Despite 500+ studies supporting creatine’s safety & efficacy, myths persist. Basic Supplements cuts through the noise with high-quality, thoroughly tested creatine products backed by science, not hype.
Despite being one of the most extensively researched supplements in the industry with over 500 peer-reviewed studies supporting its efficacy and safety, creatine remains surrounded by persistent myths and misconceptions. As highlighted in a recent International Society of Sports Nutrition’s (ISSN) press release, creatine is “safe, beneficial throughout the lifespan, and should not be restricted”[1] – yet confusion about this fundamental supplement continues to circulate.
At Basic Supplements, the mission has always been straightforward: cut through the noise and deliver high-quality, science-backed essentials without unnecessary hype or inflated claims. This isn’t just marketing talk — it’s demonstrated through their comprehensive third-party lab testing and commitment to using premium ingredients like Glanbia proteins.
Creatine: Sticking to the Thoroughly-Vetted Science
This same commitment to science and quality extends to their approach to creatine, which is found in a couple of their formulas, including Basic PRE and a standalone creatine product in their Basic Essentials lineup. With so much misinformation circulating online about this well-studied ingredient, it’s time to get back to the basics and separate fact from fiction.
In this article, we’ll address the most common creatine myths, backed by scientific research and the latest findings from the ISSN. We’ll also show how Basic Supplements’ transparent approach to formulation and testing—including their industry-leading standards for heavy metals testing—ensures you’re getting pure, effective creatine in every serving.
Before getting into it, check our deals on Basic Creatine and sign up for our Basic News alerts:
Basic Supplements – Deals and Price Drop Alerts
Get Price Alerts
No spam, no scams.
Disclosure: PricePlow relies on pricing from stores with which we have a business relationship. We work hard to keep pricing current, but you may find a better offer.
Posts are sponsored in part by the retailers and/or brands listed on this page.
This area is reserved for Team PricePlow's upcoming Research Study video.
Subscribe to our channel and sign up for notifications so you catch it when it goes live!
This article leverages the work of many studies, with special attention given to the ISSN’s peer-reviewed article on Common Questions and Misconceptions[2] alongside their position stand[3] and a critical review comparing various forms of creatine.[4]
Myth #1: “Creatine Causes Water Retention and Bloating”
One of the most persistent myths surrounding creatine supplementation is that it often causes significant water retention and bloating. While there is a kernel of truth that forms the basis of this misconception, the complete scientific picture tells a more nuanced story.
The Origin of the Myth
This belief likely originated from early research showing that short-term creatine loading (20 g/day for 5-7 days) can temporarily increase total body water. For example, studies in the 1990s demonstrated that during initial supplementation, some individuals experience a modest increase in body mass, primarily attributed to water retention.[5]
Creatine is an osmotically active substance, meaning it can draw water into cells. When you first begin supplementing, creatine concentration increases within muscle cells, potentially drawing additional water into those cells. This intracellular fluid increase might contribute to the initial weight gain commonly reported during the first week of supplementation.[5] However, this normalizes over time, and the dose does matter.
What the Science Actually Shows
Research has conclusively demonstrated that while creatine may cause a short-term increase in body water, this effect:
- Is primarily intracellular: The fluid is drawn into muscle cells rather than causing subcutaneous water retention (visible bloating).[6]
- Stabilizes over time: Multiple studies examining long-term creatine supplementation (5-10 weeks) show that total body water levels normalize during continued use.[7]
- Maintains proper water distribution: Research by Powers et al. found that creatine supplementation did not alter the ratio of intracellular to extracellular water despite increasing total body water.[5]
- Maintains proper muscle-to-water ratio: A 2019 study found that when combined with resistance training, the ratio of skeletal muscle mass to intracellular water remained similar between creatine and placebo groups, suggesting the increased water is proportional to muscle gains.[8]
The Practical Reality
This graph compares total muscle creatine stores across different dietary and supplementation strategies. The data demonstrates how vegetarians typically have lower baseline creatine levels, while supplementation—especially when combined with carbohydrates and protein—significantly increases muscle creatine concentration, explaining why both loading and maintenance protocols can be effective for different supplementation goals.[3]
For most people, any initial water retention from creatine supplementation is minimal, not visually noticeable, and primarily confined within muscle cells rather than under the skin. The modest 1-2 pound weight gain sometimes experienced in the first week actually represents a beneficial effect: the increased cellular hydration may contribute to protein synthesis and potentially enhanced performance.
In summary, while creatine may cause a modest, temporary increase in body water during initial supplementation, this effect is largely intracellular, stabilizes with continued use, and doesn’t cause the type of subcutaneous bloating that many incorrectly associate with creatine use. The scientific consensus indicates that for most individuals following recommended dosing protocols, significant “bloating” is not a legitimate concern when supplementing with creatine.
