Looking for study on permanence of creatine muscle gains

[orb85750]

I'm assuming this type of study has been done -- but I can't seem to find it. Anyone know? Thanks in advance.

Comparing two groups of weight trainers that train on similar programs for some given period of time (the longer the better):
One group uses creatine but then stops supplementing for at least a month, while the other group never uses creatine. Muscle gains compared.

[MasterBench]

I'm assuming this type of study has been done -- but I can't seem to find it. Anyone know? Thanks in advance.

Comparing two groups of weight trainers that train on similar programs for some given period of time (the longer the better):
One group uses creatine but then stops supplementing for at least a month, while the other group never uses creatine. Muscle gains compared.

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s004210050575

" The eighteen other subjects were randomly divided into a creatine- (n = 8) and a placebo-group (n = 10). They were submitted to a controlled strength-training program for 42 days followed by a detraining period of 21 days. "

"No change in body mass was observed in the control- and placebo-groups during the entire experiment period while the body mass of the creatine-group was increased by 2 kg (P < 0.001). This change can be attributed partially to an increase (P = 0.039) in the body water content (+1.11), and more specifically, to an increase (P < 0.001) in the volume of the inter-cellular compartment (+0.61). Nevertheless, the relative volumes of the body water compartments remained constant and therefore the gain in body mass cannot be attributed to water retention, but probably to dry matter growth accompanied with a normal water volume."

[orb85750]

@MasterBench

Thanks for that. I'm a little confused about the abstract. I probably don't fully understand it. Both groups underwent a 21 day detraining period -- does that mean that they stopped training altogether? (and did they also stop the creatine and placebo supplementation for the 21 days?)

Any longer-term studies of which you are aware?

[MasterBench]

@MasterBench

Thanks for that. I'm a little confused about the abstract. I probably don't fully understand it. Both groups underwent a 21 day detraining period -- does that mean that they stopped training altogether? (and did they also stop the creatine and placebo supplementation for the 21 days?)

Any longer-term studies of which you are aware?

I didn't read the full text, just did a quick search for you. There might be longer studies out there but with the parameters you asked for I am not sure.
Detraining likely would refer to the subjects stopping training in the context of this study.
Creatine/placebo was administered for the full time of the study. LIke I said, a quick search was the closest thing I could pull up to those parameters.
After saturation is achieved (around 30 days @ 5g/day) it will remain for several weeks.

I found something that better answers your question after some more hunting

http://www.jappl.org/content/83/6/2055.full

"Long-term creatine intake is beneficial to muscle performance during resistance training.J. Appl. Physiol. 83(6): 2055–2063, 1997.—The effects of oral creatine supplementation on muscle phosphocreatine (PCr) concentration, muscle strength, and body composition were investigated in young female volunteers (n = 19) during 10 wk of resistance training (3 h/wk). Compared with placebo, 4 days of high-dose creatine intake (20 g/day) increased (P < 0.05) muscle PCr concentration by 6%. Thereafter, this increase was maintained during 10 wk of training associated with low-dose creatine intake (5 g/day). Compared with placebo, maximal strength of the muscle groups trained, maximal intermittent exercise capacity of the arm flexors, and fat-free mass were increased 20–25, 10–25, and 60% more (P < 0.05), respectively, during creatine supplementation. Muscle PCr and strength, intermittent exercise capacity, and fat-free mass subsequently remained at a higher level in the creatine group than in the placebo group during 10 wk of detraining while low-dose creatine was continued. Finally, on cessation of creatine intake, muscle PCr in the creatine group returned to normal within 4 wk. It is concluded that long-term creatine supplementation enhances the progress of muscle strength during resistance training in sedentary females."

"The increase in fat-free mass achieved in the Cr group at the end of the resistance training plus LD period was maintained throughout the detraining plus LD period (Fig. 5). Even 4 wk after cessation of LD, compared with placebo, fat-free mass was still greater in Cr than in P subjects. Changes in weight and percent fat were similar between groups during and after detraining plus LD."

[rhadam]

Creatine doesn't directly build muscle. So your question makes no sense.

[orb85750]

Creatine doesn't directly build muscle. So your question makes no sense.

I think the question concerning whether training with creatine leads to better "permanent" muscle gains than training without is valid -- perhaps because you are able to train with heavier weights for more reps if you use creatine than if you dont?

[rhadam]

I think the question concerning whether training with creatine leads to better "permanent" muscle gains than training without is valid -- perhaps because you are able to train with heavier weights for more reps if you use creatine than if you dont?

