Ive just read in a few places things like "your gains can begin to diminish over time because your body simply gets accustomed to the higher levels of creatine" and that "you should take a couple of weeks off every 2 months for the sake of receptor attenuation".
Do most people here not cycle it then?
The reason behind cycling may simply be to try and stimulate a greater effect, since if you cycle off, cycling back 'on' can almost cause the effect of a loading phase, where the goal is to increase the muscle creatine concentration by 20% from resting levels (Burke, et al., 2006; Harris, et al., 1992).
However, the muscles have a creatine threshold of ~150-160 mmol/kg dw. In the absence of supplementation (i.e. cycling off), the muscle creatine concentration returns to resting levels in 4-5 weeks (Burke, et al., 2006; Hultman, et al., 1996).
Most peole cycle creatine off for only 1-2 weeks; which is not effective at bringing their muscle creatine levels back to baseline. For those who DO cycle creatine, the most effective method would be to do 8-12 weeks on and 4 weeks off.
However, as mentioned, there is NO need to cycle creatine, as gains do NOT diminish over time, especially if you are doing intensive daily exercise.
Not necessary to cycle. I have actually like its effects better during a cutting phase because that's when you're lower on energy and glycogen levels. It will helps with training and strength in a cutting phase.
Actually creatine has better effects when one IS using higher carbohydrates (CHO). Creatine accumulation in the muscle is ENHANCED by coingestion of at least 75-100g of CHO (Green, et al., 1996); and it may also enhance muscle glycogen storage (Burke, et al., 2006).
Creatine helps with "training and strength" no matter WHAT "phase" one is in, as it allows an enhanced ability to undergo resistance training and [repeated] high-intensity exercise; which makes for performance gains.