Myth #2: “Creatine is an Anabolic Steroid”
Perhaps the most ridiculously unfounded yet damaging misconceptions about creatine supplementation is the belief that it’s an “anabolic steroid” or similar to hormone-based performance-enhancing drugs. This myth likely stems from creatine’s well-documented effects on muscle mass and performance, combined with the mainstream media’s scare tactics and a wholesale general lack of understanding about its chemical structure and mechanism of action
Understanding Creatine’s Chemistry and Classification
This diagram illustrates how creatine is naturally synthesized in the body from amino acids arginine and glycine, then converted to phosphocreatine and eventually to creatinine. Far from being a synthetic steroid, creatine is a naturally-occurring compound produced through normal metabolic processes, debunking the myth that it’s an anabolic steroid.[3]
Creatine (methylguanidine-acetic acid) is a naturally occurring compound that’s synthesized endogenously from the amino acids arginine, glycine, and methionine in the kidneys and liver. It’s also consumed through dietary sources, primarily meat and fish.[9]
In stark contrast, anabolic steroids are synthetic versions of testosterone, a hormone that produces distinctly different effects on the body through entirely different mechanisms. While both substances can potentially enhance muscle mass, the similarities end there.
From a regulatory standpoint, the distinction couldn’t be clearer:
- Anabolic steroids are classified as Schedule III controlled substances regulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and subject to the Controlled Substances Act provisions enforced by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). Possession without a prescription is illegal.[2]
- Creatine is categorized as a dietary supplement under the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 (“DSHEA”) and regulated by the FDA for Good Manufacturing Practices. It’s legally available over-the-counter without restrictions.[2]
This illustration shows how creatine (Cr) functions within cells to facilitate energy production and transfer. The diagram demonstrates creatine’s role in recycling ATP (the body’s energy currency) through the phosphocreatine (PCr) system, highlighting how creatine supports energy availability during high-intensity exercise through fundamentally different mechanisms than anabolic steroids.[3]
Fundamentally Different Mechanisms
The confusion becomes even more unfounded when examining how these substances work:
- Anabolic steroids enter the muscle cell, bind with intracellular androgen receptors, and increase the expression of muscle-specific genes, directly affecting muscle protein synthesis.[10]
- Creatine is converted to phosphocreatine and regulated by creatine kinase in muscle to create intracellular ATP production. It essentially enhances energy availability during high-intensity exercise, which can subsequently contribute to greater training volume and adaptations over time.[3]
The Bottom Line
The evidence is unequivocal: creatine is not an anabolic steroid. It has a completely different chemical structure, works through different physiological pathways, and is regulated differently by government agencies. Creatine is a naturally occurring compound found in the human body and in various foods, particularly meat and fish. It represents one of the most thoroughly researched and safely used nutritional supplements available today.
This persistent misconception unfortunately dissuades some individuals from using a safe, effective supplement due to unfounded fears about its legal status or potential side effects. Understanding the fundamental differences between creatine and anabolic steroids is essential for making informed decisions about supplementation strategies.
The detailed cross-section of a mitochondrial membrane shows creatine kinase (mtCK) in action, revealing how creatine participates in cellular energy management at the subcellular level. This mechanism helps explain why creatine enhances performance—by facilitating efficient energy transfer within muscle cells rather than causing water retention or bloating as commonly misunderstood.[3]
Long story short, anyone who calls creatine — a simple molecule used by the body to store energy and phosphate for cells — a steroid, is a fundamentally unserious person who has absolutely zero credibility in any health, nutrition, or fitness matter, full stop. They have negative credibility, in fact.
Myth #3: “Creatine Damages Kidneys and Causes Renal Dysfunction”
The concern that creatine supplementation leads to kidney damage or renal dysfunction remains one of the most persistent and potentially harmful myths in sports nutrition. This misconception may deter many from using a safe and effective supplement based on unfounded fears.
Origin of the Kidney Damage Myth
This widespread concern likely stems from two primary sources:
- Confusion about creatine metabolism: Creatine and its metabolite creatinine are filtered by the kidneys and excreted in urine. Since elevated blood creatinine is used as a marker of kidney dysfunction, some incorrectly assumed that creatine supplementation might stress or damage the kidneys.[11]
- A single case study from 1998: Perhaps the most influential source of this myth was a case report published in The Lancet involving a young male with pre-existing kidney disease who showed apparent deterioration in kidney function while taking creatine.[12] This single case report, despite its significant limitations, gained considerable attention and helped cement the kidney damage myth in popular consciousness.
