which form of creatine is best?
- 04-16-2008, 10:09 AM
- 04-16-2008, 10:13 AM
this discussion topic has been beaten to death so many times.
- 04-16-2008, 02:31 PM
04-16-2008, 02:44 PM
As soon as you admit i am right
04-16-2008, 02:48 PM
04-16-2008, 02:52 PM
No I havent tried it like you mentioned. That looks like it is worth a try. Appreciate that tip
04-18-2008, 09:43 AM
04-19-2008, 02:59 AM
Stick with good ol Creatine Monohydrate.
04-22-2008, 12:38 AM
Just get EXCEEEED !!!!!!!!!!!!! Mono is just a bloat an than you loose it after , its a waste ...
04-22-2008, 02:31 AM
I hold out with what I said above, CM is the way to go. Its cheap and effective and not just bloat. Read the studies that have been coming out for the last 10 or 15 years. Here's 2 examples stacked against CEE and Kre-alkalyn (posted on another site by str8flexed)
______________________________ ______________________________ ____________
Creatine ethyl ester rapidly degrades to creatinine in stomach acid
Child R1 and Tallon MJ2
1Department of Life Sciences, Kingston University, Penrhyn Rd, Kingston-upon-Thames, United Kingdom. 2University of Northumbria, Sport Sciences, Northumbria University, Northumberland Building, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom, DrChild@CR-Technologies.net
Creatine ethyl ester (CEE) is a commercially available synthetic creatine that is now widely used in dietary supplements. It comprises of creatine with an ethyl group attached and this molecular configuration is reported to provide several advantages over creatine monohydrate (CM). The Medical Research Institute (CA, USA) claim that the CEE in their product (CE2) provides greater solubility in lipids, leading to improved absorption. Similarly San (San Corporation, CA, USA) claim that the CEE in their product (San CM2 Alpha) avoids the breakdown of creatine to creatinine in stomach acids. Ultimately it is claimed that CEE products provide greater absorption and efficacy than CM. To date, none of these claims have been evaluated by an independent, or university laboratory and no comparative data are available on CEE and CM.
This study assessed the availability of creatine from three commercial creatine products during degradation in acidic conditions similar to those that occur in the stomach. They comprised of two products containing CEE (San CM2 Alpha and CE2) and commercially available CM (Creapure?). An independent laboratory, using testing guidelines recommended by the United States Pharmacopeia (USP), performed the analysis. Each product was incubated in 900ml of pH 1 HCL at 37? 1oC and samples where drawn at 5, 30 and 120 minutes. Creatine availability was assessed by immediately assaying for free creatine, CEE and the creatine breakdown product creatinine, using HPLC (UV)
After 30 minutes incubation only 73% of the initial CEE present was available from CE2, while the amount of CEE available from San CM2 Alpha was even lower at only 62%. In contrast, more than 99% of the creatine remained available from the CM product. These reductions in CEE availability were accompanied by substantial creatinine formation, without the appearance of free creatine. After 120minutes incubation 72% of the CEE was available from CE2 with only 11% available from San CM2 Alpha, while more than 99% of the creatine remained available from CM.
CEE is claimed to provide several advantages over CM because of increased solubility and stability. In practice, the addition of the ethyl group to creatine actually reduces acid stability and accelerates its breakdown to creatinine. This substantially reduces creatine availability in its esterified form and as a consequence creatines such as San CM2 and CE2 are inferior to CM as a source of free creatine.
______________________________ ______________________________ _
Kre-alkalyn? supplementation has no beneficial effect on creatine-to-creatinine conversion rates.
Tallon MJ1 and Child R2
1University of Northumbria, Sport Sciences, Northumbria University, Northumberland Building, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom, 2Department of Life Sciences, Kingston University, Penrhyn Rd, Kingston-upon-Thames, United Kingdom. DrTallon@CR-Technologies.net
All American Pharmaceutical and Natural Foods Corp. (Billings, MT, USA) claim that Kre-alkalyn? (KA) a ?Buffered? creatine, is 100% stable in stomach acid and does not convert to creatinine. In contrast, they also claim that creatine monohydrate (CM) is highly pH labile with more than 90% of the creatine converting to the degradation product creatinine in stomach acids. To date, no independent or university laboratory has evaluated the stability of KA in stomach acids, assessed its possible conversion to creatinine, or made direct comparisons of acid stability with CM.
