CEE and Kre-Alkalyn v. Creatine Mono (AGAIN!)
- 07-13-2007, 02:22 PM
CEE and Kre-Alkalyn v. Creatine Mono (AGAIN!)
This has been debated ad naseum, but here is some real evidence. If this doesn't put the "debate" to bed, then I suppose nothing will.
Creatine Efficacy Headlines At Sports Nutrition Meeting :: News :: Natural and Nutritional Products Industry Center
- 07-13-2007, 02:34 PM
- 07-13-2007, 02:45 PM
07-20-2007, 09:32 AM
i think that is bs. the study was done by a competitor right? i held out on trying CEE for the longest time but finally ordered some cuz my friend said it was great. I had already read that thread so i was even more skeptical than had already been. Yet CEE gave me better results than mono.
07-20-2007, 09:42 AM
Nobody ever seems to provide hard data on this. I always read stuff like "dude, I had INSANE pumps and I wasn't bloated at all," or "I always look soft on mono, but with cee I'm all cut up!" I have yet to hear somebody say that they had no strength gains on mono but their lifts all went up on cee.
I think cee is a scam and I have increased my bench, for example, by 30 pounds in about 4 months using mono. I've also gained 5 pounds and decreased my bf from about 18% to 16.2% as of 4 weeks ago. Granted, I have taken some other supplements along the way, but I took other supps when I tried cee too and did not get these results. That's all the proof I need.
But everybody has their own thing.
Edit: And by the way, NO, this study was not done by a competitor. That's the point. It was an INDEPENDENT scientific study. Read the references.
Last edited by EctoPower; 07-20-2007 at 09:44 AM. Reason: Added something
07-20-2007, 09:47 AM
I agree with you. I've tried every muthafu-kin' version of creatine out there under the sun and none work as good an monohydrate. What my beef here is why not more scientific studies on the various creatines ?
Here's how to do an extremely, but effective study on the various creatines. Take a bunch of Fisher rats of the same genetic disposition. Give them all the same meal but leave out any type of red meat or something that might contain any type of form of creatine. Give them different forms of creatine to each groups for awhile and let it soak up. Then slice up the rats and do a muscle biopsy to examine the creatine content within those rats which should tell if it worked or not b/c that would be their only creatine intake.
I also do not buy into the 'I got jacked' statement from people who say stuff works. The majority of these statements are unfortunately the result of a placebo study and mild (and up to severe) retardation unfortunately.
07-20-2007, 11:05 AM
Yeah there have not been enough studies on the "other" forms of creatine and that would help put the issue to bed. However, creatine mono is the most studied supplement ever and has been proven time and time again to increase strength, among other things. The only reason some companies **** with this is for marketing and hype and because they know the world is full of gullible fools who will buy the latest, greatest thing without thinking about it. There's nothing more boring than creatine monohydrate, so they come up with "new" creatine and people still fall for it. These are the same companies that gave us "creatine serum." Genius.
PT Barnum said, "There's a sucker born every minute." So I say in the absence of real science, feel free to try stuff out, but be honest about the results.
You're right on about the placebo effect. I've tried all kinds of stuff and always ask, "Is this really making me bigger/stronger/leaner." Most of the time I either have no noticable improvement or I get a temporary improvement. That's when I decide that whatever I just tried was useless and never buy it again. And I come to that conclusion OFTEN. Some popular examples: CEE, pretty much any thermogenic fat burner, and AAKG. I've tried various brands, concoctions and potencies. All of them were useless for long term, sustainable results.
But people will keep buying them all until the next great thing comes along.
07-20-2007, 11:26 AM
I've had the best results using Kre-Alkalyn, and stand by it.
07-20-2007, 11:26 AM
See that's what I've been trying to say all along here on this board and its funny because noone really seems to give a sh1t yet they glorify themselves in all the expertise they know. Let's look at it like this: Creatine Monohydrate is boring, but hell it works right ? Why in the world would I give money to a supplement company that will give me junk or some useless version of creatine ? I can easily push my money in the toilet and flush it down without too much needed assistance. I think people rely too heavily on supplements and not enough on other mitigating factors. If a supplement dosen't work then your piss out of your money and guess who ends up a winner ? Sure as hell ain't you. Look at the bullsh1t that Muscle-Tech pushes. 400% more effective creatine (Cell-Tech) ? I feel those lies are even worse than what is being peddled with the war in Iraq. If companies believed in their product, prove it buy having a guarantee...which they won't. This is what I've came across as money effective and it is not the most interesting thing but it works, and it works well.