Panel A illustrates the chemical process by which creatine naturally degrades to creatinine through cyclization, losing a water molecule. Panel B shows stability at different pH levels over time, demonstrating that creatine remains stable at neutral pH but degrades more rapidly in acidic environments. This chemistry helps explain why claims about kidney damage are unfounded—creatinine formation is a natural metabolic process unrelated to kidney function.[4]
What many don’t realize is that this case study had serious flaws. The patient already had kidney disease for 8 years and was being treated with a potentially nephrotoxic medication (cyclosporine). The authors also overlooked the fact that creatine supplementation naturally increases blood creatinine without affecting actual kidney function.[2]
What the Science Actually Shows
In response to concerns about renal health, numerous well-designed studies have specifically examined creatine’s effect on kidney function:
- Short-term studies: Multiple investigations found no adverse effects on renal function from creatine loading protocols (up to 20g/day).[13]
- Long-term studies: Research examining the effects of creatine supplementation lasting from several months to years has consistently demonstrated no detrimental effects on kidney function in healthy individuals.[14]
- Clinical populations: Even studies involving individuals with type 2 diabetes, a population at increased risk for kidney issues, found no adverse effects of creatine supplementation on renal function.[15]
The scientific consensus from multiple systematic reviews and meta-analyses is clear: creatine supplementation at recommended doses does not adversely affect kidney function in individuals with healthy kidneys.[16]
The Bottom Line
This comprehensive table summarizes eight controlled studies examining creatine’s effects on hydration and temperature regulation across diverse populations and exercise conditions. The consistent findings across different research protocols show creatine doesn’t impair hydration or increase heat stress. Several studies actually demonstrate beneficial effects, providing strong evidence against the notion that creatine causes dehydration or cramping.[17]
After nearly three decades of research, including numerous randomized controlled trials specifically investigating kidney function, the evidence overwhelmingly indicates that creatine supplementation does not impair renal function in healthy individuals following recommended dosing protocols. If anything, this myth represents a case study in how a single, flawed case report can generate a persistent misconception that contradicts the weight of scientific evidence.
Just because creatine’s metabolite is creatinine, and creatinine is used as a renal function biomarker, does not mean that there is a connection between creatine use and renal function.
As with any supplement, individuals with pre-existing kidney disease should consult with their physician before beginning creatine supplementation. However, for healthy individuals, concerns about kidney damage from creatine use are not supported by the extensive body of scientific research available today.
Myth #4: “Creatine Causes Hair Loss/Baldness”
The claim that creatine supplementation causes hair loss or accelerates baldness is a relatively newer myth compared to others, but one that gained traction in the late 2010s, especially among younger men concerned about their hairline. This misconception stems primarily from a single study that has been widely misinterpreted.
Origin of the Hair Loss Myth
The concern about creatine and hair loss can be traced to a 2009 study by van der Merwe et al., which found that college-aged rugby players who supplemented with creatine (25g/day for 7 days, followed by 5g/day for 14 days) experienced an increase in dihydrotestosterone (DHT) levels – approximately 56% after the 7-day loading phase and 40% above baseline after the maintenance period.[18]
Basic Supplements has shared their lab tests, raising the bar for transparency in the supplement industry. They just released comprehensive Dyad Labs test results showing their products not only meet but often exceed label claims.
Since DHT is sometimes (but certainly not always) associated with male pattern baldness in genetically predisposed individuals, this single study sparked concerns about creatine potentially accelerating hair loss. However, several critical points about this study are often overlooked:
- The study did not assess or report any actual hair loss among participants
- The increase in DHT, while statistically significant, remained well within normal clinical ranges
- Total testosterone levels did not increase in the participants
- This finding has not been replicated in subsequent research
- DHT does not cause hair loss in the first place – modern research is strongly challenging this assumption.[19]
What the Science Actually Shows
The scientific evidence regarding creatine and hair loss is characterized by:
- Lack of replication: Despite numerous studies examining the hormonal effects of creatine supplementation, the finding of increased DHT has not been reproduced.[2]
- Normal hormone levels: In the original study, despite the percentage increase in DHT, the absolute values remained within normal clinical ranges.[2]
- No direct evidence: To date, no study has demonstrated or reported actual hair loss or acceleration of male pattern baldness from creatine supplementation.[3]
- Inconsistent findings on testosterone: Across 12 other studies investigating creatine’s effects on testosterone levels, only two reported small, physiologically insignificant increases, while ten found no change.[2]
- Challenging the DHT Hair-Loss Hypothesis: Modern DHT users and case reports, combined with clinical research,[19] are tearing down the assumption that DHT is causally involved in hair loss in the first place.
The Bottom Line
Basic Supplements Promises something simple: To get back to the basics
While theoretically creatine could influence DHT levels in some individuals, there is currently no direct evidence that creatine supplementation causes or accelerates hair loss, and it’s unlikely that DHT itself causes it in the first place. The concern is based primarily on a single study showing increased DHT (within normal ranges) without measuring actual hair loss, and these findings have not been replicated in subsequent research.
