which form of creatine is best?
- 04-10-2008, 02:39 PM
- 04-10-2008, 04:06 PM
04-10-2008, 04:07 PM
04-10-2008, 04:24 PM
04-10-2008, 11:29 PM
Ester creatine is bad for the kidneys. I have never been let down by monohydrate.
The LORD is my rock, my fortress, and my savior; my God is my rock, in whom I find protection. He is my shield, the power that saves me, and my place of safety.-Psalm 18:2
04-11-2008, 12:03 AM
i liike ethyl ester and i would say best bang for your buck would be crealean2 everybody has their on own opinion
04-11-2008, 01:41 AM
I like DiM-C and Mono combined. This works best for me. CEE is a waste of time, IMO. People complain about bloat with Mono, but luckily I have not had this side.
04-11-2008, 02:01 AM
04-11-2008, 05:48 AM
04-11-2008, 05:52 AM
04-11-2008, 07:03 AM
I'd say Creatine mono. Used to take the caps then got the powder and just mix it with water. Powder doesn't seem to disolve properly though, even if i put a little more water than recommended there still seems to be a little bit of powder at the bottom of the glass.
Worth going back onto the capsules?
04-11-2008, 10:40 AM
04-11-2008, 06:13 PM
04-11-2008, 08:18 PM
I find they are good at different things. Creatine Mono definitely gives the biggest size advantage for me b/c I retain quite a bit of water while on it and get VERY good strength gains. I find the CEE and Tricreatine-Malate didn't give me quite as good as strength gains as mono, but I retained far less water weight. I like mono during my winter months when bulking and such. Then a less water retaining one like CEE or Malate when I want to look less bloaty.
Just my .02
I voted Mono in the poll though.
04-12-2008, 01:42 AM
Tri-Creatine di-methyl-malate-ester-gluconate I heard is the best one to take.
or maybe just monohydrate.
04-12-2008, 02:02 AM
04-12-2008, 07:58 AM
04-12-2008, 08:01 AM
04-12-2008, 01:44 PM
04-12-2008, 01:54 PM
I like CEE too because mono makes me nauseous as well as bloat,
but I have a feeling that the reduction in sides from CEE is flat out because CEE is less effective. Somewhere here on the boards, an independant study was finally posted on mono vs CEE claiming CEE was only 60something % as effective.
04-14-2008, 09:16 AM
04-14-2008, 09:44 AM
Ok, how the hell can any of these other versions of creatine be 'better' when they all originate from creatine monohydrate with some kind of weird attachment ?
04-14-2008, 10:04 AM
04-14-2008, 02:15 PM
04-14-2008, 02:17 PM
04-14-2008, 02:19 PM
04-14-2008, 02:28 PM
04-14-2008, 02:43 PM
dicreatine malate gets my vote out of those listed, but you cant go wrong with c-mono due to the years of studies backing it.
I've responded to very low dosed kre alk (1.5g/day) and have used magnesium creatine many times in good products (Green mag, nos ether, etc)
04-14-2008, 07:05 PM
04-15-2008, 09:02 AM
Well maybe, just maybe creatine is a little over hyped. But I know I have seen guys move hUUge weights taking just creatine. Some benching as high as 225 and for reps to boot. That cant be hype
Similar Forum Threads
- By Palash in forum SupplementsReplies: 75Last Post: 06-23-2011, 08:34 PM
- By jsp0785 in forum SupplementsReplies: 41Last Post: 10-18-2008, 03:08 PM
- By hawks31 in forum SupplementsReplies: 15Last Post: 05-03-2008, 09:33 PM
- By bulls**t in forum NutraplanetReplies: 7Last Post: 12-20-2006, 02:11 PM
- By xtdot in forum SupplementsReplies: 7Last Post: 07-05-2006, 12:04 PM