Stop focusing on single ingredients to save you. It's never going to happen. True virility is unlocked when you realize all ingredients, be it creatine or anything else, work synergistically with one another to maximize effects. This principle applies to all vitamins and minerals.
Can you reference a scientific study demonstrating the presence of the toxic 'tagalongs' (what even does that mean?) In creatine supplements. Your personal experience is anecdotal and you have not provided any scientific link proving that your health issues were in fact related to creatine supplements. You have provided abstracts from 2 scientific studies that suggest potential negative outcomes from high levels of supplementation (emphasise potential) but the thrust of your article relates to the toxins in creatine. To give weight to your standpoint you need to reference actual studies and not just hearsay. I have no interest in creatine, but I do take Umbridge to authors stating something as a given fact without providing evidence to back this up. Just saying.
Just following up on this. There was a study undertaken in 2011 by Moret S, Preparing A and Tubaro F "Levels of creatine, organic contaminants and heavy metals on creatine dietary supplements" Food Chemistry 126 (3), 1232-1238 https://doi.org/10.1016/juice.foodchem.2010.12.028. Study concluded that creatinine was the most common impurity above 100 mg/kg in 44% of samples, followed by dihydro-1,3,5 thiamine above detection level (up to 8mg/kg) a few samples exceeded 50 mg/kg of dicyandiamide. Only trace amounts of mercury (as a heavy metal) were found. (NB study was based on 33 creatine supplements). Fast forward and the industry standard is 'creapure' which is German made to high standards using filtration and HPLC (liquid chromatography) to detect impurities such as creatinine and DCD and DHD. So in summary, stay away from cheap sources, especially from manufacturers in China or you do run the risk of certain potentially harmful impurities and instead purchase high grade European or US manufactured product that adheres to food safety standards. Hope this helps form a balanced opinion. 😀
They used high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) to analyze creatine content and possible organic contaminants in 33 samples of creatine supplements from the market.
Creatinine resulted to be the major organic contaminant (44% of the samples over 100 mg/kg). About 15% of the samples had dihydro-1,3,5-triazine concentrations exceeding the detection limit of 4.5 mg/kg (maximum 8.0 mg/kg) and a dicyandiamide concentration over 50 mg/kg.
They found that creatine is metabolized to methylamine, which is further converted to formaldehyde by semicarbazide-sensitive amine oxidase (super toxic).
Formaldehyde is well known to cross-link proteins and DNAs, and known to be a major environmental risk factor.
SSAO-mediated production of toxic aldehydes has been recently proposed to be related to pathological conditions such as vascular damage, diabetic complications, nephropathy, etc. Chronic administration of a large quantity of creatine can increase the production of formaldehyde, which may potentially cause serious unwanted side-effects.
Review 1) They found increases in methylamine and formaldehyde excretion after a heavy load of creatine (20 g/day) and it was advised that high-dose (>3-5 g/day) creatine supplementation should not be used by individuals with pre-existing renal disease or those with a potential risk for renal dysfunction
Hi Anthony. Thanks for flagging all this and being so constructive with how you presented it all. I've now updated the post to reflect more evidence to support my argument along with posting the individual studies and reviews in the comments section, here, too.
No worries 👍 thank you for taking the time to respond meaningfully. I do think, however, that we should keep in mind that lots of medicines and vitamins are created from toxic precursors but when synthesised and stabilised they are perfectly safe to take. Creatine is known to be safe and stable but I agree that loading at high doses could compromise the health of some vulnerable individuals, eg renal issues.
Just look at what creatine is derived from. It's insane the amount of push-back and dissonance I'm getting on this post. It's literally derived from toxic chemicals that have no bearing on nature or biological translation.
This is clickbait AI-written slop with bad sourcing and unsupported hyperbolic claims, offering much more expensive and difficult alternatives ("just eat grass-fed steak every day bro, if you don't you're undisciplined")
Keep taking creatine made in the USA, like BulkSupplements. Don't listen to the crazy slopmonger
You must question all your synthetic supplements. How they were made. What they're derived from. And whether they've been tested. Most of you aren't and you wonder why you're still not getting the results you want.