For individuals genetically predisposed to male pattern baldness, multiple factors beyond potential DHT fluctuations influence hair loss progression, including insulin resistance, lack of sunlight, and tension/stress. The current scientific consensus does not support avoiding creatine supplementation based on hair loss concerns.
Myth #5: “Creatine Leads to Dehydration and Muscle Cramping”
The belief that creatine supplementation causes dehydration and muscle cramping persists despite substantial evidence to the contrary. This misconception has potentially prevented many athletes and fitness enthusiasts from benefiting from one of the most well-researched supplements available.
This flowchart demonstrates how creatine influences fluid balance in muscle cells during exercise in hot conditions. Rather than causing dehydration as popularly believed, creatine helps maintain intracellular fluid volume, potentially reducing strain on the body’s cooling system and lowering heat illness risk. This diagram directly addresses the myth that creatine supplementation leads to dehydration and cramping.[17]
Origin of the Myth
This myth likely originated in the early 2000s when, with limited data and based primarily on speculation, the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) suggested that individuals controlling their weight or exercising in hot environments should avoid creatine supplementation.[20]
The theoretical basis for this recommendation stemmed from creatine’s osmotic properties. Since creatine can increase intracellular water retention, there was concern that this might alter whole-body fluid distribution, potentially leading to extracellular dehydration, electrolyte imbalances, and muscle cramping — particularly during intense exercise in hot conditions.[21]
Anecdotal Reports vs. Scientific Evidence
Some survey-based studies have reported perceived negative effects from creatine use. For example, in a survey of 219 athletes, 34 (38%) of creatine users reported perceived negative effects, with cramping being the most common complaint (27%).[22]
However, these self-reported surveys contrast sharply with controlled experimental research:
- A study by Greenwood et al. monitored 72 NCAA Division I football players during pre-season training in hot (27.3°C) and humid (54.2%) conditions. Contrary to the myth, creatine users experienced significantly less cramping, heat illness, dehydration, muscle tightness, muscle strains, and total injuries compared to non-users.[23]
- In the clinical setting, creatine has actually been shown to reduce cramping. A study of hemodialysis patients who frequently experienced muscle cramping found that creatine supplementation (12g before dialysis) reduced cramping frequency by 60%.[24]
This graph compares subjective symptoms during heat exposure between creatine users and non-users. While both groups experienced increased discomfort after heat-tolerance testing, the creatine group (black bars) actually reported slightly lower symptom scores than the placebo group (white bars). This finding directly challenges the misconception that creatine increases susceptibility to heat-related illness or discomfort during exercise in hot environments.[25]
Experimental Research Refutes the Myth
Controlled research consistently contradicts the dehydration and cramping myth:
This methodology flowchart details the systematic review process for identifying quality research on creatine’s effects on thermoregulation and hydration. Starting with 95 potentially relevant studies, researchers applied strict inclusion criteria to narrow down to just 10 high-quality investigations (with PEDro scores ≥7/10). This rigorous selection process demonstrates how scientific consensus on creatine’s safety regarding hydration is based on carefully vetted evidence rather than anecdotal reports.[17]
- A comprehensive review by Lopez et al. examining the effects of creatine supplementation on hydration status and cramping concluded that there is no evidence that creatine supplementation negatively affects either outcome.[17]
- Multiple studies have shown that creatine supplementation does not negatively affect thermoregulation, plasma volume, or hydration status during exercise in heat.[25]
- Some research even suggests that creatine may have protective effects against heat stress by improving thermoregulatory responses.[26]
The Bottom Line
This forest plot visualizes how creatine affects body temperature compared to placebo across multiple studies. The predominantly negative values indicate most research shows creatine supplementation either lowers body temperature or has no negative effect. This evidence directly contradicts claims that creatine causes overheating or compromises temperature regulation during exercise.[17]
The scientific consensus is clear: creatine supplementation does not increase the risk of dehydration, muscle cramping, or heat illness. If anything, controlled research suggests potential protective effects against these conditions. The persistent myth appears to be based on theoretical concerns and anecdotal reports rather than experimental evidence.
This misconception is particularly unfortunate as it may deter athletes competing in hot environments—who might benefit significantly from creatine’s ergogenic and potentially protective effects—from using this well-researched supplement. Based on the available evidence, there is no scientific reason to avoid creatine supplementation due to concerns about dehydration or muscle cramping.
Myth #6: “Creatine is Harmful for Younger Populations”
Concerns about the safety of creatine supplementation in children and adolescents (under 19 years) continue to be widespread despite growing scientific evidence suggesting otherwise. This myth has likely prevented many young athletes from safely utilizing this well-researched supplement to enhance performance and recovery.