The bread and the butter:
-Steroids (if you are into them)
-All on top of a good diet,exercise, and excellent training regiment.
Arnold Schwarznegger didn't build muscle off of Anabolic Pump, CEE, AAKG, Super-Pump and whatever else the f-ck they are peddling out there. Just good ol' fashion dieting and Dbol.
07-20-2007, 12:00 PM
So there have been some nice improvements and additions to the old Arnold standby (you should copywrite "dieting and dbol" - that's funny), but they're all peripheral. I could pretty much scrap everything except whey, mono, bcaa, fish oil, and multi-v. and I would do just fine.
Don't even get me started on muscle tech. Or BSN. They should just drop the "N" and call it what it is... Does anybody out there believe that Ronnie Coleman gets huge for the Mr. O on BSN products? Really?
I really like AST-SS. Check out their website. No BS there. Lot's of great articles, breaking research, etc. I don't buy it all, but they're the most reputable company I've found. If I could afford their meal replacement shake, I'd make it two of my meals everyday. It's the perfect meal. Expensive though.
07-20-2007, 12:42 PM
I take plenty of supplements for health too including fish oil. I've heard about cissus, but I've never actually tried it and it is something that I'll look into. My joints take a beating and glucosamine can only do so much so hopefully cissus will help as well.
In reguard to Kre-alkalyn, as far as my understanding goes the ONLY study that CONFIRMS that it does work is by EFX which is the one that is selling it (go figure). However ! there are other studies such as the one above that shows it DOES NOT WORK. I'd like to see an independent study that proves that CEE or Kre-Alkalyn does work, until then I doubt it.
I actually tried taking as high as 12g of Kre-Alkalyn which is WELL PAST their recommend dose, and still at the same time it did not give me what creatine monohydrate did at 10g.
With the aspect of pulsing, that is also something that I really don't buy into or worth entertaining. Yeah the idea of it really appeals to people, but most ppl who pulse get a SERM anyway so what's the point ? I assumed when the compound was researched and manufactured it was not under the presumption of a 'pulse usage'....so in that respect I think that any type of compound should still be used at a steady rate till the end then SERMs used accordingly.
07-20-2007, 01:05 PM
I tried the pulse method for a few reasons. First, I was a steroid virgin and I wanted an ultra safe way to test the waters. Second, the concept does actually make some sense to me, from a physiological standpoint. Third, I did not want to blow up huge in four weeks. I just wanted a nice, steady gain so that I could hide my steroid usage from my wife. Divorce is not cool! Fourth, I did not want to do anything illegal. I'm pretty sure obtaining a SERM without a valid prescription is illegal. I was not willing to risk that.
Anyway, I had to terminate the pulse after 1 week and go right to my modified, SERM-less PCT. I learned that my body is likely hypersensitive to steroids because I actually only took 4 total doses. Yet I had increased strength pretty much on day one, major lethargy by day two, and a headache that lasted 5 days from day two. My blood pressure jumped up by 20-30 points after just a couple days on a pulse of what was supposedly a "mild" compound. Freaked me out. In hindsight, I probably should have just started with 30mg in the first week to see how I responded. Still, the recommended dose of Propadrol is 30mg-60mg. I was in that range by taking 60mg, but my body couldn't handle it.
So, my quick take on pulsing is that the drug will work in that way, especially for a noob and if you can control the estrogen and cortisol between doses and post-cycle, you can probably keep your gains without a SERM. But if you have no problem with obtaining a SERM and gaining big over 4 weeks, then go with a regular cycle.
For me, I'm probably done with PH/PH, etc.
This has been a good discussion man, thanks for the input. Reps for you!
07-20-2007, 01:14 PM
07-20-2007, 01:26 PM
2 days 400mg 6-oxo, 200mg DHEA
2 days 300mg 6-oxo, 200mg DHEA
4 days 200mg 6-oxo, 150mg DHEA
5 days 100mg 6-oxo, 100mg DHEA
Then I'll continue with 50mg DHEA for a couple days to make sure cort stays down as my body re-adjusts. This is another one where I am eager to see if the effects I've noticed are temporary or permanent. I'm eager to see if my BF% improved too.
07-20-2007, 01:33 PM
07-20-2007, 02:50 PM
i personally dont really give a crap about one study that says CEE does not work. there are lots of studies that say mono does not work as well but in general most studies have found that it does. Anyway the only thing this one study proved is that if CEE sits in an acidic liquid it deriorates. that really does not prove much as far as absorption in the human body. For some reason it works for me so i am going with it. what i care about is real world results as long as they are safe. i dont see the reason for the big conspiracy theories but some controlled studies on animals would be nice like said earlier.