Congratulations on beating cancer! I’m going to push back a little: a man over 40 could naturally hit 865, even post-cancer, but that’s rare. Most men this age are in the 400–600 range. This reads like classic health marketing funnel language. You could design it better to get people to click and eventually buy coaching or a course without dragging creatine into it. The real dark side of creatine is that “safe and boring” doesn’t get clicks.
My AST/ALT numbers looked like a lifelong alcoholic after a few months on a “clean” version of creatine. After stopping and waiting a few months, everything was back in normal range.
Creatine supplementation typically does not significantly affect AST or ALT levels in healthy individuals when taken at recommended dosages. Most research shows that creatine use is safe for liver enzyme levels in healthy, physically active adults—even over long-term use.
Thanks for posting. There is robust research that shows a direct relationship between creatine supplementation and liver enzyme distortion- however, as you correctly noted, it isn’t the creatine alone that causes the spike. It is actually the ethanol (alcohol) which causes the spike. However, whereas normal alcohol consumption shouldn’t have a major effect on liver enzymes, when one supplements with creatine in conjunction with even the slightest amount of alcohol, the liver effect gets magnified manifold. See “Creatine supplementation exacerbates ethanol‑induced hepatic damage in mice” by Marinello et al., published in Nutrition in October 2019 (Epub May 29, 2019).
“Creatine isn’t natural anymore; it’s made like fertilizer/plastics.” - Misleading framing, Yes, supplements are synthesized (from cyanamide + sarcosinate). But synthetic creatine monohydrate is chemically identical to the creatine your body makes and the creatine in meat. Major regulators treat it as such.
“Toxic residues: DCDA, triazines, heavy metals contaminate most tubs; strain kidneys.” - Largely false for reputable brands; specs exist
“Creatine wrecks kidneys / ‘Russian roulette.’ Not supported in healthy people, Large safety reviews and many trials show no adverse effect on renal function at recommended doses in healthy adults; creatine can raise serum creatinine (a breakdown product), which can confuse lab eGFR without indicating damage. People with known kidney disease should speak to their clinician first.
“Creatine is laced with ‘deuterium’ that slows proton pumps; DCDA/triazines gunk mitochondria; EMF makes them more toxic.” No credible evidence
“Creatine spikes DHT by 56% (but T flat).” - True in one small study; not replicated
"Creatine was first discovered in 1832.. in meat."
Actually it is highly questionable whether creatine is even in meat. It may just be a by-product of adding a bunch of chemicals to meat.
To wit, here is how Michel Eugène Chevreul claimed to "discover creatine in meat" - tell me how convincing this is:
1) He boiled muscle meat down to an extract
2) He added potassium hydroxide to the meat juice and filtered out some proteins
3) He added lead acetate and extracted a white crystalline powder
3) He added sulfuric acid to get pure creatine crystals
Now MAYBE that took away all the non-creatine parts that were in the meat and just left the creatine that had been there all along, or maybe the process simply CREATED creatine that was never there in the meat at all.
"Creatine" could then be an oddly appropriate name for the chemical. Though this is how all "vitamins" and such are supposedly discovered, and we should be similarly skeptical of those processes for the same reasons. Assumptions are not facts.
Agreed. You could say the same for all “vitamins” .. I would have put this in there but it felt a bit too red-pill for my audience. May have to consider that.
For an older male (56) with an aging brain, the cognitive benefits for me totally outweigh the downsides. Not that have experienced any of the downsides listed in the post or the replies 🤷♀️
My primary take-away from this article is that I should be careful regarding who/where my creatine comes from.
More to the point, this article would be a good cautionary tale about supplement contamination rather than creatine itself.
Adulterated contaminated products aside, the reason that creatine remains popular is that it is one of few non-androgen supplements that actually works for most people.
Stop focusing on single ingredients to save you. It's never going to happen. True virility is unlocked when you realize all ingredients, be it creatine or anything else, work synergistically with one another to maximize effects. This principle applies to all vitamins and minerals.
Wrong. 2 ingredients, that’s all you need. Crack Cocaine, and IV heroin.