Dude.... Cmon. You serious with this line of thinking? Think about what you're saying/asking "more permanent muscle..." Lol you can't be serious.

[orb85750]

Dude.... Cmon. You serious with this line of thinking? Think about what you're saying/asking "more permanent muscle..." Lol you can't be serious.

Perhaps worded poorly, but .... studies comparing lean muscle gains well after period of creatine use versus muscle gains for those not using creatine at all -- you get my point?

[rhadam]

OK well once you lose saturation and return to baseline levels, you'd be on par with other placebo subjects. You're not going to reap any benefits once you lose saturation.

Such confusion. Wow. Many pseudo depth.

[eatyourspinach]

Creatine leads to the production of more ATP, which generates cellular energy. It aids in performance which in turn could lead to being able to perform more intense exercise. It will not on it's own directly build muscle.

[Mmats]

Perhaps worded poorly, but .... studies comparing lean muscle gains well after period of creatine use versus muscle gains for those not using creatine at all -- you get my point?

Why would you ever stop using creatine?

[extremenergy3]

Perhaps worded poorly, but .... studies comparing lean muscle gains well after period of creatine use versus muscle gains for those not using creatine at all -- you get my point?

I think I get what you're saying... but the study would need to follow them after they stop taking creatine and still continue to train for several weeks/months.

[Mr.Cooper69]

Creatine leads to the production of more ATP, which generates cellular energy. It aids in performance which in turn could lead to being able to perform more intense exercise. It will not on it's own directly build muscle.

But who was osmolyte

[eatyourspinach]

But who was osmolyte

I hate when you make me read

http://jp.physoc.org/content/576/2/391.full.pdf

[orb85750]

I think I get what you're saying... but the study would need to follow them after they stop taking creatine and still continue to train for several weeks/months.

Yes, that's exactly the type of study for which I'm searching. Is the answer so obvious that nobody has bothered? rhadam (above) indicates that you will not reap any benefit to having used creatine for some time well after you stop, even if you keep training.

[Mmats]

Yes, that's exactly the type of study for which I'm searching. Is the answer so obvious that nobody has bothered? rhadam (above) indicates that you will not reap any benefit to having used creatine for some time well after you stop, even if you keep training.

What he said has nothing to do with muscle built while subjects were fully saturated. If you discontinue creatine, you would lose water weight (yes in muscle tissue) as you return to baseline PCr.

Muscle gained during creatine use is the same as muscle gained during periods where youre eating apples, oranges, or flying kites.

[Big.Jazayrli]

The muscle you gain while training & using creatine is.. THE SAME TYPE OF MUSCLE.. as the muscle you gain training without creatine

mind = blown

[orb85750]

What he said has nothing to do with muscle built while subjects were fully saturated. If you discontinue creatine, you would lose water weight (yes in muscle tissue) as you return to baseline PCr.

Muscle gained during creatine use is the same as muscle gained during periods where youre eating apples, oranges, or flying kites.

And after all is said and done, you have no more muscle months down the road after stopping creatine than you would had you never used it in the first place? (both cases training consistently and with good effort)
That is the study that has never been done?

[Mmats]

And after all is said and done, you have no more muscle months down the road after stopping creatine than you would had you never used it in the first place? (both cases training consistently and with good effort)

I dont think you understand. Creatine should allow you to put MORE effort into training than if you had not used it. Thus, creatine is simply a tool that can be used to help gain muscle.

[orb85750]

I dont think you understand. Creatine should allow you to put MORE effort into training than if you had not used it. Thus, creatine is simply a tool that can be used to help gain muscle.

OK, so in other words, you might be more muscular in the long-term even if you stopped using creatine months ago, simply because you were able to work harder to build muscle during the time that you were using creatine. I think that's your point. If not, let me know. That's really my question --> but no study to support it?

[Farley1324]

That is an interesting question and I get what you are saying/asking.

Apparently there is no study or any information really other than people just saying "well duh it works like this just because I think it works like this"

And to be fair, there are other things that, cycling off of, results in losing the muscle that was gained as a result of the Supplement, you know

[Mmats]

but no study to support it?

You could say this about almost any ergogenic aid, going by the parameters you require. Good luck finding studies that prove muscle gains made during times of caffeine usage are kept after "cycling off".

Btw, creatine isnt hormonal.

[Farley1324]

You could say this about almost any ergogenic aid, going by the parameters you require. Good luck finding studies that prove muscle gains made during times of caffeine usage are kept after "cycling off".

