Creatine
marshjon74
Posts: 7 Member
Thoughts on creatine as a weight loss inhibitor?
1
Replies
-
As a weight loss inhibitor?
It’s not one.
Creatine will cause a slight gain in water weight due to intramuscular water retention (a good thing) but it won’t slow or hinder fat loss in a caloric deficit.7 -
It isn’t. It is a work out supplement for increasing your muscular ATP levels. The energy source used by contractile tissue to contract. Sure the extra couple of calories burned by doing an extra couple reps in your workout might help you for weight loss in like a 2 year period, but nothing short term. It may actually cause a weight increase.2
-
Carlos_421 wrote: »As a weight loss inhibitor?
It’s not one.
Creatine will cause a slight gain in water weight due to intramuscular water retention (a good thing) but it won’t slow or hinder fat loss in a caloric deficit.
Definitely this here. It is great for weight training.0 -
surgromanyukha wrote: »Weight loss inhibitor, I don’t know. But I’ve been told that if I want to start supplementing with creatine then I should drink LOTS of water because creatine is hard on the kidneys. So in other words I have to destroy my internal organs in order to look more muscular on the outside?? No thanks. I’m gonna let these other meatheads at the gym keep their creatine, I’ll stay natural.
Wrong. You drink lots of water because creatine pulls water into your muscles causing water retention. Which in turn can cause a bit of dehydration.
Meatheads and stay natural? Are *kitten* kidding?
Creatine benefits everyone. Runners, weightlifters, and even the elderly. That’s an extremely generalized comment. You’re a meat head because you supplement your goals with a naturally occurring substance?
Did you know creatine is naturally occurring in red meat(aka skeletal muscle). Including the human body. It comes from the Greek word kreat which literally means flesh. Ignorant people like you are what’s wrong with the fitness industry. Many people lift weights for health and it has nothing to do with being an ego driven “meathead”.
6 -
surgromanyukha wrote: »Weight loss inhibitor, I don’t know. But I’ve been told that if I want to start supplementing with creatine then I should drink LOTS of water because creatine is hard on the kidneys. So in other words I have to destroy my internal organs in order to look more muscular on the outside?? No thanks. I’m gonna let these other meatheads at the gym keep their creatine, I’ll stay natural.
So much misinformation to overcome. It's not a steroid and it's not hard on the kidneys but does increase creatinine levels in the blood which is used as a maker for kidney disease. It does not, however, cause kidney disease.3 -
surgromanyukha wrote: »Weight loss inhibitor, I don’t know. But I’ve been told that if I want to start supplementing with creatine then I should drink LOTS of water because creatine is hard on the kidneys. So in other words I have to destroy my internal organs in order to look more muscular on the outside?? No thanks. I’m gonna let these other meatheads at the gym keep their creatine, I’ll stay natural.
That's painting with a pretty broad brush. And an inaccurate one. Creatine is one of the most studied supplements out there. And is safe.
OP, feel free to add it to your regimen, or do some additional research. But you're good to go. ETA: but not for weight loss, does nothing for that, good luck man
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3407788/
1 -
surgromanyukha wrote: »@jessef593 yes, I realize creatine is naturally occurring in some foods. But the powdered *kitten* in the jar sitting on your kitchen counter was probably created in a lab. See, my personal standards of “natural” probably differ from most people’s idea of “natural.” By my standards if you consume nothing apart from food and drink then you are 100% “natty.” Any powders, pills, etc to me disqualifies someone as natural because that *kitten* is being produced in a lab. I really don’t care if creatine is found naturally in certain foods if the creatine you absorbed wasn’t from the steak you ate.
For the longest time I was hesitant to even start consuming whey, but now I do. So I consider myself only mostly “natty” but not 100%. Like I said - my personal standards of what “natty” is are probably stricter than other people’s standards.