Can you reference a scientific study demonstrating the presence of the toxic 'tagalongs' (what even does that mean?) In creatine supplements. Your personal experience is anecdotal and you have not provided any scientific link proving that your health issues were in fact related to creatine supplements. You have provided abstracts from 2 scientific studies that suggest potential negative outcomes from high levels of supplementation (emphasise potential) but the thrust of your article relates to the toxins in creatine. To give weight to your standpoint you need to reference actual studies and not just hearsay. I have no interest in creatine, but I do take Umbridge to authors stating something as a given fact without providing evidence to back this up. Just saying.
Just following up on this. There was a study undertaken in 2011 by Moret S, Preparing A and Tubaro F "Levels of creatine, organic contaminants and heavy metals on creatine dietary supplements" Food Chemistry 126 (3), 1232-1238 https://doi.org/10.1016/juice.foodchem.2010.12.028. Study concluded that creatinine was the most common impurity above 100 mg/kg in 44% of samples, followed by dihydro-1,3,5 thiamine above detection level (up to 8mg/kg) a few samples exceeded 50 mg/kg of dicyandiamide. Only trace amounts of mercury (as a heavy metal) were found. (NB study was based on 33 creatine supplements). Fast forward and the industry standard is 'creapure' which is German made to high standards using filtration and HPLC (liquid chromatography) to detect impurities such as creatinine and DCD and DHD. So in summary, stay away from cheap sources, especially from manufacturers in China or you do run the risk of certain potentially harmful impurities and instead purchase high grade European or US manufactured product that adheres to food safety standards. Hope this helps form a balanced opinion. 😀
Study 3:
They used high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) to analyze creatine content and possible organic contaminants in 33 samples of creatine supplements from the market.
Creatinine resulted to be the major organic contaminant (44% of the samples over 100 mg/kg). About 15% of the samples had dihydro-1,3,5-triazine concentrations exceeding the detection limit of 4.5 mg/kg (maximum 8.0 mg/kg) and a dicyandiamide concentration over 50 mg/kg.
Link to read in full here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0308814610016377?via%3Dihub
Study 2)
They found that creatine is metabolized to methylamine, which is further converted to formaldehyde by semicarbazide-sensitive amine oxidase (super toxic).
Formaldehyde is well known to cross-link proteins and DNAs, and known to be a major environmental risk factor.
SSAO-mediated production of toxic aldehydes has been recently proposed to be related to pathological conditions such as vascular damage, diabetic complications, nephropathy, etc. Chronic administration of a large quantity of creatine can increase the production of formaldehyde, which may potentially cause serious unwanted side-effects.
Link here: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10859677/
Review 1) They found increases in methylamine and formaldehyde excretion after a heavy load of creatine (20 g/day) and it was advised that high-dose (>3-5 g/day) creatine supplementation should not be used by individuals with pre-existing renal disease or those with a potential risk for renal dysfunction
Link here: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21399917/
Hi Anthony. Thanks for flagging all this and being so constructive with how you presented it all. I've now updated the post to reflect more evidence to support my argument along with posting the individual studies and reviews in the comments section, here, too.
No worries 👍 thank you for taking the time to respond meaningfully. I do think, however, that we should keep in mind that lots of medicines and vitamins are created from toxic precursors but when synthesised and stabilised they are perfectly safe to take. Creatine is known to be safe and stable but I agree that loading at high doses could compromise the health of some vulnerable individuals, eg renal issues.
Do you really think Pharm**a is going to waste money funding a study like you suggest? Even if N=1 the story is worth being heard.
Just look at what creatine is derived from. It's insane the amount of push-back and dissonance I'm getting on this post. It's literally derived from toxic chemicals that have no bearing on nature or biological translation.
This is clickbait AI-written slop with bad sourcing and unsupported hyperbolic claims, offering much more expensive and difficult alternatives ("just eat grass-fed steak every day bro, if you don't you're undisciplined")
Keep taking creatine made in the USA, like BulkSupplements. Don't listen to the crazy slopmonger
Another synthetic “absolutely essential” sacred cow destroyed 😂. Thanks for the info. “If man made it, don’t eat it.”
Exactly. Well said.
You must question all your synthetic supplements. How they were made. What they're derived from. And whether they've been tested. Most of you aren't and you wonder why you're still not getting the results you want.
