Creatine HCL may work better BUT only at equal doses to Monohydrate

[EricMM]

In this latest study, they compared the effects of Creatine HCL vs. Creatine Monohydrate and in this study the Creatine HCL was the clear winner! Before you run out and grab a bottle of Creatine HCL realize that it's ONLY effective at EQUAL doses to Creatine monohydrate, so these products that do "micro dosing" are ineffective and just plain WRONG IMHO.

Creatine monohydrate is well studied, but it doesn't mean that it's the best form of creatine. Creatine Malate and Creatine HCL could be viable alternatives to creatine monohydrate but only at the same dose level. It's more than possible that you need a larger dose of creatine monohydrate to creatine HCL, but there is a minimum dose required to see an effect.

ABSTRACT
Background: Creatine supplementation is a subject that is very well studied. New forms of creatine are suggesting improvements in this supplement performance. Creatine HCl is supposed to have better solubility and absorption than creatine. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of two different doses of creatine HCl with creatine monohydrate on the strength and body composition in recreational weightlifters and to verify the relationship between strength and body composition. Methods: 40 subjects were divided in four groups: Creatine Monohydrate (CMG) 5 g/daily; Creatine HCl-1 (HCl-1) 5 g/daily, Creatine HCl-2 (HCl-2) 1.5 g/daily and Control group (CG) = 5 g of resistant starch/daily. All groups performed a resistance training program during 4 weeks. Body composition and strength were evaluated pre and post intervention. Results: The 1 RM at the Leg press was increased significantly in all groups (CMG: pre = 264.4 ± 83.8 × post = 298.1 ± 90.9; HCl-1: pre = 295.0 ± 88.3 × post = 338.3 ± 86.8 and HCl-2: pre = 274.3 ± 57.1 × post = 305.7 ± 59.4; p< 0.05), Bench press 1 RM was increased significantly only in HCl-2 (pre = 72.4 ± 25.7 × post = 76.0 ± 25.0; p = 0.003), however, there was no statistically significant difference between groups. Fatmass was significantly decreased in HCl-1 (pre = 14.5 ± 8.0 × post = 13.3 ± 8.3; p = 0.034) and HCl-2 (pre = 13.8 ± 5.8 × post = 12.7 ± 5.6; p = 0.005) but fat-free mass was increased only in HCl-1 (pre = 52.2 ± 8.9 × post = 53.8 ± 8.9; p = 0.031), with no differences between groups again. We observed strong correlations between upper limb strength and fat mass (r = 0.93, p < 0.05), and between lower limb strength and FFM (r = 0.93, p < 0.05) only in HCl-1 group. Conclusions: We concluded that creatine HCl and creatine Monohydrate improve performance but only creatine HCl induces changes on body composition in recreational weightlifters with differences between creatine HCl doses.

 

[jakz]

Agreed. When HCL first came out I tried it, 1.8g a day. No effect, so I used mono.

Got some HCL for free and just amped it up to 5g a day and it did everything mono did, but I did not get those "water pimples". Price wise it's not worth it though, I'll stay with mono.

 

[MARK_]

So monohydrate group improved performance and the hcl group improved performance and body composition? Is that the difference?

 

[EricMM]

Yes Sir! Pretty important difference if you ask me! Creatine Monohydrate is probably really good for you but isn't the ergogenic aid everyone believes unless you take high doses (10g or higher per day).

Looks like I was wrong and the HCL is more bioavailable in cells. I am looking into whether it's the HCL that does the work here for body composition. We are not seeing this effect from Creatine Malate, which is every bit as soluble as HCL in water from what I see.

