Originally Posted by WillBrink

The Creatine Grave Yard
By Will Brink © 2009

Looks like another “high tech” form of creatine has got one foot planted firmly in the creatine grave yard. What is the creatine graveyard? It’s where forms of creatine - other then monohydrate - go when either science has shown them inferior to monohydrate, and or it’s life cycle of hype has come to and end.

I refer specifically to creatine ethyl ester (CEE). As with the many “high tech” forms of creatine before it, all manner of claims were/are made about how superior it is to creatine monohydrate (CM). It always starts the same. First the company will invent a long list of negatives about CM such as “poorly absorbed” or “causes bloat” or “is not stable” and then goes onto claim their form of creatine has solved all those invented negatives. The problem is, the data already shows CM does not suffer from virtually any of the negatives they invent, nor do they show their form “cures” those negatives. Sellers of CCE for example claimed CEE was better absorbed and utilized vs. CM, and that has been shown to be nonsense. There have been several in vitro (test tube) studies pointing to the fact CEE is inferior to CM, but a recent study done in humans puts a final nail in the coffin as far as I am concerned. This study is titled “The effects of creatine ethyl ester supplementation combined with heavy resistance training on body composition, muscle performance, and serum and muscle creatine levels” The full study is public access and can be read here:

Cont:

The Creatine Grave Yard | Brinkzone Blog

Originally Posted by nni

the recent study does debunk it as far as creatinine levels in the blood, but not performance. performance wise it was on par with mono with respect to strength and body composition. so either they both dont work, or they both do, you can just choose which parts of the study you will accept.

Originally Posted by Prince

I read the study, how are you going to explain all of the CM non-responders that respond to CEE? Placebo effect? Bullshit, I am a CM non-responder and CEE works for me, and there are MANY more bodybuilders that will make the same claim.

Originally Posted by WillBrink

Read what I said closely and or read the study, the placebo group had the same response. Thus, this study does not show its on par with CM, is shows CEE and CM were on par with placebo, likely due to using untrained subjects. I don't accept selective parts of studies and am clear what the drawbacks are.

Originally Posted by nni

i was talking more with respect to the study, i didnt read your report yet. but if it is addressed then it is responsible, i have seen at least 3 different self appointed authorities ignore that fact.

Originally Posted by KelJu

Well Fuck!

But wait, let me ask this. They didn't do a study of proven mono-hydrate non-responders tested to see if they benefited from CEE. That would be of interest to me.

Two groups of mono-hydrate non responders:
One group given mono
Another group given CEE.

I would love to know how those numbers would break down.

Originally Posted by KelJu

I bet the creatine serum levels would be higher in the CEE group.

Originally Posted by WillBrink

If you got the $$$$, I can make it happen



I would bet you $100, that would not be the case. It's less stable period, and leads to big increases in creatinine, not serum creatine or tissue creatine levels.

Originally Posted by KelJu

If you stop, you are going to ruin my god damn placebo!

Originally Posted by WillBrink

I can get you a bottle of this stuff real cheap:

Originally Posted by WillBrink

but anecdotal "it works for me" is not science. I have had people tell me that with great passion about Serum Creatine also, which we know does not work period.

Originally Posted by WillBrink

I can get you a bottle of this stuff real cheap:

Originally Posted by Prince

you're right its not science, but after 20 years of bodybuilding I am capable of tracking my own progress and discerning which supplements work for me and which ones do not.

Originally Posted by WillBrink

I'll take your 20 years and raise you 5 more, and there's nothing inherently wrong with experimentation and anecdotal reports, but it's not science. Objective info always trumps anecdotal reports and always should. n = 1 observation tells me nothing other then you think X does Y for you, which can't be separated from placebo, other variables not accounted for (new supps, change in diet, changes in training, drugs, etc, etc) which is why controlled objective research attempts to control for that and give us a true picture. There's a balance to be struck between data and "real world" experiences, and I can say for everyone who has claimed CEE did something, just as many didn't notice squat from it.

Originally Posted by Prince

science is not always right, and cannot explain everything.

Originally Posted by workhard1

I have never done CM before, but I do use CEE and within about 2 weeks of using the CEE I started to feel a lot better after workouts and my lifts began going up again after being at a plateau for about 2 months. I did not change my diet or training or anything, just simply started taking the CEE and started to see gains again. Does this prove CEE works? No, but it sure as hell makes me think it does.

Originally Posted by workhard1

Even if it was a placebo effect I would not care. If it is helping me I will continue to take it. However, I do not believe a placebo effect can all the sudden make you start lifting more.

