Guest viewing limit reached
  • You have reached the maximum number of guest views allowed
  • Please register below to remove this limitation

Creatine phosphate vs creatine monohydrate

u_e_s_i

u_e_s_i

Well-known member
Ive come across some recommendation for creatine phosphate.

Which is better, creatine phosphate or creatine monohydrate?
 
I think I’ve heard that creatine phosphate essentially doesn’t absorb. The body absorbs free creatine and binds it to phosphate groups within the cell.
 
Creatine Monohydrate has been well studied versus others and it has always come out on top, and it's cheap.
 
I’d stick with monohydrate until more research is done. I’m fully saturated right now going on almost 3 weeks and I’m still breaking PR’s and I’m on my pct right now.
 
Mono is obviously more reliable and cheaper.

But if you are like me and can't take it without bathroom issues of the watery kind, i would recommend a blend of others forms.

I'm using Green Magnitude from Controlled Labs and i am really satisfied (dicreatine malate and magnesium creatine chelate). Effective, packed with betaine which is also a staple and taurine + L-tyrosine, and not causing any digestion trouble.

For this package the cost per serving is absurdly low.
 
Creatine monohydrate, 3-5g a day, every day, no loading, no cycling, any beverage, any time of day. Done.

Effective, proven, cheap, simple.

Chamaan said:
Mono is obviously more reliable and cheaper.

But if you are like me and can't take it without bathroom issues of the watery kind, i would recommend a blend of others forms.

I'm using Green Magnitude from Controlled Labs and i am really satisfied (dicreatine malate and magnesium creatine chelate). Effective, packed with betaine which is also a staple and taurine + L-tyrosine, and not causing any digestion trouble.

For this package the cost per serving is absurdly low.
Click to expand...

For the unfortunate few who get GI distress from reasonable (remember, no loading) doses of monohydrate, there are options like Green Magnitude, which should come with some other stuff as well (such as the betaine in Green Mag, etc).
 
at this point I wouldn't even worry about comparing anything to monohydrate....it's cheap, it gets you to 100% saturation...it's not like mono only works to a certain extent and then stops....nope it does exactly what you want, just get some mono for cheap and it's one less thing you need to worry about when it comes to supplementation
 
justhere4comm said:
Creatine Monohydrate has been well studied versus others and it has always come out on top, and it's cheap.
Click to expand...

This. It's proven to be effect and is cheap so win win.
 
Chamaan said:
Mono is obviously more reliable and cheaper.

But if you are like me and can't take it without bathroom issues of the watery kind, i would recommend a blend of others forms.

I'm using Green Magnitude from Controlled Labs and i am really satisfied (dicreatine malate and magnesium creatine chelate). Effective, packed with betaine which is also a staple and taurine + L-tyrosine, and not causing any digestion trouble.

For this package the cost per serving is absurdly low.
Click to expand...

I know some guys who is MCC or HCI because of GI problems. If that’s not the issue I would definitely stick with plain ol’ monohydrate. I’ve used SEVERAL tubs of green mag in the past, excellent product! Their grape wrath eaa is my go to because it has betaine in it as well!

OP if you fall in that small % of ppl who have that issue SNS has other options of creatine other than monohydrate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top