 

[EricMM]

HOW HCL AFFECTS YOUR HEALTH

A hydrochloric acid deficiency (lack of adequate HCL) can have many consequences and has been associated with the following:

Malnutrition – reduction of absorption of nutrients from foods
Iron deficiency anemia, owing to poor iron absorption
Osteoporosis, resulting in part from decreased calcium absorption
Periodontal disease – receding gums
General allergies and food allergies
Leaky gut syndrome
B12 deficiency
Gallstone risk – more than half the people with gallstones show decreased HCL secretion compared with gallstone-free patients
Diabetes – elevated blood sugar
Impaired tissue repair
Skin problems – eczema, psoriasis, seborrheic dermatitis, vitiligo
Increased number of bacteria, yeasts, and parasites growing in the intestines
Lowered pancreatic secretion – which contains the majority of enzymes that actively break down foods, which then further contributes to poor assimilation and nutritional problems
Heartburn and acid reflux (commonly thought to be due to too much stomach acid and if there isn’t enough stomach acid the valve that closes the end of the esophagus at the stomach won’t close properly)
Ulcer formation – lack of protection from infectious agents such as H. Pylori
Rapid aging – HCL is necessary for restoring cellular methylation reserves
Fermentation and putrefaction
Reduced liver function
Reduced oxidation of lactic acid
Reduced white blood cell activity
Retention of carbon dioxide
Bloating, belching, and flatulence immediately after meals
Indigestion – heavy feeling in the stomach
Candida
Upset stomach
Nausea

 

[Robert5891]

Gotta link to the study?

 

[jakz]

I get my body recomp from AAS use. I like ze strength, endurance and fullness from mono.

If I did not use AAS I would opt for HCL.

 

[EricMM]

https://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?Paper****62283

 

[muscleupcrohn]

Yes Sir! Pretty important difference if you ask me! Creatine Monohydrate is probably really good for you but isn't the ergogenic aid everyone believes unless you take high doses (10g or higher per day).

Looks like I was wrong and the HCL is more bioavailable in cells. I am looking into whether it's the HCL that does the work here for body composition. We are not seeing this effect from Creatine Malate, which is every bit as soluble as HCL in water from what I see.

On what are you basing your claim that creatine monohydrate is not ergogenic? It increased performance; that is literally the definition of ergogenic. You also do not need 10g per day; it will just “load” or “reach saturation” faster with a “loading phase.” 5g/day is more than enough to reach and maintain saturation, it just may take a few weeks longer.

 

[EricMM]

On what are you basing your claim that creatine monohydrate is not ergogenic? It increased performance; that is literally the definition of ergogenic. You also do not need 10g per day; it will just “load” or “reach saturation” faster with a “loading phase.” 5g/day is more than enough to reach and maintain saturation, it just may take a few weeks longer.

I meant anabolic. Thanks for the correction.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

I meant anabolic. Thanks for the correction.

Ok. I suppose you’re talking about the lack of effects on body composition in the study you referenced? I will have to go back and look through the entirety of the research on creatine, but I think it may be a case of the total amount of creatine monohydrate ingested (4 weeks of 5g/day with no loading phase seems to be relatively close to when saturation would occur) not being enough to yield effects on body composition. Perhaps if they had employed a loading phase (to reach saturation faster), or continued the study longer (to have some time at saturation), effects would have been noted. Perhaps this is not so much a case of HCL being “better” than monohydrate, but just reaching that key saturation faster, and therefore producing favorable effects on body composition faster (i.e. in the 4 week timeframe of the study). I’ll have to go back and check though.

 

[EricMM]

Yeah, but strange that the HCL didn't have this issue.

 

[muscleupcrohn]

Yeah, but strange that the HCL didn't have this issue.

What is strange about it? I wouldn’t say it’s an “issue.” HCL is believed to be more “available,” or “efficient.” If this is true, then an equal dose to monohydrate would lead to reaching saturation quicker.

There are numerous studies showing that creatine monohydrate can benefit body composition, some just tend to be a little longer in duration and/or used a loading phase.

 

[EricMM]

What's odd is that there are lots of studies showing a 98% bioavailability for creatine monohydrate and that water solubility wouldn't seem to make that much of a difference. I am wondering if the HCL is offering some additional benefit.