So that makes it alright to insult those that do use it and spread misinformation about the product?7 -
surgromanyukha wrote: »@ notreallychris
Yes, it’s one of the most studied but I still have my doubts. There’s a YouTube video (I’ll try to post a link if I find it) of a young guy who had blood work done before consuming creatine and then some time after being on creatine. The blood work after he was on creatine for some time showed that his kidneys weren’t as healthy as before. That confirmed my suspicions that creatine can screw with one’s kidneys. But hey - people gonna do what they’re gonna do to look big and get that model like physique. I personally would rather it take me 3, 4 years or however long to get my physique to look good naturally,rather than take all sorts of pills and powders just so I can look good in 1 or 2 years.
Would really like that link. Does the link also provide in the video or a link to details about his overall diet and possible other medical conditions (or statements that ruled out any thing else)? Was the amount of creatine monitored? (meaning did he use as directed or did he overuse the product) Does it show the actual blood work as well as go into the details of the tests done to prove just how much of a deterioration did occur and that it was solely due to creatine usage?2 -
surgromanyukha wrote: »Weight loss inhibitor, I don’t know. But I’ve been told that if I want to start supplementing with creatine then I should drink LOTS of water because creatine is hard on the kidneys. So in other words I have to destroy my internal organs in order to look more muscular on the outside?? No thanks. I’m gonna let these other meatheads at the gym keep their creatine, I’ll stay natural.
Whoa. I am not a meathead and I use 5g per day. I am female and I do not experience any water retention or stomach cramps from it. I use a flavoured one and mix it with my isotonic tablet and drink it during my workout. It also helps me sleep better (not everyone experiences all the positive/negative effects)...it helps me with pump and recovery...that is why I use it. It is not a steroid and as far as I am aware is okay for any athletes to use...re-testing and such...1 -
surgromanyukha wrote: »@ notreallychris
Yes, it’s one of the most studied but I still have my doubts. There’s a YouTube video (I’ll try to post a link if I find it) of a young guy who had blood work done before consuming creatine and then some time after being on creatine. The blood work after he was on creatine for some time showed that his kidneys weren’t as healthy as before. That confirmed my suspicions that creatine can screw with one’s kidneys. But hey - people gonna do what they’re gonna do to look big and get that model like physique. I personally would rather it take me 3, 4 years or however long to get my physique to look good naturally,rather than take all sorts of pills and powders just so I can look good in 1 or 2 years.
Tell the whole story and get it straight. The blood work most likely showed an elevated creatinine reading, which is perfectly normal and expected when taking creatine. Guess what else will give you an elevated creatinine reading? Strength training. So applying the standard of elevated creatinine levels = "kidneys weren't as healthy as before", you're also screwing your kidneys by lifting weights.7 -
surgromanyukha wrote: »@jessef593 yes, I realize creatine is naturally occurring in some foods. But the powdered *kitten* in the jar sitting on your kitchen counter was probably created in a lab. See, my personal standards of “natural” probably differ from most people’s idea of “natural.” By my standards if you consume nothing apart from food and drink then you are 100% “natty.” Any powders, pills, etc to me disqualifies someone as natural because that *kitten* is being produced in a lab. I really don’t care if creatine is found naturally in certain foods if the creatine you absorbed wasn’t from the steak you ate.
For the longest time I was hesitant to even start consuming whey, but now I do. So I consider myself only mostly “natty” but not 100%. Like I said - my personal standards of what “natty” is are probably stricter than other people’s standards.
How highly you regard a product being "natty" vs "unnatty" using your standards doesn't make it a scientific fact. So don't spread "misinformation" or "broad generalizations" unless you can back it up with "links" and "articles" with proof.7 -
surgromanyukha wrote: »@jessef593 yes, I realize creatine is naturally occurring in some foods. But the powdered *kitten* in the jar sitting on your kitchen counter was probably created in a lab. See, my personal standards of “natural” probably differ from most people’s idea of “natural.” By my standards if you consume nothing apart from food and drink then you are 100% “natty.” Any powders, pills, etc to me disqualifies someone as natural because that *kitten* is being produced in a lab. I really don’t care if creatine is found naturally in certain foods if the creatine you absorbed wasn’t from the steak you ate.