I do believe there is still a lack of research out there. At this point I would say their argument that CEE is inferior when compared to CM is not much more than a hypothesis. When we see 3 or 4 other studies that support this claim maybe we can accept it as a legitimate theory, but until then I believe the verdict is still unknown

Originally Posted by strong

Ok WillBrink what do you think about kre-alkaline?

Originally Posted by strong

you say nothing about kre-alkalin

Originally Posted by WillBrink

Review: Kre-Alkalyn Buffered Creatine: Better Than Regular Creatine Monohydrate?

Originally Posted by WillBrink

This study does not prove CEE does not work. It shows CEE is inferior to CM in various respects. Even though CEE converts to creatinine, etc (see my report) it's also clear some still makes it to muscle tissue. Thus, CEE should still "work." Work as well as CM? Do the same thing for more $$$? The issue is not is CEE works, the issue is if CEE is superior to CM as claimed, which is clearly not the case.

Originally Posted by Ben dur

according to these studies
creatine monohydrate is stable in solution for much longer than originally thought

thoughts?

Originally Posted by Ben dur

---------back on topic-----------
when i take creatine mono i add weight
when

Originally Posted by Ben dur

i take cee i "dont bloat"

Originally Posted by Ben dur

but then my weight doesnt change significantly either

Originally Posted by AKIRA

Ok.


I am no scientist or bullshit artist. I am not a self-acclaimed specialist or bodybuilder. I am just a consumer with a weightlifting lifestyle that cannot deny strength numbers put down on paper after adding CEE to my regime.

Originally Posted by WillBrink

CM has always been known to be very stable. Again, read my report closely. Reports of it not being stable were invented marketing of those selling competing forms.



Which means it's working: increasing intra cellular water which is an anabolic stimulus and WHY people use creatine.




You never did bloat. You gain weight as you were supposed where you were supposed to. Again, invented marketing term of those competing with CM. Why would anyone take creatine in any form if they didn't want to gain weight in the form of intra (inside) cellular water which is an anabolic stimulus which = more muscle and more strength?



Which means, as expected, it didn't do what creatine is supposed to. It didn't work...

Originally Posted by Ben dur

i was just reinforcing the article with my personal experience

Originally Posted by AKIRA

Will, I have watched your vids and seen your input on Police related threads.

What exactly do you do ?

Originally Posted by PreMier

i like to err on the side of science.. and i will be the first to say that i get better results from CM, compared to CEE.

i respect the fact that people 'feel' somethings working, but its not proof. its like gopro with glutamine. he swears by it, but just because he 'feels' it working doesnt mean it is. 'yup, my baseline protein synthesis levels just returned to normal, this glutamine is miracle stuff!'.

if the studies are showing CM is more effective, then it probably is. im not going to deny however that CEE might be working better for some. there really is no such thing as absolutes

Originally Posted by Stewart14

I have been using CM for just about as long as I have been seriously lifting weights, so let's say that's close to 10 years now.

I have no fricken idea if the stuff is "working" or "not working" for me anymore! I never really did a "loading" phase, I would always just throw a teaspoon in my pre workout drink and another teaspoon in my post.

At this point, how would I know if it were working or not? My weight has been roughly the same give or take a few pounds for a couple of years now. Maybe initially I gained some weight from it, but I really don't remember if it was due to CM or not.

I just assume that it is just silently doing it's thing as far as workout capacity and strength goes, and I am not getting weight gain due to not loading properly.

I guess the only way to know for sure would be to stop taking it for a while and then restart it huh?

Originally Posted by Ngordyn

well seeing as how everyone seems to have different results id say it matters more on how your body specifically responds than what is "inferior"

if u respond to CEE and not to CM or KA then take CEE

personally i respond to kre-alkalyn rather well

and i say this with using CEE and CM under the exact same diet and exact same training routine and the exact same protein and multi-vitamin i experienced a faster rate of strength gains on KA

i do respect the study and realize for a general population it is probably better but there is NO WAY it is that way for everyone

after reading the study however i will now recommend people to start with CM and see if they respond or not , i do like science for general population i just don't rely on

Originally Posted by Ben dur

id like to slap you
but
maybe...

nothing is absolute

Originally Posted by WillBrink

The Creatine Grave Yard
By Will Brink © 2009

Looks like another “high tech” form of creatine has got one foot planted firmly in the creatine grave yard. What is the creatine graveyard? It’s where forms of creatine - other then monohydrate - go when either science has shown them inferior to monohydrate, and or it’s life cycle of hype has come to and end.