This study examined whether KA supplementation reduced the rate of creatine conversion to creatinine, relative to commercially available CM (Creapure?). Creatine products were analyzed by an independent commercial laboratory using testing guidelines recommended by the United States Pharmacopeia (USP). Each product was incubated in 900ml of pH 1 HCL at 37? 1oC and samples where drawn at 5, 30 and 120 minutes and immediately analyzed by HPLC (UV) for creatine and creatinine.
In contrast to the claims of All American Pharmaceutical and Natural Foods Corp., the rate of creatinine formation from CM was found to be less than 1% of the initial dose, demonstrating that CM is extremely stable under acidic conditions that replicate those of the stomach. This study also showed that KA supplementation actually resulted in 35% greater conversion of creatine to creatinine than CM. In conclusion the conversion of creatine to creatinine is not a limitation in the delivery of creatine from CM and KA is less stable than CM in the acid conditions of the stomach.
04-22-2008, 02:44 AM
And against MCC (post by Ingenium, from another site)
Mg2+-creatine chelate and a low-dose creatine supplementation regimen improve exercise performance.
Selsby JT, DiSilvestro RA, Devor ST.
Section of Sport and Exercise Sciences, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210, USA.
We tested the hypotheses that, compared with a placebo group or creatine (Cr) group, a Mg(2+)-Cr chelate group would demonstrate improvements in the 1 repetition maximum (1RM) on the bench press and be able to perform more work at 70% of the 1RM for the bench press. Thirty-one weight-trained men were randomly assigned in a double-blind manner to a placebo group (multidextran), a Cr group (2.5 g of Cr daily), or a Mg(2+)-Cr group (2.5 g of Cr daily). Baseline data were collected for the bench press 1RM and maximal work completed during a fatigue set at 70% of the 1RM. Following 10 days of Cr supplementation, follow-up tests were completed for the dependent variables. Groups were similar when the change in 1RM was evaluated either absolutely or relatively. Both the Cr and the Mg(2+)-Cr groups had significantly larger increases in work, both absolutely and relatively, when compared with the placebo group. Partial support for the hypothesis suggests that low doses of Cr are effective at increasing fiber Cr content, and consequently, performance. Further, the Cr and Mg(2+)-Cr groups were similar in both performance tests, suggesting that the proposed mechanism of entry is no better than the conventional method when 2.5 g of Cr is administered and performance is measured as work. This study raises the possibility that a low dose of Cr may be an effective means of enhancing performance after short-term ingestion.
04-22-2008, 10:35 AM
Daddy says go down to walmart and pick you up a can of the sixstar creatine. its $15.22
04-22-2008, 10:54 AM
whats the stuff is nos ether? my strength atm is pretty good.. on par with size on
04-22-2008, 10:59 AM
04-24-2008, 01:29 PM
What the hell is Exceed? Who makes it? Never heard of it, so that's a bad sign in my book.
CM is the only creatine that works. The "bloat" is water retention, which is a sign that the creatine is helping increase your strength (intracellular water retention). No water retention = bunk product. If you're taking CEE and you think it increased your strength at all, I'd like to introduce you to a concept known as "placebo effect."
04-24-2008, 01:54 PM
creatine works, not for people with nat. high creatine levels but it works.
Also of the creatines u listed probably mono is the best gram for gram.
I think if you have to take more than 5g of a "super" creatine to see results then its no better than mono.
The creatine malate does add malic acid which helps atp, but gram for gram those are all basic creatines so u might as well go with the cheapest. For me I have to take 10g of mono to see any results but with the 10g a day come bloating so I dont use bulk mono.
04-24-2008, 05:28 PM
whats the best way to dose mono?
05-16-2008, 02:35 AM
05-16-2008, 02:38 AM
Five grams/ cycle......your body produces creatine naturally...just like anything else....you supplement it..your body reduces production.
05-19-2008, 12:05 AM
05-19-2008, 11:12 AM
creatine mono is the best and worked great for me. i tried cellmass did nothing for me.
