? is it good for u?
wat's creatine
- Thread starter Azn_Drag0n
- Start date
So far creatin has not been proved to increase performance, especially when eaten since most of it is metabolized.
Though a study reported that anabolic steroids are found in most of creatin products for sale... which may explain why it seems to work well. No need to say that such information is never written on creatin boxes.
Though a study reported that anabolic steroids are found in most of creatin products for sale... which may explain why it seems to work well. No need to say that such information is never written on creatin boxes.
Hi all
I now this kind of news is pretty worrying, though enhancing performance products companies lobby is powerful and those studies are often kept confidential
a quick search gave me that link :
This is only a study, but believe me there are several more of them, often keep unpubished...
I now this kind of news is pretty worrying, though enhancing performance products companies lobby is powerful and those studies are often kept confidential
a quick search gave me that link :
This is only a study, but believe me there are several more of them, often keep unpubished...
this says one total creatine product and it looks like its Scandinavian.
this is not worrying at all, it shows that if one deals with shady companies you get what you pay for. the company muscletech was doing this sort of thing with their protein product a few years ago. the dietary supplement industry does have power here in the USA
wheres your one for not increasing performance?
this is not worrying at all, it shows that if one deals with shady companies you get what you pay for. the company muscletech was doing this sort of thing with their protein product a few years ago. the dietary supplement industry does have power here in the USA
wheres your one for not increasing performance?
here is one concerning creatine and performance
though there is a full debate background to get about these topics, presence or not of steroids in creatine products and creatine improving performances. The debate lasts for several years and one summary of one study is not representative of the whole thing over years.
as I said before all the information about that is not published.
though there is a full debate background to get about these topics, presence or not of steroids in creatine products and creatine improving performances. The debate lasts for several years and one summary of one study is not representative of the whole thing over years.
as I said before all the information about that is not published.
The_FD said:
This is one says nothing pertaining to not increasing performance by any means, hence the word 'unambiguous' in the first sentence.
Also, the first source you listed notes "one (1)" creatine product had traces. Today any company can 'create' any study as they wish and make it the truth. And, like abear said, this only gives concrete evidence to customers that it is indeed beneficial to buy from reputable companies.
indeed AJP, you got it
the fact that companies can make the truth is the problem. They can even pay for studies not to be published when they do not like the results. The most powerful is a company the most it can make its own truth
As I said before I am not going to put all the debate and an exhaustive literature review in here, that's not the right place. I just gave a link. But you can search by yourself if interested and you'll see how the debate is going
the fact that companies can make the truth is the problem. They can even pay for studies not to be published when they do not like the results. The most powerful is a company the most it can make its own truth
As I said before I am not going to put all the debate and an exhaustive literature review in here, that's not the right place. I just gave a link. But you can search by yourself if interested and you'll see how the debate is going
Different countries have different guidelines and regulations for products that get approved. The US is fairly tight and I am from Canada where it is even more strict. Any product containing any trace amounts of steroids would not be allowed in Canada for sale. Bottom line.
Can studies be swayed or influenced by large companies, yes, I agree with you 100%, that is why reading 1 article from 1 source is never the best answer. Many of the guys on the boards here have a ton of sources that can be utilized to gather an informed decision. I always try to find a minimum of 2-3 articles (not from companies that make the stuff) to find a base opinion on something. From there you can start to form an opinion of your own, dig deeper and see what you can find.
Can studies be swayed or influenced by large companies, yes, I agree with you 100%, that is why reading 1 article from 1 source is never the best answer. Many of the guys on the boards here have a ton of sources that can be utilized to gather an informed decision. I always try to find a minimum of 2-3 articles (not from companies that make the stuff) to find a base opinion on something. From there you can start to form an opinion of your own, dig deeper and see what you can find.
you can link "related links" in that post and find many studies on the benefits of creatine. dont know where you're getting this "several years" stuff at. fact of the matter is that each month more and more evidence comes about in support of creatine use. they're even using it to treat concussions and other treatments with the brain and even the heart.The_FD said:
i dont know who you're getting your information from but maybe you should look into ppl like roger harris, jeff volek, will brink, etc just to name a few.
European contries often package creatine with the same machines they package pro-hormones with. This has caused more than one olympic athlete to test positive for banned substances.
However, that is a far cry from the bullsh*t claims that The_FD is making. Creatine has been studied more extensively than any other sports supplement...even more than protein powders. Creatine increases your ability to use energy to power muscles, and thus IS a performance increase...just not beyond what your body could optimally do...hence why its not a banned substance (aside from teh fact that its yet to be proven harmful).
Stick to real facts or shut up.
However, that is a far cry from the bullsh*t claims that The_FD is making. Creatine has been studied more extensively than any other sports supplement...even more than protein powders. Creatine increases your ability to use energy to power muscles, and thus IS a performance increase...just not beyond what your body could optimally do...hence why its not a banned substance (aside from teh fact that its yet to be proven harmful).
Stick to real facts or shut up.
and what are real facts?
I just noted I am the only one who provided any links to support my ideas... moreover links from independant research labs, published in international scientific reviews
I am not going to go through the whole literature review, but there are labs which are working for so long about Cr matters. here are another two links
I am wondering how many of you went to the library and read those article in full text...
ps: And Cr may not be a banned substance in the states but it is in some other countries.
I just noted I am the only one who provided any links to support my ideas... moreover links from independant research labs, published in international scientific reviews
I am not going to go through the whole literature review, but there are labs which are working for so long about Cr matters. here are another two links
I am wondering how many of you went to the library and read those article in full text...
ps: And Cr may not be a banned substance in the states but it is in some other countries.
this has been published in "Sportscience Training & Technology". I never heard of it so far as listed in the impact factor list of scientific reviews ( ).
And apparently you did not check how many studies were listed as reference in the papers I gave the link earlier.
By the way I am not going to change the site I am using to provide info since it is the one that indexes the most scientific reviews, sorry if you have to pay to get the best info, that's life (or just go to a library that as a subscription).
And apparently you did not check how many studies were listed as reference in the papers I gave the link earlier.
By the way I am not going to change the site I am using to provide info since it is the one that indexes the most scientific reviews, sorry if you have to pay to get the best info, that's life (or just go to a library that as a subscription).
And did any of you read the papers I pointed out? tougher than reading any of the messages written in this thread...
I am sorry you guys don't know pubmed more, it is not only one source
. Here are the journals recorded in pubmeb
It is the most used tools used by people doing research when they need to go through the literature.
The illegitimitate point of view I am trying to make is just based on rational study critics: double blind studies? what kind of supplemantation, for how long? what kind of training along with? technique of data recording? Any study on directly on tissue and not global body, any biomolecular analyses?... and so forth
I am open to criticics but with people that are able to give valuable arguments, not just what they think.
good bye
I am sorry you guys don't know pubmed more, it is not only one source
. Here are the journals recorded in pubmeb It is the most used tools used by people doing research when they need to go through the literature.
The illegitimitate point of view I am trying to make is just based on rational study critics: double blind studies? what kind of supplemantation, for how long? what kind of training along with? technique of data recording? Any study on directly on tissue and not global body, any biomolecular analyses?... and so forth
I am open to criticics but with people that are able to give valuable arguments, not just what they think.
good bye