Hey guys, Sean Nalewanyj here of SeanNal.com and BodyTransformationTruth.com and today
I want to briefly discuss buffered creatine vs creatine monohydrate.
Which is more effective, which one do I recommend and why.
So when creatine monohydrate first came onto the scene back in the early 1990's, it pretty
much changed the bodybuilding supplement world forever.
No other natural muscle building substance is backed by more concrete research demonstrating
clear, significant effects on muscle growth and performance than creatine, and ever since
then, an endless number of "new and improved" versions of creatine have popped up, each
one claiming to be superior to the original monohydrate in a variety of ways.
Buffered creatine is one of the most popular of these forms and it apparently uses a "molecular
buffering process" that creates a "100 percent stable" form of buffered creatine that is
less likely to be converted into the waste product creatinine.
It's claimed to be up to 10 times more powerful than standard monohydrate and it's claimed
to have no bloating or cramping, no necessity for a loading phase and greater creatine uptake
into the muscle cells.
But what is the reality behind these claims?
Well, first of all, it should be noted that the first two points are essentially irrelevant.
Yes, buffered creatine does not cause bloating and/or cramping and it does not require a
loading phase, but neither does regular creatine monohydrate.
The apparent "problems" that are associated with standard creatine monohydrate are typically
only put forward by companies who are selling "new and improved" versions of creatine, but
they have no real grounding in any scientific research.
When using a high quality form of creatine at the recommended 3 to 5 gram per day dosage,
creatine monohydrate has been consistently shown to be both completely safe and effective
and it should also be noted that most, the most popular brand of buffered creatine still
contains about 98 percent creatine monohydate, with the "buffer" making up the other 2 percent.
So what about the actual effects of buffered creatine vs creatine monohydrate?
Well a new study was actually released fairly recently back in September 2012 in The Journal
Of The International Society Of Sports Nutrition that examined this issue in quite a bit of
detail.
It was a double blind study with 36 participants and they supplemented with creatine using
the following protocols.
The first group was standard creatine monohydrate using a loading phase of 20 grams a day for
5 days followed by a standard maintenance phase.
The second group used the manufacturer's recommended dosage of buffered creatine which was 1 and
a half grams per day and the third group used the buffered creatine but at the same dosing
protocol as the first creatine monohydrate group.
And here's what the researchers found.
On the issue of creatine absorption and effects on muscle mass and performance: “Neither
manufacturers recommended doses or equivalent loading doses of buffered creatine promoted
greater changes in muscle creatine content, body composition, strength, or anaerobic capacity
than creatine monohydrate.
These findings do not support claims that buffered creatine is a more efficacious form
of creatine.”
On the issue of safety: “Neither manufacturers recommended doses or equivalent loading doses
of buffered creatine compared to creatine monohydrate resulted in any negative side-effects
or health, health outcomes.
Additionally, there was no evidence that creatine monohydrate supplementation experienced a
greater degradation of creatinine, greater degradation to creatinine, sorry.
These findings suggest that buffered creatine is just as safe to consume as creatine monohydrate
with minimal side-effects.”
And the final word: "Buffered creatine supplementation does not promote greater changes in muscle
creatine content, body composition, or training adaptations in comparison to creatine monohydrate
and buffered creatine supplementation does not exhibit a safer clinical profile or have
less side effects in comparison to creatine monohydrate”.
And I'll link that study in the description box below if you want to check it out yourself.
In addition to this it should be noted that on a gram for gram basis, buffered creatine
is significantly more expensive than regular creatine monohydrate, at roughly 20 cents
per gram, depending on where you buy it from, compared to roughly 3 cents per gram for standard
creatine monohydrate and that makes it about 7 times more expensive.
My suggestion is to examine the claims, review the concrete research that I've provided,
compare the prices and then just go ahead and make up your mind for yourself.
So thanks alot for watching this video.
If you did find the information useful here today please make sure to hit the Like button,
leave a comment and subscribe to stay up to date on all of my future video lessons.
Make sure to check out my complete step-by-step muscle building and fat loss programs over
at BodyTransformationTruth.com.
The link to that is in the description box below, and make sure to join the Facebook
page for daily tips and updates.
The link for that is also in the description box.
Talk to you again soon.