07-20-2007, 04:57 PM
And again, you're providing absolutely no proof that CEE has worked at ALL for you. Before and after stats? Any measurements at all? I'll be waiting forever for this, won't I?
As for the study, you just don't get it. The fact that CEE deteriorates in stomach acid at an astronomically faster rate means that almost none of it is able to be absorbed by the human body. On the other hand, mono is 99% absorbed, making it far superior. You can debate the type of study they did or the amount and/or concentrations of the various substances used if you like. But given the parameters of this particular study, the results say that CEE is almost useless.
Anyway, good luck. I really hope you do get the results you want. I hate to see anybody flushing money down the toilet.
07-20-2007, 08:46 PM
holy cow. man you need to chill with the personal attacks. please reread my post. no where did i say that mono does not work. i simply stated that there are many studies that say that mono does not work as well as many that say it does. i know it does and so does just about everyone else. therefor to dismiss CEE as useless because of 1 study is whimsicle. Besides the study did not study how CEE acts in the body. How do you know that it doesnt become more effective as the acid breaks it down? How do you know the CEE isnt absorbed at a much greater rate than mono. there is all sorts of angles that need to be taken into consideration, the study was very very simple. Like mentioned before a study on rats would be great.
And since you need to here my "proof "that CEE worked for me (as if I am lying lol) I will let you know that i gained about 4 pounds once I started CEE and I am not as soft looking as I was while on mono.
07-21-2007, 12:45 AM
07-21-2007, 02:20 AM
all i can speak for is my experence, you guys can follow the test tube if you want. one single experiment in a test tube and you guys are experts lol. you know that deca was proved to be highly catabolic in one experiment in a test tube as well right?????
you guys are dumb
12-30-2007, 10:39 PM
Don't listen to that report remember they said ALL n.o. products are useless LOL. If you tried them you know they work, case closed.
01-08-2008, 02:33 PM
The studies prove themselves, however, everyone's body is different.
Creatine Monohydrate made me feel so bloated, gave me really bad gas, and occasionally gave me the runs.
CEE, on the other hand, didn't make me retain any water, and my muscles were very full and hard. I loved it.
I prefer CEE over CM. Like I said, these studies prove themselves, as they're intended. But, again, everyone's body works differently.
03-12-2008, 10:32 PM
All personal preferences. I used creatine Mono & CEE both for extended periods of time and personally had best results with micronized creatine mono. Also NOS products never did one thing for me.
03-13-2008, 09:04 AM
Remember, I am not a bodybuilder but an overweight (need to try and drop about 15+ lbs over the next two months so I can compete in the 65+/ 198 lb class) 66 year old retiree who prefers powerlifting. Here is my test lab from just before I ripped up my RC (third time) doing my annual birthday strength tests. On this Hammer Strength Vid I hit 360. http://www.motionbox.com/video/playe...ment_end=19.64
03-16-2008, 08:46 PM
Ok u guys keep comaplaining about results of if people have increased in strength...well wen i have always been strong and the summer before 11th grade i was doing football workouts all august and i could easily bench 225, 10times and squat 400pounds and clean 210 and i used no xplode and cellmass...sooo i think that CEE most defintally works
03-17-2008, 12:16 AM
03-17-2008, 01:26 AM
The study showed that CEE is less effective, by a certain percentage. Not that it is pointless. I finally caved and bought a creatine supp. that's a mix of CEE and Mono, and it doesn't twist my stomach the way pure mono does. So, I'm happy with not getting any bloating or nausea whatsoever in exchange for slightly nerfed results.
04-15-2008, 09:23 AM
This doesn't really say much. They say after 2 hours that 72% of the CEE was available after incubation in pH 1 HCl. First off they are not taking into account MANY facts. First off the amount of water a lot of people are going to put in their drinks is quite substantial. Next, they are not saying how much HCl they are actually using. I can't imagine any large amounts of HCl would be secreted by the stomach in response to merely liquid and considering the fact that a lot of these products are sugar free, it would further the argument. Next, they don't take into account the fact that a liquid is going to VERY quickly pass through the stomach. This becomes obvious by the fact that you have to urinate shortly after drinking a large one of these drinks. It wouldn't stay in the stomach anywhere near 30 minutes. Also, even at 72% it is still a large yield. Taking 5g you would still have ~3.6 grams available.