I refer specifically to creatine ethyl ester (CEE). As with the many “high tech” forms of creatine before it, all manner of claims were/are made about how superior it is to creatine monohydrate (CM). It always starts the same. First the company will invent a long list of negatives about CM such as “poorly absorbed” or “causes bloat” or “is not stable” and then goes onto claim their form of creatine has solved all those invented negatives. The problem is, the data already shows CM does not suffer from virtually any of the negatives they invent, nor do they show their form “cures” those negatives. Sellers of CCE for example claimed CEE was better absorbed and utilized vs. CM, and that has been shown to be nonsense. There have been several in vitro (test tube) studies pointing to the fact CEE is inferior to CM, but a recent study done in humans puts a final nail in the coffin as far as I am concerned. This study is titled “The effects of creatine ethyl ester supplementation combined with heavy resistance training on body composition, muscle performance, and serum and muscle creatine levels” The full study is public access and can be read here:

Cont:

The Creatine Grave Yard | Brinkzone Blog

Originally Posted by suprfast

Not to bring up an old thread(a month isnt so bad) but i keep reading on "RESULTS". What the hell should i be looking for.

Originally Posted by suprfast

Will, i respect what you are doing with Science. I completely understand what you are saying when reading your blog

Originally Posted by suprfast

Also, when non CM users switch to CEE what results are they having.

Originally Posted by suprfast

How do i know im a non responder to CM and a responder to CEE or vice versa.

Originally Posted by suprfast

Now is there a brand preference for CM, or will any old 100% CM be fine.

Originally Posted by suprfast

Im positive its mixing properly, but i mix it with my protein at two times.

Preworkout is 25g whey isolate(lactose intolerant, so i cant use any other whey), 25g oatmeal(complex carbs) with one teaspoon of regular old walmart / body fortress creatine monohydrate.

Post workout i take 25g whey isolate with one teaspoon of same CM. In a separate cup i mix 2tb powder gatorade with just water. Now i know it mixes perfectly because i mix the protein and CM with my vita-mix. ZERO CHUNKS(no not a plug for a vita-mix, just stating it cant mix any better than this).

Originally Posted by suprfast

Now is there a brand preference for CM, or will any old 100% CM be fine.

Originally Posted by jchappj

I'm interested in your opinion on this too Will as I've read only to use CREAPURE ® creatine.

Originally Posted by WillBrink

Long answer:

Creatine, do you know what chemicals you are eating? Click here!

Originally Posted by WillBrink

Creatine, do you know what chemicals you are eating? Click here!

Originally Posted by suprfast

I do agree, same red flags were going off.

Appeal to authority?

Originally Posted by bio-chem

loved the article, very informative. my problem is when the research is from an unknown source. I work in research and when you can't say what company did the research red flags go off everywhere for me. "a reputable company" then say the name. It lends legitimacy. Your reputation in my eyes is without question from what I've seen and read from you so far, but this seems to be a glaring weakness in the article.

Originally Posted by suprfast

Took this off the "creapure" website.



Looks like two brands here in the states are allowed.

PROLAB and OPTIMUM NUTRITION

Originally Posted by suprfast

I do agree, same red flags were going off.

Appeal to authority?

Originally Posted by WillBrink

Which authority? :-)

Originally Posted by WillBrink

And the reasons for not disclosing the company are given. I didn't disclose the name of the company that tested well either for some years, only recently disclosing the fact it was Creapure. For years I got letters and emails asking "What's the name of the German brand that tested so well Will?" and only 'till fairly recent was that info disclosed for both reasons mentioned in the article, and a few reasons that were not, but it does not take a rocket scientist to figure that out.

There are times when one can disclose a source, and times you can't, but I don't blame you for asking...

Originally Posted by bio-chem

let me get this right. this study is years old?

Originally Posted by bio-chem

has there been a follow up study to test where things are now? It's not too hard to imagine a scenario where Creapure is now the worst creatine out there.

Originally Posted by jchappj

Let's hope they don't buy the German company!! That would be the scenaro I could envision!!

Originally Posted by WillBrink

The Chinese have a history or poor quality control with supps in general

Originally Posted by Ben dur

i think its safe to say that MOST of the PRODUCT (not just sups) that come from china are subject to LOW QUALITY CONTROL

.

Originally Posted by suprfast

Will,
sorry to ask you so many questions but you are the creatine man.

Just ordered a big container of Optimum Nutrition micronized creatine "CREAPURE".

Approximately what should i dose and when? Before/after workout(or both). different time? 1t(5g) twice or just once, or smaller.

Thanks
kris

Originally Posted by Dale Mabry

What about Kre-Alkalyn?