Origin of the Concern
The hesitation regarding creatine use in younger populations stems from several factors:
- General caution about supplement use in developing bodies
- Limited research specifically focused on adolescent populations
- Label advisories on many creatine products that caution against usage by those under 18 years
- Conservative recommendations from some medical and athletic organizations
These concerns persist despite the fact that many children and adolescents naturally consume creatine through their diet (primarily from meat and fish), and the body produces creatine endogenously regardless of age.[3]
Basic Supplements shares heavy metals test results showing their whey protein has significantly lower levels than meat and fish. See the data on how their rigorous testing and quality control sets new standards for supplement safety.
What the Scientific Evidence Shows
The body of research examining creatine supplementation in younger populations has grown significantly in recent years:
- Performance Benefits in Young Athletes: Several studies have demonstrated that creatine supplementation provides similar ergogenic benefits in adolescent athletes as observed in adults, including improvements in strength, power, and high-intensity exercise capacity.[27]
- Safety Profile in Clinical Pediatric Populations: Creatine has been used therapeutically in children with various medical conditions without significant adverse effects. For example, children with muscular dystrophy, traumatic brain injury, and certain metabolic disorders have benefited from creatine supplementation under medical supervision.[28]
- No Evidence of Harm: A comprehensive review by Jagim et al. (2018) found no evidence of adverse effects in the studies examining creatine supplementation among adolescent athletes.[27]
- Regulatory Recognition: In late 2020, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) classified creatine as “generally recognized as safe” (GRAS), providing further support for its safety profile.[2,29-31]
The Current Scientific Position
The most recent position stand from the International Society of Sports Nutrition (ISSN) states:
“If proper precautions and supervision are provided, creatine monohydrate supplementation in children and adolescent athletes is acceptable and may provide a nutritional alternative with a favorable safety profile to potentially dangerous anabolic androgenic drugs.”[3]
The ISSN further specifies that creatine supplementation should only be considered for younger athletes who:
- Are involved in serious/competitive supervised training
- Are consuming a well-balanced and performance-enhancing diet
- Are knowledgeable about appropriate creatine use
- Do not exceed recommended dosages
The Bottom Line
Basic Supplements launches three research-backed essentials manufactured at Nutrablend Foods with third-party testing. Pure BCAA, Creatine, and Glutamine in clinical doses without the hype.
Current scientific evidence does not support the notion that creatine supplementation is harmful for younger populations. In fact, for adolescent athletes involved in high-intensity sports, creatine may be one of the safest and most effective performance-enhancing supplements available, especially compared to alternatives with less favorable safety profiles.
While more research specifically examining creatine’s effects in adolescent populations would be beneficial, the available evidence suggests that, with proper supervision and appropriate dosing, creatine supplementation is safe for younger athletes engaged in serious training. As with any nutritional intervention, consultation with healthcare providers and appropriate supervision remain important considerations.
Myth #7: “Creatine Increases Fat Mass”
The misconception that creatine supplementation leads to increased fat mass is one that continues to deter many individuals from using this well-researched supplement. This concern likely stems from the initial weight gain often associated with creatine loading, which many mistakenly attribute to fat accumulation rather than its true cause.
Origin of the Myth
This myth likely originated from observations that individuals often experience a rapid increase in body weight (1-3 kg) during the initial phase of creatine supplementation.[32] Some may have incorrectly assumed this weight gain was partially due to fat accumulation, particularly since the weight gain occurs relatively quickly. In reality, this initial weight gain is primarily attributable to increased water retention within muscle tissue, not added fat mass.[33]
What the Research Shows
Basic Supplements Basic Pre brings just what’s needed for focus, energy, and pumps, with 200mg caffeine and 3g citrulline per scoop — and it’s affordable with no tingles!
Controlled research examining the effects of creatine supplementation on body composition tells a very different story:
- Short-term Studies: Acute creatine supplementation (7 days) has consistently shown no effect on fat mass in both young and older adults, even while increasing fat-free mass.[34]
- Medium-term Studies: Multiple studies ranging from 6-8 weeks have demonstrated that creatine supplementation has no impact on fat mass when combined with resistance training.[35]
- Long-term Research: Studies examining creatine supplementation over periods of 12 weeks or longer have similarly found no increase in fat mass.[36]
- Some Evidence of Fat Reduction: Interestingly, a recent meta-analysis examining the effects of creatine supplementation in older adults (≥50 years) actually found a small but significant reduction in body fat percentage (-0.55%) compared to placebo during resistance training.[37]
Clinical Applications
Further contradicting the fat-gain myth, creatine has shown potential benefits for body composition in certain clinical populations:
- In children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia, creatine supplementation was associated with significant reductions in fat mass, while those not receiving creatine gained fat mass during treatment.[38]
Potential Mechanisms
There are several physiological mechanisms that might explain why creatine does not increase — and may potentially decrease — fat mass:
This three-panel graph illustrates changes in muscle creatine content, fat-free mass, and total work capacity over a 28-day supplementation period. The data contradicts the myth that creatine increases fat mass, showing instead that it increases muscle creatine storage and fat-free mass while potentially improving work capacity. This evidence-based view supports creatine’s benefits for diverse populations beyond young male athletes.[4]
- Enhanced training capacity leading to greater energy expenditure
- Possible influences on metabolic rate
- Cellular signaling effects that may favorably impact fat metabolism
- Improved glycogen storage that might alter substrate utilization during exercise
The Bottom Line
The scientific consensus based on numerous randomized controlled trials is clear: creatine supplementation does not increase fat mass. This conclusion holds true across studies of varying durations (one week to two years), different populations (young to elderly), and various training statuses (untrained to elite athletes).