Congratulations on beating cancer! I’m going to push back a little: a man over 40 could naturally hit 865, even post-cancer, but that’s rare. Most men this age are in the 400–600 range. This reads like classic health marketing funnel language. You could design it better to get people to click and eventually buy coaching or a course without dragging creatine into it. The real dark side of creatine is that “safe and boring” doesn’t get clicks.
My AST/ALT numbers looked like a lifelong alcoholic after a few months on a “clean” version of creatine. After stopping and waiting a few months, everything was back in normal range.
Many such cases, Mark. You are not alone my friend. Thanks for sharing.
From Perplexity:
Creatine supplementation typically does not significantly affect AST or ALT levels in healthy individuals when taken at recommended dosages. Most research shows that creatine use is safe for liver enzyme levels in healthy, physically active adults—even over long-term use.
Thanks for posting. There is robust research that shows a direct relationship between creatine supplementation and liver enzyme distortion- however, as you correctly noted, it isn’t the creatine alone that causes the spike. It is actually the ethanol (alcohol) which causes the spike. However, whereas normal alcohol consumption shouldn’t have a major effect on liver enzymes, when one supplements with creatine in conjunction with even the slightest amount of alcohol, the liver effect gets magnified manifold. See “Creatine supplementation exacerbates ethanol‑induced hepatic damage in mice” by Marinello et al., published in Nutrition in October 2019 (Epub May 29, 2019).
This entire article is bogus:
“Creatine isn’t natural anymore; it’s made like fertilizer/plastics.” - Misleading framing, Yes, supplements are synthesized (from cyanamide + sarcosinate). But synthetic creatine monohydrate is chemically identical to the creatine your body makes and the creatine in meat. Major regulators treat it as such.
“Toxic residues: DCDA, triazines, heavy metals contaminate most tubs; strain kidneys.” - Largely false for reputable brands; specs exist
“Creatine wrecks kidneys / ‘Russian roulette.’ Not supported in healthy people, Large safety reviews and many trials show no adverse effect on renal function at recommended doses in healthy adults; creatine can raise serum creatinine (a breakdown product), which can confuse lab eGFR without indicating damage. People with known kidney disease should speak to their clinician first.
“Creatine is laced with ‘deuterium’ that slows proton pumps; DCDA/triazines gunk mitochondria; EMF makes them more toxic.” No credible evidence
“Creatine spikes DHT by 56% (but T flat).” - True in one small study; not replicated
Girl you stupid.
"Creatine was first discovered in 1832.. in meat."
Actually it is highly questionable whether creatine is even in meat. It may just be a by-product of adding a bunch of chemicals to meat.
To wit, here is how Michel Eugène Chevreul claimed to "discover creatine in meat" - tell me how convincing this is:
1) He boiled muscle meat down to an extract
2) He added potassium hydroxide to the meat juice and filtered out some proteins
3) He added lead acetate and extracted a white crystalline powder
3) He added sulfuric acid to get pure creatine crystals
Now MAYBE that took away all the non-creatine parts that were in the meat and just left the creatine that had been there all along, or maybe the process simply CREATED creatine that was never there in the meat at all.
"Creatine" could then be an oddly appropriate name for the chemical. Though this is how all "vitamins" and such are supposedly discovered, and we should be similarly skeptical of those processes for the same reasons. Assumptions are not facts.
Agreed. You could say the same for all “vitamins” .. I would have put this in there but it felt a bit too red-pill for my audience. May have to consider that.
This is a loads of bullsh..it!!!
For an older male (56) with an aging brain, the cognitive benefits for me totally outweigh the downsides. Not that have experienced any of the downsides listed in the post or the replies 🤷♀️
Lions mane for cognition. In my non-medical opinion, it’s way more powerful.
Just listen to nature. Experts are right until they are wrong.
Good read!
Every time I took it, my stomach felt "funny". I did notice the gain in my muscle mass, though.
So, thank you for the article. I think I am done with this "bio hack".
My primary take-away from this article is that I should be careful regarding who/where my creatine comes from.
More to the point, this article would be a good cautionary tale about supplement contamination rather than creatine itself.
Adulterated contaminated products aside, the reason that creatine remains popular is that it is one of few non-androgen supplements that actually works for most people.