For the longest time I was hesitant to even start consuming whey, but now I do. So I consider myself only mostly “natty” but not 100%. Like I said - my personal standards of what “natty” is are probably stricter than other people’s standards.
What you think is actually irrelevant, it's not the accepted definition so frankly, nobody cares. Ignorance is not an argument.8 -
Does eating cornbread, which does not occur in nature and must be created in a lab (a kitchen is basically a lab), make me not natty?
9 -
Carlos_421 wrote: »Does eating cornbread, which does not occur in nature and must be created in a lab (a kitchen is basically a lab), make me not natty?
In my world, cornbread is magically dropped by fairies, it's that damn good!
6 -
surgromanyukha wrote: »@wheelhouse15
People are gonna do what they’re gonna do. If you’re happy gulping down pills and powders then that’s you’re prerogative. If I am ignorant then let me be in my state of bliss and stick with food and drink.
@ carlos_421
You know what I mean. Cornbread is made by mixed natural food ingredients and baking it. Creatine sold to you at supplement shops is probably synthesized in a lab by people in lab coats. Not my idea of natty, but those are just my own personal standards.
You can be whatever way you choose but you don't get to judge others. Otherwise, I really have no issues. I have no problem discussing differences in opinions but I dislike judgemental attitudes.4 -
surgromanyukha wrote: »@wheelhouse15
People are gonna do what they’re gonna do. If you’re happy gulping down pills and powders then that’s you’re prerogative. If I am ignorant then let me be in my state of bliss and stick with food and drink.
@ carlos_421
You know what I mean. Cornbread is made by mixed natural food ingredients and baking it. Creatine sold to you at supplement shops is probably synthesized in a lab by people in lab coats. Not my idea of natty, but those are just my own personal standards.
I'm finding it hard to imagine what possible relevance what someone is wearing while preparing it could have to the value of a food.
Are you saying that if I made you a "natty" meal but happened to do it in a lab coat because I've got a weird sense of style, that would matter to you?7 -
So . . . in the interest of not creating a new thread on creatine, this does make me curious:
- As a fairly active female, lifting and running 3x week (with some lighter endurance/circuit-based 'recovery' activities 2x/week), if my goal is to get stronger - is creatine something I should look into? What are potential down-sides to taking it?0 -
surgromanyukha wrote: »@jessef593 yes, I realize creatine is naturally occurring in some foods. But the powdered *kitten* in the jar sitting on your kitchen counter was probably created in a lab. See, my personal standards of “natural” probably differ from most people’s idea of “natural.” By my standards if you consume nothing apart from food and drink then you are 100% “natty.” Any powders, pills, etc to me disqualifies someone as natural because that *kitten* is being produced in a lab. I really don’t care if creatine is found naturally in certain foods if the creatine you absorbed wasn’t from the steak you ate.
For the longest time I was hesitant to even start consuming whey, but now I do. So I consider myself only mostly “natty” but not 100%. Like I said - my personal standards of what “natty” is are probably stricter than other people’s standards.
6 -
surgromanyukha wrote: »@wheelhouse15
People are gonna do what they’re gonna do. If you’re happy gulping down pills and powders then that’s you’re prerogative. If I am ignorant then let me be in my state of bliss and stick with food and drink.
@ carlos_421
You know what I mean. Cornbread is made by mixed natural food ingredients and baking it. Creatine sold to you at supplement shops is probably synthesized in a lab by people in lab coats. Not my idea of natty, but those are just my own personal standards.
Have you ever taken cold medicine? Cough drops, gotten a flu shot. You do realize whey such as isolate is modified in labs right? That many foods in boxes or cans contain preservatives created in labs. Ever taken a multi vitamin?
Just because you have an uneducated ignorant opinion does not make it right. You are free to have that opinion but when it comes to a fact based debate, it is better to leave said opinion at the door and take a moment to learn something.
What exactly do you think creatine is used for? It won’t shave 2 years off of the required training time to reach a physique. We’re not talking about anabolic steroids here. It adds maybe 1-2 more reps a set. Which will only have an effect if you’re eating In a caloric surplus.
