Creatine Monohydrate vs "New and Improved" Creatine

A forum for anything related to nutritional supplementation including advice and reviews.

Moderators: Boss Man, cassiegose

Post Reply
User avatar
Kevsworld
ESTABLISHED MEMBER
Posts: 107
Joined: Thu May 14, 2009 10:08 am

Creatine Monohydrate vs "New and Improved" Creatine

Post by Kevsworld »

Creatine has become one of the most popular dietary supplements in the sports nutrition market. The form of creatine that has been most extensively studied and commonly used in dietary supplements is creatine monohydrate (CM). Studies have consistently indicated that CM supplementation increases muscle creatine and phosphocreatine concentrations by approximately 15-40%, enhances anaerobic exercise capacity, and increases training volume leading to greater gains in strength, power, and muscle mass. A number of potential therapeutic benefits have also been suggested in various clinical populations. Studies have indicated that CM is not degraded during normal digestion and that nearly 99% of orally ingested CM is either taken up by muscle or excreted in urine. Further, no medically significant side effects have been reported in literature. Nevertheless, supplement manufacturers have continually introduced newer forms of creatine into the marketplace. These newer forms have been purported to have better physical and chemical properties, bioavailability, efficacy, and/or safety profiles than CM. However, there is little to no evidence that any of the newer forms of creatine are more effective and/or safer than CM whether ingested alone and/or in combination with other nutrients. In addition, whereas the safety, efficacy, and regulatory status of CM is clearly defined in almost all global markets; the safety, efficacy, and regulatory status of other forms of creatine present in today's marketplace as a dietary or food supplement is less clear.
Quoted from: Analysis of the efficacy, safety, and regulatory status of novel forms of creatine (emphasis mine)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21424716" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Kevin,
http://strongandfit.net" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
User avatar
Boss Man
SITE ADMIN
Posts: 15458
Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 3:27 pm

Re: Creatine Monohydrate vs "New and Improved" Creatine

Post by Boss Man »

interesting.

Some years back when CEE was first introduced, some literature abounded saying that it was not proven to be 100% safe and also that it might not bypass gut enzymes, meaning the Esther bond could be stripped off, leaving you with something akin to a fancy Monohydrate.

This was then rumoured to have been put out by a Kre-alkalyn manufacturer, to scare people back onto Kre, because Kre had already been around for about 12 months or so, but this rumour being true was never proven; not to knowledge anyway.
Post Reply