In fact, there is some evidence that creatine supplementation may actually help reduce body fat percentage, particularly when combined with resistance training. This myth represents a significant misunderstanding of creatine’s physiological effects on body composition and should not deter individuals from using this safe and effective supplement.
Myth #8: “A Loading Phase is Required for Creatine to Work”
A common belief among many fitness enthusiasts is that you must “load” creatine (taking 20-25g/day for 5-7 days) to experience its benefits. While this protocol can accelerate muscle creatine saturation, the notion that a loading phase is absolutely necessary misrepresents what research has shown about different supplementation strategies.
Origins of the Loading Protocol
The concept of creatine loading originated from pioneering research in the early 1990s. Harris et al. published a seminal paper demonstrating that supplementing with high doses of creatine (20-25g/day) for several days significantly increased muscle creatine stores.[39]
This flowchart illustrates the two primary approaches to creatine supplementation. Strategy A shows the traditional loading protocol (20-25g daily for 5-7 days followed by maintenance), while Strategy B demonstrates the direct maintenance approach (3-5g daily). This diagram addresses the myth that loading is required, showing both methods effectively saturate muscle creatine stores, though at different rates. Larger athletes may benefit from higher maintenance doses of 5-10g daily.[2]
This loading protocol became widely adopted after subsequent research confirmed its effectiveness for rapidly increasing intramuscular creatine concentration. The strategy typically involves consuming 20-25g of creatine daily (often divided into 4-5 equal doses) for 5-7 days, followed by a maintenance phase of 3-5g daily.[40]
Alternative Supplementation Strategies
While the loading approach quickly saturates muscle creatine stores, research has clearly demonstrated that alternative supplementation protocols can achieve similar levels of muscle creatine saturation without the loading phase:
- A classic study by Hultman et al. compared different creatine protocols and found that consuming 3g/day for 28 days resulted in similar increases in muscle creatine content as the loading protocol (20g/day for 6 days), although the increase occurred more gradually.[40]
- Multiple studies have confirmed that daily low-dose creatine supplementation (3-5g/day) effectively increases muscle creatine concentration and produces performance benefits, though it may take 3-4 weeks to reach maximum saturation levels.[3]
Practical Considerations for Different Approaches
The decision to load or not should be based on individual goals and preferences:
- Loading Benefit: The primary advantage of loading is the quicker saturation of muscle creatine stores, potentially leading to more rapid performance benefits within the first week of supplementation.[3]
- Non-Loading Benefits: Lower daily dosing without a loading phase may reduce the likelihood of gastrointestinal discomfort that some individuals experience with higher doses. It also eliminates the potential for short-term weight gain from water retention that can occur during loading.[41]
The Bottom Line
Scientific evidence clearly indicates that a loading phase is not required for creatine to be effective. While loading accelerates the increase in muscle creatine content and may provide more immediate benefits, taking smaller daily doses (3-5g) will eventually achieve the same level of muscle creatine saturation and performance benefits, albeit over a longer timeframe (typically 3-4 weeks).
For individuals planning long-term creatine use, both approaches will ultimately lead to similar ergogenic benefits. The choice between loading or not should be based on whether rapid saturation is desired, tolerance to higher doses, and personal preference, rather than a belief that loading is essential for creatine to work.
Myth #9: “Creatine Only Benefits Young Male Athletes”
A persistent misconception is that creatine supplementation is only effective for young male athletes, particularly those involved in strength and power sports. This belief likely stems from the fact that early creatine research predominantly focused on this demographic. However, current scientific evidence demonstrates that creatine’s benefits extend across age groups, sexes, and various athletic and clinical populations.