06-10-2008, 11:43 PM
yeah i went with the creatine glucanate too. I just thought since i responded well to size on, ill buy crea gluc. in bulk from nutra. and see how it goes with some BA.
06-11-2008, 09:25 AM
whatever the NoxCG3 by Xyience is...that is what I respond to the best for some reason.
06-14-2008, 05:59 PM
But nothing works if you don't move the weights hard!!
Also, anyone thinking any supp will get you to look like the Mr. O ads in the mags.... lol... they are all on roids.
07-01-2008, 12:22 PM
ive tried bulk di-creatine malate, sizeon, & green mag... recently switched to beverly creatine select (mono + phosphates)
and a week into the mono it i hit a personal best on the my incline bench & t-bar rows...
07-01-2008, 01:01 PM
sounds pretty good to me. i tried creatine gluconate and i can say, it helped me out minimally. I was on it for maybe 1 month and strength gains all around were about 10 pounds. i ordered mono 3 days ago and I'm hoping to see better results. but as always, i believe the best strength gains ONLY come from the food that you eat (i.e A LOT).
07-01-2008, 08:52 PM
07-21-2008, 02:32 AM
MONO...AKG is some good ****e too!
09-06-2008, 12:29 PM
I always used Prolab Creatine which used Creapure Creatine and i think it was written on the label somewhere. The last one i bought i got minimal results, aside from stomach ache so i checked the label and there was nothing saying they use Creapure anymore so just make sure it is Creapure and it will be on the label if that's what they use.
After trying almost all other Creatines and different strategies on using them i got best results taking a heaping spoon of Creapure with a heaping spoon of BCAA's an hour or so before a workout and sip water constantly over the next few hours.
Combining it with simple sugars made it work quicker and i got a lot fuller but it also lead to an increase in waste size as well which isn't the look i'm after.
09-07-2008, 05:56 AM
I think I somewhat agree.. my best strength gains were on MONO..
09-08-2008, 04:37 PM
It seems clear that mono is the most favored, so what would you say is the best brand of mono. I've never tried mono other than on my off days from size on but want to give it a try. Size on works great for me but its a little pricey.
09-09-2008, 08:15 AM
09-09-2008, 04:05 PM
So is the prolabs micronized? If not is there a creatine that uses creapure that is. Non micronized gives me a stomach ache.
09-09-2008, 06:55 PM
I was looking for it in the ingredient listing. It should be printed there to though. Creapure is what a lot of people look for so i'd be putting it all over the place!!
09-10-2008, 12:08 AM
Size on did nothing for me that I could tell - definately not worth the price.
I've got some NeoVar recomp to try out, and if that's nothing flash then it's back to the tried and trusted mono
09-10-2008, 11:41 PM
09-10-2008, 11:44 PM
both the di's are pretty good for gaining size IMO
but my favorite is kre cuz in my experience my strength went through the roof
09-19-2008, 07:13 PM
i haven't tried krealk but of all of them I like DiCrMalate because it seems to work more efficiently ie you don't need to take as much and it gives me a wicked pump. Mono works but for me I need to load up major on the sht. It's not convenient in that sense. CEE had no major effect on me and tastes like sht.
09-19-2008, 07:20 PM
My opinion is old school creatine monohydrate works the best
11-10-2008, 12:45 AM
creatine monohydrate, has over 500 hundred peer reviewed, published studies to support it as an effective ergogenic aid. Take a guess how many published peer reviewed studies CEE has showing it effective? The answer, ZERO and little to nothing is known about its safety. Don't buy into pure marketing hype.
Similar Forum Threads
- By Palash in forum SupplementsReplies: 75Last Post: 06-23-2011, 07:34 PM
- By jsp0785 in forum SupplementsReplies: 41Last Post: 10-18-2008, 02:08 PM
- By hawks31 in forum SupplementsReplies: 15Last Post: 05-03-2008, 08:33 PM
- By bulls**t in forum NutraplanetReplies: 7Last Post: 12-20-2006, 01:11 PM
- By xtdot in forum SupplementsReplies: 7Last Post: 07-05-2006, 11:04 AM