6 -
surgromanyukha wrote: »@ notreallychris
Yes, it’s one of the most studied but I still have my doubts. There’s a YouTube video (I’ll try to post a link if I find it) of a young guy who had blood work done before consuming creatine and then some time after being on creatine. The blood work after he was on creatine for some time showed that his kidneys weren’t as healthy as before. That confirmed my suspicions that creatine can screw with one’s kidneys. But hey - people gonna do what they’re gonna do to look big and get that model like physique. I personally would rather it take me 3, 4 years or however long to get my physique to look good naturally,rather than take all sorts of pills and powders just so I can look good in 1 or 2 years.
Tell the whole story and get it straight. The blood work most likely showed an elevated creatinine reading, which is perfectly normal and expected when taking creatine. Guess what else will give you an elevated creatinine reading? Strength training. So applying the standard of elevated creatinine levels = "kidneys weren't as healthy as before", you're also screwing your kidneys by lifting weights.
This is exactly what my bloodwork shows. Slightly elevated Creatinine levels. But kidney function tests always come out fine. I have D deficiency so I do have my blood tested several times a year and each time I have them run the full panel, just so I can take a look.
My 5 grams a day has caused no damage in the last 5 years or so... not worried at all because as already mentioned... one of the most studied things on the planet.
Also... still natty.
6 -
surgromanyukha wrote: »Let me clarify what I meant by the meathead thing. I was referring to these big dudes, the backwards hat wearing lugs to whom it seems education is important but big biceps are importanter. You all know who I’m talking about.
Still painting with a broad brush, I see. So...where was that link to the youtube video that made you think creatine supplements were extremely toxic?4 -
surgromanyukha wrote: »@jessef593 yes, I realize creatine is naturally occurring in some foods. But the powdered *kitten* in the jar sitting on your kitchen counter was probably created in a lab. See, my personal standards of “natural” probably differ from most people’s idea of “natural.” By my standards if you consume nothing apart from food and drink then you are 100% “natty.” Any powders, pills, etc to me disqualifies someone as natural because that *kitten* is being produced in a lab. I really don’t care if creatine is found naturally in certain foods if the creatine you absorbed wasn’t from the steak you ate.
For the longest time I was hesitant to even start consuming whey, but now I do. So I consider myself only mostly “natty” but not 100%. Like I said - my personal standards of what “natty” is are probably stricter than other people’s standards.
This might be the dumbest thing I've read on this website, and I was once involved in a 50+ page Dr Oz thread. By your logic, someone eating something made with wheat flour isn't "natty" because, after all, that's a powder.8 -
rckeeper22 wrote: »So . . . in the interest of not creating a new thread on creatine, this does make me curious:
- As a fairly active female, lifting and running 3x week (with some lighter endurance/circuit-based 'recovery' activities 2x/week), if my goal is to get stronger - is creatine something I should look into? What are potential down-sides to taking it?
It can add a small benefit to your lifting by allowing you to lift a bit more in terms of reps according to the research. It has no real effect on longer duration exercises like running, biking etc. It has generally found to produce a small, but consistent increase in muscle gains. So the question is, are you interested in gaining a bit more muscle for the money you will have to pay?
It does cause a bit of water retention in the muscle, making them appear a little fuller, which many like, and the monohydrate has been known to cause some people bloating.
1 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »rckeeper22 wrote: »So . . . in the interest of not creating a new thread on creatine, this does make me curious:
- As a fairly active female, lifting and running 3x week (with some lighter endurance/circuit-based 'recovery' activities 2x/week), if my goal is to get stronger - is creatine something I should look into? What are potential down-sides to taking it?
It can add a small benefit to your lifting by allowing you to lift a bit more in terms of reps according to the research. It has no real effect on longer duration exercises like running, biking etc. It has generally found to produce a small, but consistent increase in muscle gains. So the question is, are you interested in gaining a bit more muscle for the money you will have to pay?
It does cause a bit of water retention in the muscle, making them appear a little fuller, which many like, and the monohydrate has been known to cause some people bloating.