Benefits for Women
Research examining creatine’s effects in females has consistently shown benefits similar to those observed in males:
- A study by Vandenberghe et al. demonstrated that women (19-22 years) experienced significant increases in muscle mass and strength from creatine supplementation during 10 weeks of resistance training compared to placebo.[42]
- In elite female soccer players, creatine supplementation (20g/day for 6 days) improved sprint and agility performance compared to placebo.[43]
- Research by Hamilton et al. showed that creatine supplementation (25g for 7 days) enhanced upper-body exercise capacity in strength-trained females compared to placebo.[44]
Benefits for Older Adults
Contrary to the myth, older individuals often experience substantial benefits from creatine supplementation:
- A comprehensive meta-analysis by Devries and Phillips showed that creatine supplementation during resistance training in older adults (≥50 years) produced greater gains in lean tissue mass, strength, and functional performance compared to resistance training alone.[45]
- Research by Candow et al. found that creatine supplementation combined with resistance training reduced sarcopenic symptoms and improved bone mineral density in older adults.[46]
- Multiple studies have demonstrated creatine’s effectiveness in postmenopausal women, with benefits for muscle mass, strength, and bone health.[47]
Clinical and Therapeutic Benefits
Creatine’s benefits extend beyond athletic performance to various clinical applications:
- Creatine has shown therapeutic potential for patients with neuromuscular diseases, including muscular dystrophy and neurodegenerative conditions.[48]
- Research indicates potential benefits for cognitive function in both younger and older adults, with emerging evidence for its role in brain health.[49]
- Studies have demonstrated creatine’s potential for protecting against traumatic brain injury and supporting recovery from concussion.[50]
This four-panel graph compares how different creatine forms affect creatine concentrations in arterial plasma, portal vein plasma, muscle tissue, and brain tissue. The data shows that while creatine monohydrate (CrM, blue) significantly increases creatine levels in blood and muscle compared to control, creatyl-L-leucine (CLL, orange) shows less impressive results despite manufacturer claims. This research supports the article’s conclusion that standard monohydrate remains the most effective form.[4]
The Bottom Line
The scientific evidence clearly demonstrates that creatine supplementation can benefit diverse populations beyond young male athletes. Women, older adults, and individuals with various clinical conditions can all experience significant improvements from creatine supplementation. The benefits are not limited to muscular performance but extend to bone health, brain function, and overall quality of life.
This myth represents an outdated view based on early research limitations rather than the current scientific understanding of creatine’s wide-ranging applications. As research continues to evolve, creatine is increasingly recognized as a supplement with broad applications across different populations and health conditions.
Myth #10: “Other forms of creatine are superior to monohydrate”
Despite the overwhelming research supporting creatine monohydrate’s effectiveness, supplement companies continually release “new and improved” forms of creatine with bold claims of superior absorption, better results, and fewer side effects. These alternative forms include creatine ethyl ester, buffered creatine, creatine HCl, liquid creatine, and various creatine salts. But do these actually outperform good old creatine monohydrate?
The scientific evidence says no. In a comprehensive review by Kreider et al. (2022), researchers examined the bioavailability, efficacy, safety, and regulatory status of various creatine forms. Their conclusion was clear: creatine monohydrate continues to be the only form with substantial evidence supporting its bioavailability, efficacy, and safety.[4]
For example, despite claims of greater solubility meaning better absorption, studies show that creatine ethyl ester actually converts to creatinine (a waste product) at a higher rate than monohydrate during digestion. Research has demonstrated that creatine HCl, despite claims of being “38 times more soluble”, doesn’t lead to greater muscle creatine retention at equivalent or lower doses compared to monohydrate.[2]
The left side shows molecular structures of creatine citrate and creatine pyruvate, while the right graph plots plasma creatine levels over time for different forms. Despite their different chemical compositions, all forms produce similar plasma concentration curves, peaking around 1 hour post-consumption with comparable areas under the curve. This evidence challenges marketing claims that alternative creatine forms offer superior absorption or effectiveness.[4]
It’s worth understanding that simple powder solubility in water doesn’t equate to better absorption in the body. Creatine monohydrate is already nearly 100% bioavailable, meaning almost all of it is either taken up by tissues or excreted in urine through normal digestion.[4]
This three-panel graph compares plasma creatine concentrations over time with different supplementation methods. Panel A shows pure creatine solution’s rapid absorption and clearance curve, panel B demonstrates how meat consumption provides lower but sustained creatine levels compared to solution, and panel C reveals how various creatine formulations (gel, suspension, lozenge) deliver comparable bioavailability despite manufacturer claims of superiority, supporting the article’s point that alternative forms don’t outperform basic monohydrate.
[4]
Many alternative forms also contain less creatine by weight than monohydrate (which is 87.9% creatine), meaning you need more product to achieve the same dose. And crucially, no alternative form has demonstrated better muscle creatine uptake or performance benefits in comparative studies.
This diagram shows the molecular structure of anhydrous creatine and creatine monohydrate. The only difference between these forms is the presence of a single water molecule in monohydrate (indicated by • H₂O), which explains why monohydrate contains slightly less creatine by weight (87.9%) than pure creatine. This simple structural comparison helps explain why creatine monohydrate remains the gold standard despite marketing claims about “superior” forms.[4]
The International Society of Sports Nutrition (ISSN) position stand concludes:
“Creatine monohydrate is the most extensively studied and clinically effective form of creatine for use in nutritional supplements in terms of muscle uptake and ability to increase high-intensity exercise capacity.”[3]
The Bottom Line: Monohydrate.