Btw, creatine isnt hormonal.

Caffeine increases muscle gain? And is proven to do so on the same level as creatine?

This is news to me

[jtaylor2010]

OK, so in other words, you might be more muscular in the long-term even if you stopped using creatine months ago, simply because you were able to work harder to build muscle during the time that you were using creatine. I think that's your point. If not, let me know. That's really my question --> but no study to support it?

Creatine helps you lift heavier

Lifting heavier makes you build more muscle


It's not like you stop taking it and your body goes" well, some of that extra effort came from taking creatine...so lets make sure we catabolize that muscle and get back to the exact point we would've been if we never used creatine and lifted heavier."

[Mr.Cooper69]

Since no one except spinach caught my drift, there's decent reason to believe creatine can actually accelerate hypertrophy due to its intracellular osmolytic effect and independent of its effects on PCr metabolism.

[Mmats]

Caffeine increases muscle gain? And is proven to do so on the same level as creatine?

Indirectly, it could. Its misleading to say that creatine supplementation WILL gain you muscle. Lay in bed all day for a few weeks while supplementing creatine and see how much muscle it builds you.

[Mr.Cooper69]

Indirectly, it could. Its misleading to say that creatine supplementation WILL gain you muscle. Lay in bed all day for a few weeks while supplementing creatine and see how much muscle it builds you.

If you take creatine without exercising, you will not experience myofibrillar hypertrophy which is what people traditionally refer to when they talk muscle growth. But you will get sarcoplasmic hypertrophy. Creatine pulls water into the muscle cell, and this "water weight" is classified as LBM when it resides in the muscular compartment. So LBM will increase (as will muscle size). But unlike the myofibrillar gains experienced with creatine from strength adaptation, this osmolytic effect is transient and will be lost if creatine is stopped.

An analogy is how people look "fuller" when their glycogen stores are replete...a phenomenon also related to water trapping in the myocyte

[ne1]

i agree that it won't make you build more muscles, nor build any muscle faster, but it will help you push maybe more weight and have more endurance, which will probably help aid build muscles. i laugh at some of the reviews and posts i've read where people claim they gained 4-8lbs in a month after taking creatine. if you do, its most likely all water weight.. i've trained for a year before starting creatine and after a month i didn't gain a single pound attributed from taking the creatine (5g per day), i'm actually glad i didn't gain pounds on the scale because it means it's not just water fluffing my muscle.

imo things like liver tabs are more likely to help you actually build muscles rather than creatine but it's more expensive option.

[Mmats]

If you take creatine without exercising, you will not experience myofibrillar hypertrophy which is what people traditionally refer to when they talk muscle growth. But you will get sarcoplasmic hypertrophy. Creatine pulls water into the muscle cell, and this "water weight" is classified as LBM when it resides in the muscular compartment. So LBM will increase (as will muscle size). But unlike the myofibrillar gains experienced with creatine from strength adaptation, this osmolytic effect is transient and will be lost if creatine is stopped.

An analogy is how people look "fuller" when their glycogen stores are replete...a phenomenon also related to water trapping in the myocyte

I understand its osmolytic effect, but as its not accompanied by increased myofibrillar/sarcoplasmic protein synthesis I think its a stretch to call it muscle building directly.

[MuscleUpCrohns]

I don't think that anyone has mentioned it yet, but examine.com is a great website for supplement research. I can't post links yet because of my post count, but there are a plethora of studies on creatine and muscle/strength. On examine.com there are 65 studies that show a strong increase in power output, 19 that show a minor increase in lean body mass, 19 that show a minor increase in anaerobic running capacity, and, honestly, the list for what creatine has been proven to help with goes on and on.

Also from examine.com, "I honestly see no reason why somebody shouldn't supplement creatine, nor do I see any logical basis for the seeming 'fear' of this compound in society.
It's safe, it's healthy, it's cheap, and for most people, it just works. Get some Creatine Monohydrate, take 5g a day, and you're good to go.
If humans didn't make any in the body, this thing would be a vitamin. There do exist deficiency symptoms that result in mental retardation.[2] They're rare, but they pretty much establish the importance of this molecule as a vitamin-like compound."

Just go on examine.com, click the supplements link, and then click "creatine". You can read each individual study, and the overwhelming consensus is that creatine is a safe and effective supplement for building muscle/increasing strength, and is also extremely cost effective, especially compared to many supplements out there.