There is NO scientific evidence that CEE works!?!?

[krnxpride83]

I was just reading up bb.com on creatine... and this was what i found....

"The big question we all want to know the answer too, putting all of the marketing hype aside, is has anyone actually invented a better form of creatine? Answer: NO!

At the time of writing this article there was no scientific evidence supporting that other forms of creatine work better than creatine monohydrate. This includes the popular creatine ethyl ester HCl (CEE).

As it turns out, there is a lack of published research conducted with humans using CEE. Based on data submitted to the FDA by a CEE raw material manufacturer, the FDA noted that according to the rat study, the CEE dissociated in to creatine and ethanol in the gut before being bioavailable to the tissues. The FDA also noted that the rat study data did not show an increase in creatine blood levels in the rats that ingested the CEE.

The FDA stated that the study failed to provide data showing that creatine levels were increasing as CEE dissociates and diffuses from the gut into the blood. This study did not clearly demonstrate the relative concentration of CEE, creatine, and ethanol between the gut and blood especially during the first three hours after intake. It is unclear to FDA how creatine/creatinine levels in the urine could be detected yet there were no recorded measurements for creatine in the blood during the first 190 minutes of the experiment.

In all fairness to the CEE company, perhaps CEE is not as bioavailable in rats as it might be in humans. However, in this regard it is interesting to note that in the CEE patent, the illustration identifies CEE as "biologically inactive", then shows some illustrations of what happens to CEE as it moves through the digestive system, where in the intestines the CEE has to be broken down by intestinal enzymes (esterase), and freed in to creatine monohydrate before it can be taken up in to the blood stream and delivered to the muscles.

So, putting all of the CEE marketing hype aside, there is currently no scientific evidence that CEE works better than creatine monohydrate. In fact the CEE molecule has to be digested in the intestines to free up creatine monohydrate to be absorbed in to the body. Based on data submitted to the FDA, it appears that this digestion of CEE in the intestines may be incomplete, and in the end not be very bioavailable.

Perhaps in the future there will be some humans studies conducted using CEE compared directly to creatine monohydrate to determine if it is safe and effective in humans, and if effective, how it actually compares to the beneficial effects of research proven creatine monohydrate, which I look forward to reporting about in future editions of this article.

If you are going to try CEE products, it would probably make sense to do this in the off season, as the expectation of CEE producing benefits is questionable. "


Anyone disagree w/ this article?... and if molecule has to be digested in the intestines to free up creatine monohydrate.. wouldn't it be better to just intake creatine monohydrate in its form already?... any new research on this matter?...

[=*=]

i thought the FDA doesn't touch any of the supplements since it doesn't regulate em, so why did they test em on rats?

[bigpump23]

there really is none people run and jump on the bandwagon but there is no evidence it works better then creatine mono

[JRRBadBoy4Life]

Why is Scientific evidence necessary? If you take CEE and you notice yourself getting bigger and stronger, then I guess it works for you. Thats all the evidence you need, nothing scientific about it!

[DelToro]

Originally Posted by JRRBadBoy4Life

Why is Scientific evidence necessary? If you take CEE and you notice yourself getting bigger and stronger, then I guess it works for you. Thats all the evidence you need, nothing scientific about it!

I'd say that 70% of the users of CEE products are teenage kids that never did Creatine Mono and don't lift 4 real

[pu12en12g]

Originally Posted by DelToro

I'd say that 70% of the users of CEE products are teenage kids that never did Creatine Mono and don't lift 4 real

That sounds about right

[aceman0920]

what about kre-alk

[JRRBadBoy4Life]

Originally Posted by DelToro

I'd say that 70% of the users of CEE products are teenage kids that never did Creatine Mono and don't lift 4 real

That reminds me of the time I was at GNC a couple of months ago and these 2 kids come in looking to buy NO2. I swear they didnt weigh over 120 and probably never lifted weights in their life. I guess they thought NO2 was some magical supplement that would make them big and buff and have the chicks flocking to them.

[BigBTA]

Originally Posted by aceman0920

what about kre-alk

Dude, Kre-Alk is Creatine Monohydrate. They just fixed its conversion problem so can use less and don't get side effects.

[bigpump23]

find something proven to be better then creatine mono

[krazykarl]

Originally Posted by bigpump23

there really is none people run and jump on the bandwagon but there is no evidence it works better then creatine mono

word. a lot of parallelism between mono/cee and ephedra/ephedrine hcl ...

(just for PU)

[pu12en12g]

Originally Posted by krazykarl

word. a lot of parallelism between mono/cee and ephedra/ephedrine hcl ...

No.. not really...

[BringnIt]

"find something proven to be better then creatine mono"--magnesium creatine chelate.

[dtrain13]

Originally Posted by BringnIt

"find something proven to be better then creatine mono"--magnesium creatine chelate.

Yup!

[DelToro]

I'm willing to test some creatine magnesium chelate

any supp companies willing to provide a sample

[jr93]

Originally Posted by bigpump23

find something proven to be better then creatine mono

for me? CEE. went from 225 lb bench, 6 times to 9 times after only 5 days of 3 grams a day. may not work for u but it does for me and yes ive taken mono before.