...and it's worth mentioning that a significant percentage of people are non-responders, for one reason or another.
I took creatine for around 6 months and noticed absolutely no changes in my workouts, mass gains, muscle fullness, bloating.....nothing. I stopped taking it a month or two ago and have noticed no changes in the opposite direction.
Doesn't hurt to try it though, it's pretty inexpensive and won't harm you. But the effectiveness is kind of a YMMV thing.
Not discounting the research at all, I've read it myself, it's sound and I don't disbelieve it - just saying the results aren't a universal thing.5 -
surgromanyukha wrote: »Let me clarify what I meant by the meathead thing. I was referring to these big dudes, the backwards hat wearing lugs to whom it seems education is important but big biceps are importanter. You all know who I’m talking about.
I’d be curious to see this “natty” progress you’ve made over the last 3-4 years I think you said it was?
I’ve been lifting for 3 years. Occasionally supplementing with creatine. All the while getting regular blood tests, physicals, and all that good *kitten*. At no time were any irregularities noted. All the while the heaviest I’ve ever reached was 186lbs, not exactly a lug or meathead as you put it. So why exactly haven’t I blown up to an Olympian sized physique considering that I am no longer “natural”? I would like to know you’re reasoning on this.
Also some of these backwards hat wearing guys are some of the nicest most respectful, intelligent, and even modest people I have met. You’d know that if you ever spoken with them rather than silently judging them from your smith machine in the corner. Maybe one of these days you should grow a pair and say some of these opinions of yours straight to their faces. Wouldn’t that be something, we’ll see just how far your superb natural physique and righteous opinions get you.
6 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »rckeeper22 wrote: »So . . . in the interest of not creating a new thread on creatine, this does make me curious:
- As a fairly active female, lifting and running 3x week (with some lighter endurance/circuit-based 'recovery' activities 2x/week), if my goal is to get stronger - is creatine something I should look into? What are potential down-sides to taking it?
It can add a small benefit to your lifting by allowing you to lift a bit more in terms of reps according to the research. It has no real effect on longer duration exercises like running, biking etc. It has generally found to produce a small, but consistent increase in muscle gains. So the question is, are you interested in gaining a bit more muscle for the money you will have to pay?
It does cause a bit of water retention in the muscle, making them appear a little fuller, which many like, and the monohydrate has been known to cause some people bloating.
...and it's worth mentioning that a significant percentage of people are non-responders, for one reason or another.
I took creatine for around 6 months and noticed absolutely no changes in my workouts, mass gains, muscle fullness, bloating.....nothing. I stopped taking it a month or two ago and have noticed no changes in the opposite direction.
Doesn't hurt to try it though, it's pretty inexpensive and won't harm you. But the effectiveness is kind of a YMMV thing.
Not discounting the research at all, I've read it myself, it's sound and I don't disbelieve it - just saying the results aren't a universal thing.
Gotcha, I really appreciate the info. So if I'm understanding correctly: The potential upside of creatine is that it may lead to minor strength gains, and 'plump out' the muscles so they're more aesthetically pleasing (in terms of appearing fuller). The downsides are that it may or may not work (meaning it could be a waste of money), and potentially some bloating. Is that accurate?
I'll have to give it some thought, and decide if the bang is worth the buck - though sounds like the downsides are pretty minor. I have heard before that creatine should be cycled, so that the body doesn't start relying on it and stop producing it naturally. Is that relevant or just bad gouge?
0 -
rckeeper22 wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »rckeeper22 wrote: »So . . . in the interest of not creating a new thread on creatine, this does make me curious:
- As a fairly active female, lifting and running 3x week (with some lighter endurance/circuit-based 'recovery' activities 2x/week), if my goal is to get stronger - is creatine something I should look into? What are potential down-sides to taking it?
It can add a small benefit to your lifting by allowing you to lift a bit more in terms of reps according to the research. It has no real effect on longer duration exercises like running, biking etc. It has generally found to produce a small, but consistent increase in muscle gains. So the question is, are you interested in gaining a bit more muscle for the money you will have to pay?