I am not disputing these results but merely showing that not all bases were covered. It was interesting to find that it was degraded in the first place in concentrated acidic solutions but considering the alkaline environment of the small intestine and how quickly the liquid would pass through the stomach, I can't imagine there being a widespread issue here.
04-16-2008, 02:03 AM
Lake I love how you are always in this section doing your thing. Are you up to something? HMMM? I am glad you pointed these things out as I thought there may be more to the picture.. I would like to see more studies on CEE as I am not yet convinced that it's effects are merely a placebo.
04-16-2008, 07:57 AM
Yeah, it is hard to base an opinion on one study for sure. It is a good start and interesting nonetheless but CM used to bloat the hell out of me and I much rather get 75% of what I am taking in CEE (this isn't even a really accurate number in vivo) than have to take CM.
08-02-2008, 09:58 AM
I am very aware of the whole debate on the 3 forms of creatine. I tried Mono on 2 ocassions. I did not see it do much for me plus the fact that I hated loading it and having to drink it with a sugary juice and keep mixing it.
I have never tried CEE
I currently do KA. I used to use SCI FIT but I found I could get EFX cheaper so I switched to them. I made am email to the guy in charge there to ask him about this testing and all.
The results I see in me with KA are these:
-If I do not take in enough water I find my lower lips gets a dryness.
-There are times where I find my muscle getting a certain tightness in them which lasts usually for an hour or more. Sometimes I will wake up and find my whole system very tight and am shocked to see what I see in the mirror...good thing.
-Maybe it is a placebo effect but I was out of training for 4 months. My biceps were about 15 1/2" Taking KA along with training brought them up to about 16" at this moment.
- KA...I take it because it is so much easier to take pill form than powder. I can take the pills and then drink water and not having to worry about sucking a whole glass down within a few minutes. Usually I suck down several glasses with KA in the span of 10-15 minutes.
This is my experience and thoughts on the subject. In the future I may try some difference mono, micronized and see what happens again. For now KA is my thing.
10-01-2008, 07:26 AM
Ive got to add my view here..
Firstly creatine mono, does work very well, by storing water in the muscle cells, and of course the effects of the creatine itself on muscle energy output.
I have used creatine monohydrate, and my strength always goes up, my speed, improves, i just hate the water retention, especialy in my face.
So i used kre alkalyn, i found the pumps i got were great, my lifts went up slightly, but my speed didnt improve, i record everything i do, i will show you my results after i just say my views.
Then i used CEE, wich as regards muscle size and pumps go, it was way stronger than mono, however i still didnt get as good strength increases, and no speed improvement, i think kre-alkalyn and CEE work, i actualy prefer Kre-alkalyn, as i get no water bloat at all, but i might as well use a nitric oxide booster, as i guess the effects are very similar.
Here are my lifts, bench press, and my 100 metre sprint times.
before creatine this was 4 years ago that i logged this information, when i started trying to get bigger, and faster.
Before creatine cycle/ bench 110kilo/ 100metres sprint 10.82sec i repped 110 kilo 3 times
Creatine mono/ bench 120 kilo/ 100 metres 10.69
Kre-alkalyn/ bench 115kilo/ 100 metres 10.80
CEE/ bench 115/ 100 metres 10.79
Current after steroid cycles etc. bench 160kilo/100 metres 10.60 yeah i know im like a second behind usain bolt, but im a white guy, i only run 100 metres once a week, maybe if i trained i could get it lower, but nowhere near olympic standard. Black guys will always be quicker, they have straight bones.
Review.. Mono is the best for strength and speed, i would say CEE for size, And kre-alkalyn for pumps. hope this info helps guys. Russian
10-01-2008, 07:35 AM
Everyone is worried about what creatine they are taking...why not just make sure your diet and training is in order...
10-03-2008, 10:11 AM
10-03-2008, 08:52 PM
creatine, for the most part, is creatine. If training and diet are not in order then you are pissing your money away.
10-04-2008, 03:30 AM
10-04-2008, 09:52 PM
10-05-2008, 12:08 PM
10-05-2008, 03:13 PM
10-05-2008, 08:22 PM
Similar Forum Threads
- By luxxor in forum SupplementsReplies: 1Last Post: 03-24-2010, 11:37 PM
- By luxxor in forum Supplement LogsReplies: 1Last Post: 03-24-2010, 10:31 PM
- By djbombsquad in forum SupplementsReplies: 12Last Post: 12-24-2008, 02:09 PM
- By Ryan Leal in forum SupplementsReplies: 32Last Post: 12-06-2007, 05:36 AM
- By drei in forum SupplementsReplies: 4Last Post: 01-11-2005, 05:08 PM