[krnxpride83]

so u guys think CEE is still worthy of the praise?...

[dtrain13]

Originally Posted by krnxpride83

so u guys think CEE is still worthy of the praise?...

IMO, yes. The most profound gains I ever made while on creatine were with Omego Cre-ethyl Thunder. I grant you that there is more than CEE in this product but it is without question the backbone of the formula.

[krazykarl]

Originally Posted by krnxpride83

so u guys think CEE is still worthy of the praise?...

few things are. find out what works for you.

[thicketman]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again....I'm not impressed w/ CEE.

Of course, I had extremely high expectations from the stuff. I respond very weel to mono, so I figured CEE would make me Superman. When it didn't happen, I was disappointed.

I won't say that the stuf doesn't work...it just doesn't seem to work as well for me as mono. Mono, turns me into a beast. My diet can be complete crap, and my strength shoots up.

[pu12en12g]

Originally Posted by DelToro

I'm willing to test some creatine magnesium chelate

any supp companies willing to provide a sample

Pure MCC seems to be pretty rare

Originally Posted by thicketman

Mono, turns me into a beast. My diet can be complete crap, and my strength shoots up.

Dosage ?

[BigRagu]

I could really give u $#@ if there is a study saying it works or not........ i tested it .... it works.......end of story

1/2 the time studies are full of bs anyway....... i have seen many studies that say..... this dosn't work......that dosn't work.........then when u try it your like OMG.......THIS IS AWESOME!......... same thing goes for herbs and vitamins........ i swear pharm companies that test this stuff screw the results so the "NATURAL" way dosn't work....... but there pill does (and kills u down the road)...........

[CourtneyD]

So, do you all think someone should try out mono before CEE if they are a creatine virgin? I was going to go ahead with CEE, but I've been going back and forth on what to order. I've read so much about both forms, and as of now it's a toss up.

[RepubCarrier]

Originally Posted by jr93

for me? CEE. went from 225 lb bench, 6 times to 9 times after only 5 days of 3 grams a day. may not work for u but it does for me and yes ive taken mono before.

that's some hell of a placebo effect... anabolic steroids barely work that fast dude.

[jr93]

Originally Posted by RepubCarrier

that's some hell of a placebo effect... anabolic steroids barely work that fast dude.

its a good thing i have nothing to prove to u. and ive never had placebo effect from anything. ive taken creatine before. u do realize creatine is an energy supplement not a muscle builder right? i didnt say my max went up, just the number of times i could do 225. with doing it 9 times back then you'd figure i could put up close to 300 but i couldnt. i was still around 270 where i was before. things have since changed obviously but i can still notice a difference when i take creatine. i only take it about a week at a time and have never believed in loading and the "it takes at least 2 weeks to kick in" crap. if it was placebo effect, it wouldve taken place on the first workout you'd figure but it wasnt till the second. i dont know why everyone believes it takes that long. u only have somewhere around 90-100 grams of creatine in ur body so after u take 10g u have a 10% in increase if all or most is absorbed which cee claims to do. i think many people dont take creatine properly or take too much of it. taking large amounts of a highly acidic cee can cause blood rouleau and poor oxygen transport and cause u to not have any gains because ur body cant make atp too well without properly working red blood cells.

[thicketman]

Originally Posted by pu12en12g

Dosage ?

Loading phase: (yeah I know it's not necessary) @ 20g /day- spread out or I'll be one the toilet all day.

Maintenance phase: 5g post-workout.

I take it w/ water. I've never needed to take it w/ grape juice or any high-glycemic carb to see results.

Obviously, my body absorbs it well, so I probably shouldn't have expected anything spectacular from CEE.

[jr93]

just to add a little more to what i said a couple posts up. i feel and have always felt that creatine affects people with higher amounts of fast twitch muscle much more than it helps others. obviously, slow twitch muscle fiber approaches the krebs (citric acid) cycle a little differently and creatine is less useful. since i have always been an explosive person with a weightlifting endurance problem, my gain on cee is not too suprising i think. also, so many people are busy taking dozens of supplements at once that they forget to eat a balanced diet and they leave out the important intermediates of the krebs cycle which renders creatine AND carbs nearly useless. just like creatine is pointless without water, its pointless without acids and other things needed to produce more atp and a reasonable blood pH to deliver the oxygen. the reason most people are non responders to creatine has nothing to do with genetics and more to do with their diet.

[Phosphate bond]

I'm suprised you guys didn't know there was no scientific evidence CEE works better than the monohydrate form.

I searched Pubmed for it and found zero articles on it.

CEE is just someones idea on how it should work in theory. It's not tested though so it's anyone guess how good it is compared to the regular stuff.

[jr93]

whats funny about this whole discussion is that hardly anything has scientific evidence. the human body is barely understood. thats why we have test rats. people hypothesize things then test them. people take a lot of supplements and medicines that dont really have proof that they work. they just do sometimes.

[Doughboy]

I do not think you are going to find many human studies on the supplements we are taking.