It does cause a bit of water retention in the muscle, making them appear a little fuller, which many like, and the monohydrate has been known to cause some people bloating.
...and it's worth mentioning that a significant percentage of people are non-responders, for one reason or another.
I took creatine for around 6 months and noticed absolutely no changes in my workouts, mass gains, muscle fullness, bloating.....nothing. I stopped taking it a month or two ago and have noticed no changes in the opposite direction.
Doesn't hurt to try it though, it's pretty inexpensive and won't harm you. But the effectiveness is kind of a YMMV thing.
Not discounting the research at all, I've read it myself, it's sound and I don't disbelieve it - just saying the results aren't a universal thing.
Gotcha, I really appreciate the info. So if I'm understanding correctly: The potential upside of creatine is that it may lead to minor strength gains, and 'plump out' the muscles so they're more aesthetically pleasing (in terms of appearing fuller). The downsides are that it may or may not work (meaning it could be a waste of money), and potentially some bloating. Is that accurate?
I'll have to give it some thought, and decide if the bang is worth the buck - though sounds like the downsides are pretty minor. I have heard before that creatine should be cycled, so that the body doesn't start relying on it and stop producing it naturally. Is that relevant or just bad gouge?
No benefit to cycling. it's not steroids. it's a nutrient/mineral1 -
surgromanyukha wrote: »education is important but big biceps are importanter. You all know who I’m talking about.
The dedication, commitment, sacrifice and knowledge of your body and how nutrition works required to become a ripped "meathead" is beyond most people ... If it wasn't we would all be 10% fat and 218lbs
Even if they are not natural, you don't just stick a needle in you and bulk up ... you still need to put in the work, eat the right food, be dedicated, sacrifice your social life .. and learn about cycling and support so you don't screw your self up
I know its beyond my mental capacity
1 -
rckeeper22 wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »rckeeper22 wrote: »So . . . in the interest of not creating a new thread on creatine, this does make me curious:
- As a fairly active female, lifting and running 3x week (with some lighter endurance/circuit-based 'recovery' activities 2x/week), if my goal is to get stronger - is creatine something I should look into? What are potential down-sides to taking it?
It can add a small benefit to your lifting by allowing you to lift a bit more in terms of reps according to the research. It has no real effect on longer duration exercises like running, biking etc. It has generally found to produce a small, but consistent increase in muscle gains. So the question is, are you interested in gaining a bit more muscle for the money you will have to pay?
It does cause a bit of water retention in the muscle, making them appear a little fuller, which many like, and the monohydrate has been known to cause some people bloating.
...and it's worth mentioning that a significant percentage of people are non-responders, for one reason or another.
I took creatine for around 6 months and noticed absolutely no changes in my workouts, mass gains, muscle fullness, bloating.....nothing. I stopped taking it a month or two ago and have noticed no changes in the opposite direction.
Doesn't hurt to try it though, it's pretty inexpensive and won't harm you. But the effectiveness is kind of a YMMV thing.
Not discounting the research at all, I've read it myself, it's sound and I don't disbelieve it - just saying the results aren't a universal thing.
Gotcha, I really appreciate the info. So if I'm understanding correctly: The potential upside of creatine is that it may lead to minor strength gains, and 'plump out' the muscles so they're more aesthetically pleasing (in terms of appearing fuller). The downsides are that it may or may not work (meaning it could be a waste of money), and potentially some bloating. Is that accurate?
I'll have to give it some thought, and decide if the bang is worth the buck - though sounds like the downsides are pretty minor. I have heard before that creatine should be cycled, so that the body doesn't start relying on it and stop producing it naturally. Is that relevant or just bad gouge?
Pretty much.
You don't have to cycle it.
My personal results included trying to balance the water gain with wanting to be light for distance running. I gained about 3-4 lbs, but I definitely was able to kick out a few extra reps during my strength training sessions. Those gains "outweighed" the water weight. I had no digestive issues from it and it's super cheap.
I think the research says 20-25% of people are non responders.1
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.5K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions