoid, or how you do not need as high of doses as many companies suggest.

I'm not sure if you even read the Gastelu link I provided. He provides over 30 published studies from reputable sources such as the Journal of Applied Physiology, Journal of Sports Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism, and the American Journal of Physiology among many others.

As far as safety of long term creatine usage, a study was done which tracked healthy athletes over a five-year period, and football players who used creatine at levels up to 15.75g of creatine per day showed no effect on markers of renal or kidney stress. This study was published in the American Journal of Sports Medicine. There are also a couple other landmark studies that proved the safety of creatine usage.

As far as questioning the long-term benefits of creatine usage, many studies have shown that creatine increases muscle mass. It is a common misconception that it all just water weight. There is a difference between cell volumization and water retention. Cell volumization leads to more water inside the cells, making the muscle bigger and firmer. Water retention happens outside the muscle cells. That extra cell volumization leads to greater anabolism, which for most will lead to greater lean muscle mass.

[s7eve]

I must not have made myself clear because obviously you missed my point. I blame myself.

I'm not talking about long term use or interested in it's safety as the average person is most likely not going to use it long term, they will use it to achieve their goal and then stop.

Nor am I stating that it is all water weight, I am questioning if a person would benefit over using creatine and then going off it over a person who trains without it, hence the example.

Person A: uses creatine for 3 months then trains for a further 3 months without creatine
Person B: trains for 6 months without creatine.

Originally Posted by ElDuderino

But you left out the other information in his biography, such as how he is Director of Nutritional Sciences for the International Sports Sciences Association (ISSA), is an author, a "trainer of fitness trainers", and a sports nutrition and dietary supplement industry expert. He developed and authored ISSA's Specialist in Performance Nutrition certification program and course book, which is used to certify doctors, physical therapists, fitness trainers, strength coaches and nutritionists. He also is a graduate of Rutgers University, where he taught science courses.

And this is a good thing why? I can not understand why people can not appreciate the problem with that, on one hand he is incredibly influential and in a position of responsibility on the other he is making money from the sale of the types of products he endorses, it is a conflict of interest and he is in the position to advocate products reguardless of their effectiveness that he sells.

But he is not doing a great job is he. The fitness industry is a massive one that offers very little for a lot of investment. Gyms are full of people who train everyday and never achieve their goals, people spend a fortune consulting "doctors, physical therapists, fitness trainers, strength coaches and nutritionists" who are unable to help them, for every successful body builder how many wannabe body builders are out there who are doing everything they are told to and never seem to be able to get there? Obviously there is a lot of bad advice out there, the successful people are usually those who spend extra for a personal trainer or an expert that has a proven track record. These experts often keep their secrets close to them, that's how they stay successful, not to mention that going against the tide publicly could be career suicide for them. There are successful programs that are designed to improve physique that do not use creatine but these programs are not for people who are trying to get massive they are for the average person who wants to sculpt their body and get a bit bigger, the same type that is in this thread.

There are places you can go for information that have a much higher rate of success, I am a member of one such place at the moment, although I am not strictly following the program the success rate there is not equalled anywhere I have seen. 99% success rate for weight loss following a program that is against what is accepted as the right way to lose weight. You can check it out yourself but you have to pay for entry. The trainer who developed this system along side a doctor that specialises in diet has been named Australian personal trainer of the year and yet they speak out against the whole industry.

Creatine is great for a competitive body builder but we are not competitive body builders, we are a bunch of people that want to lose weight, get healthy and/or put on some muscle mass, few of us will want to take creatine long term to maintain our size so again the question is would we benefit from taking creatine short term and then just continue to train normally afterwards or would we be just as successful training without creatine?

One thing you will find with certainty and you will find this in body building forums is that it is not worth training with creatine and then stopping your creatine and training, in that case you will lose what you have gained.

Again I'm not against creatine and I believe in it's benefits for the applications I have mentioned, I am not convinced that it is of benefit to the other group I have discussed.

Finally, I did not read the entire article, I did however read the published studies, if I had not I would not have known how they were conducted and I would not have commented on them.

[Labrie]

Originally Posted by s7eve

Creatine is great for a competitive body builder but we are not competitive body builders, we are a bunch of people that want to lose weight, get healthy and/or put on some muscle mass

You definitely don't want to take creatine if your goal is to lose weight, in fact it will probably do the opposite. Just thought I'd throw that in there.

[ElDuderino]

Originally Posted by s7eve

I must not have made myself clear because obviously you missed my point. I blame myself.


Nor am I stating that it is all water weight, I am questioning if a person would benefit over using creatine and then going off it over a person who trains without it, hence the example.

Person A: uses creatine for 3 months then trains for a further 3 months without creatine
Person B: trains for 6 months without creatine.


But he is not doing a great job is he. The fitness industry is a massive one that offers very little for a lot of investment. Gyms are full of people who train everyday and never achieve their goals, people spend a fortune consulting "doctors, physical therapists, fitness trainers, strength coaches and nutritionists" who are unable to help them, for every successful body builder how many wannabe body builders are out there who are doing everything they are told to and never seem to be able to get there? Obviously there is a lot of bad advice out there, the successful people are usually those who spend extra for a personal trainer or an expert that has a proven track record. These experts often keep their secrets close to them, that's how they stay successful, not to mention that going against the tide publicly could be career suicide for them. There are successful programs that are designed to improve physique that do not use creatine but these programs are not for people who are trying to get massive they are for the average person who wants to sculpt their body and get a bit bigger, the same type that is in this thread.


Creatine is great for a competitive body builder but we are not competitive body builders, we are a bunch of people that want to lose weight, get healthy and/or put on some muscle mass, few of us will want to take creatine long term to maintain our size so again the question is would we benefit from taking creatine short term and then just continue to train normally afterwards or would we be just as successful training without creatine?

One thing you will find with certainty and you will find this in body building forums is that it is not worth training with creatine and then stopping your creatine and training, in that case you will lose what you have gained.

Sorry for the misunderstanding. Through personal experience and all the research I have done, I would be pretty confident saying that Person A would see better results than Person B. In a study published in the American Journal of Physiology, Vandenburghe and associates reported that women consuming creatine (20 g/day for 4 days followed by 5 g/day for 66 days) during resistance training observed significantly greater gains in fat-free mass compared with a placebo group. These gains were maintained during a subsequent 70-day detraining period with continued supplementation (5 g/day). In addition, the gains in fat-free mass were maintained 28 days after cessation of supplementation despite muscle phosphocreatine levels returning toward pre-supplementation values.

So the claim that training with creatine and then stopping supplementation and training is useless is completely false. Also, creatine supplementation is useful for more than just competitive bodybuilders. As I previously stated, anybody trying to increase strength and put on some muscle mass, which sounds like several of the posters in this thread, would benefit from creatine.

While it will help you gain strength and muscle mass, if you are 160 pounds, using creatine will not turn you into a bulked up bodybuilder, so there is no need to worry about that. This idea brings up a funny story from Dorian Yates - "I would always get questions or statements from people who used to come down to the gym and asked to get big, but they didn't want to get too big. They wanted to attain the same proportions or something as me, but not much bigger than that. I would always tell them don't worry about it, it's not going to happen by mistake."


While this doesn't relate to the original point, I don't think it is fair to blame the failures of average gym-goers on Daniel Gastelu and the ISSA. There is a huge difference between the bodybuilders and the wanna-be bodybuilders, and it can't be blamed on bad trainers. If you followed them around, you could point out their flaws in either training, living habits, or diet which prevents them from attaining their goals. I have never heard anybody complain about a bad phsyical therapist, nutritionist, or strength and conditioning coach either. I believe saying that gyms are full of people who train everyday and never achieve their goals is a bit of an overstatement. Even so, for those who don't achieve their goals in the gym, I believe for a majority of them most of the blame lies on their own shoulders.

On the topic of creatine, I guess we just have different viewpoints