This figure examines creatine nitrate, showing its chemical structure on the left and three data panels on plasma creatine, plasma nitrate, and muscle creatine content at different doses. While creatine nitrate increases plasma nitrate levels (panel B), it doesn’t provide superior muscle creatine content (panel C) compared to equivalent doses of creatine monohydrate, challenging marketing claims that nitrate-bound creatine offers performance advantages.
[4]
When selecting a creatine supplement, stick with the proven, researched standard: creatine monohydrate.
The Basic Supplements Difference
This comprehensive lab analysis report demonstrates Basic Supplements’ commitment to quality and transparency. The certificate shows their creatine monohydrate product exceeds 99.9% purity while containing virtually undetectable levels of heavy metals (arsenic, lead, cadmium, and mercury). The microbiological analysis confirms the product’s safety, reinforcing Basic’s approach of letting science and rigorous testing speak for itself rather than relying on marketing hype.
While the science behind creatine is robust, not all supplements on the market deliver the same quality or transparency. This is where Basic Supplements truly stands apart from the competition.
At the core of Basic’s approach is their unwavering commitment to ingredient quality. For their creatine products, they’ve opted for pure, pharmaceutical-grade creatine monohydrate—the most thoroughly researched and effective form of creatine available. Rather than chasing trends with exotic, unproven creatine variants, Basic sticks with what works, backed by decades of scientific validation.
What truly separates Basic from other brands is their unprecedented transparency. As demonstrated in their comprehensive third-party lab testing, every batch of their supplements undergoes rigorous analysis for both potency and purity. Their creatine is verified to contain precisely what’s claimed on the label—no under-dosing, no fillers, just pure creatine monohydrate.
The lab tests reveal another crucial advantage: Basic’s meticulous standards for contaminant testing. Their creatine products consistently test well below acceptable limits for heavy metals and other impurities, setting a new standard in the industry for product safety and quality control.
Basic’s product formulation philosophy extends beyond standalone creatine. In Basic PRE, for example, they’ve included a scientifically-supported 1.5g dose of creatine monohydrate alongside synergistic ingredients like citrulline and caffeine. This intelligent formulation delivers the performance benefits of creatine within a comprehensive pre-workout solution, without resorting to proprietary blends or undisclosed amounts.
Instead of relying on marketing hype or exotic claims, Basic lets science guide their approach to supplementation. Their creatine products reflect this philosophy—effective doses of the most proven form, manufactured to exceptional standards, and backed by verifiable testing.
No gimmicks, no inflated promises—just the basics, done right.
Conclusion: Basics, But Supported by Science
As we’ve explored throughout this article, many of the concerns surrounding creatine supplementation are based on misconceptions rather than scientific evidence. The research is clear: creatine monohydrate is safe, effective, and beneficial for a wide range of populations when consumed at recommended dosages.
As discussed when Marc Curcio and Laura Valley introduced the brand on Episode #156 of the PricePlow Podcast, Basic Supplements (the sponsor of this article) embodies the principle that quality supplementation doesn’t need to be complicated. Their straightforward approach to product formulation—focusing on clinically effective doses of proven ingredients like creatine monohydrate—exemplifies their commitment to “getting back to basics.”
In fall of 2024, Mike and Ben flew to Buffalo, NY to Nutrablend Foods, manufacturer for the new upstart brand, Basic Supplements. They interview Marc Curcio and Laura Valley for Episode #156, discussing how they’re simplifying the supplement industry with high-quality, essential products that are both affordable and transparent.
By prioritizing transparency through comprehensive third-party lab testing and maintaining rigorous standards for contaminants like heavy metals, Basic Supplements gives consumers confidence that they’re getting exactly what’s on the label—nothing more, nothing less.
Whether you’re looking for a standalone creatine product or a formula like Basic PRE that incorporates creatine alongside other essential ingredients, Basic Supplements delivers science-backed, no-nonsense options that cut through the marketing hype.
For those seeking to learn more about the brand’s philosophy and product lineup, the Basic Supplements brand introduction provides an excellent overview of their approach to quality, transparency, and effectiveness.
In an industry where flashy marketing often overshadows scientific substance, Basic Supplements reminds us that sometimes the most powerful approach is simply getting back to the basics: evidence-based ingredients at effective doses, manufactured to the highest standards, with nothing to hide.
Basic Supplements – Deals and Price Drop Alerts
Get Price Alerts
No spam, no scams.
Disclosure: PricePlow relies on pricing from stores with which we have a business relationship. We work hard to keep pricing current, but you may find a better offer.
Posts are sponsored in part by the retailers and/or brands listed on this page.
Comments and Discussion (Powered by the PricePlow Forum)