Creatine Supplementation and Fat-loss - The Truth
For building muscle and enhancing athletic performance, creatine monohydrate
is probably the most effective, research-proven supplement that we’ll ever
see in our life time. Once inside the muscle, creatine is shown to increase
muscle cell volume and stimulate the growth of contractile proteins to
provide better, faster results from resistance training. However, a popular
misconception among many bodybuilders and other athletes is that creatine
supplementation prevents fat loss. Some believe that for building muscle,
creatine is a great supplement but if you want to “cut-up” or get lean,
then creatine supplementation must be avoided. This notion is completely
false and there is no scientific evidence to support this recommendation.
In this article, I provide the reader with the scientific evidence that
is relevant to creatine and fat loss so that the athlete can make an informed
decision based on facts, not out dated gym folk-law.
Creatine contains no fat or carbohydrates. In fact, creatine contains zero calories. Therefore, creatine supplementation cannot provide additional calories to the diet and impede fat loss. In terms of applied research, over 55 well-controlled studies that have examined creatine’s effects on body composition have shown that longer term creatine supplementation (8-12 weeks) increases lean muscle mass with little or no change in fat mass. Remember that an increase in lean mass with no change to fat mass still equates to a decrease in body fat percentage. Over an even longer term, an increase in lean mass will provide an increase in a person’s metabolic rate that, in turn, burns more body fat. Therefore, in an indirect way, creatine supplementation probably speeds fat loss! So where did the unfounded notion that creatine prevents fat loss actually originate from?
Inaccuracies, Fallacies and
the Magazines.
I’ve been reading bodybuilding magazines for over 20 years. Anyone else
that has read them for that long will probably agree that although the
pictures and the paper upon which these magazines are printed have become
better quality, the content has essentially stayed the same.
Why?
Muscle magazines are not designed to educate. Their one sole purpose
is to provide a medium in which marketers can sell supplements. Muscle magazines
have always been nothing more than a monthly supplement brochure (that the
consumer pays top dollar for). However, today’s magazines run advertisements
that sell anything from penis and breast enlargers to anabolic steroids! Almost
every one of the major bodybuilding publications are owned by supplement
companies. The magazine that is not, blatantly prostitutes its editorial space
to any company that buys the most advertising space!
Therefore, the
editorial content of these magazines becomes rather unreliable and distorted.
Bodybuilding magazines do not “fact check” their content before (or after)
publishing. Many of the articles are written by freelance journalists or staff
writers (on behalf of illiterate bodybuilders) that have a very limited ability
to make accurate interpretations of the scientific literature. For these
reasons, inaccuracies and fallacies about bodybuilding training techniques and
supplements are perpetuated, repeatedly until they become gym-gospel. Need some
examples? How about “high rep training is the way to provide cuts and definition
to your physique” or “side crunches will tighten the waist and obliques” or the
classic, “low intensity cardio is the best way to burn body fat”. Where do you
think all these bogus ideas came from? The muscle magazines; not scientific
research.
Now it appears that the topic of creatine and fat loss has
become a part of the bodybuilding folk-law for ignoramuses. The findings from a
most recent creatine study [2] have been interpreted by many in the bodybuilding
media to suggest that creatine supplementation somehow prevents fat
loss.
This study examined creatine’s influence on body composition and
substrate (fuel) utilization in ten college-attending males (not bodybuilders)
undertaking a 12-week resistance training program. This study employed a
crossover design and the subjects were divided into two groups. Group-1
supplemented with creatine during the first few weeks and after a 4-week
“washout” (a period of no creatine consumption) this group ingested the glucose
placebo during the later weeks in this study. Group-2 ingested the placebo first
and then after the 4-week washout period, this group was given creatine during
the final weeks. All data was then combined to provide the results from
“creatine” and “placebo” supplementation.
When the data is presented in
this manner, the results show that creatine and the placebo treatment resulted
in the same amount of muscle gain, and when the men did not use creatine, they
showed a significant loss of body fat. Also, when the men were taking the
creatine, they showed a greater respiratory exchange ratio (RER). This indicates
a shift towards the use of carbohydrates rather than fat for fuel. However, for
dedicated bodybuilders, these results need to be interpreted with caution, for a
number of reasons.
The Facts Behind this Research . . .
The subjects in this research study were not bodybuilders, they were
active but physically untrained, college males. Unlike bodybuilders these men
were not use to following regimented eating, training and sleeping patterns. I
have conducted numerous exercise training studies involving bodybuilders. I know
the difficulty in controlling eating patterns, training attendance and intensity
even in these highly motivated individuals. Untrained college men would not be
nearly as disciplined or motivated as bodybuilders with regard to their eating,
sleeping patterns or training intensity. They would not be accustomed to the
rigorous, weekly training or having to report dietary details. Based on my
experience, unless the study participant is a highly motivated bodybuilder; they
do not fully comprehend the importance of a consistent approach to eating,
sleeping and training. Therefore the data obtained during a bodybuilding study
that does not utilize bodybuilders, must be questionable.
This study used
a “crossover design”; the assessment period between creatine use and
non-creatine use was very close. The interaction of diet, creatine
supplementation and training may have an accumulative (or carry-over) effect
that may last for a number of days or even weeks after cessation of creatine
use. Therefore, supplementing with creatine for 3 weeks then ceasing
supplementation for 4 weeks (as in this study) probably provided improvements in
muscle mass and metabolism during the “non-creatine” assessment period.
Therefore, it is difficult to make firm interpretations about the effects of
creatine from this data.
In this study, the authors suggest that creatine
may prevent fat loss and this is a puzzling notion. The creatine dose used in
this study was 20-grams for 4 days followed by 2-grams a day for 17 days.
Creatine contains no calories and I fail to see how 2-grams a day of a
non-caloric compound could interfere with the fat loss process. I mean let’s use
our common sense here.
The participants in this study were not
athletes or bodybuilders; they were not use to following a regimented lifestyle
that is required for quality gains from training (anyone who’s attended college
can identify with this). In this study, the subject’s diets were not
statistically analyzed. Therefore, common logic leads me to suspect that any
changes in fat mass seen in these subjects were most likely due to alterations
in dietary intake and not from ingesting 2-grams of a zero calorie-containing
supplement.
The aspects I have raised are not meant to detract from the
research study I have just discussed. These points merely stress the importance
of the way in which the results are interpreted. Also, remember that not all
bodybuilding journalists are interested in the little details that may influence
the results. As I have shown you here, sometimes the findings from a
“bodybuilding research study” are not really applicable to dedicated,
hard-training bodybuilders.
The Real Life Results ! . . .
If
you’re after “real world” examples of the effects of creatine on fat loss, take
a look at bodybuilding champion’s such as Jeff Willet, Skip La Cour and Derik
Farnsworth; each are a prime example of “applied bodybuilding research”. I say
this because these men are machine-like in there preparation and documentation
of their diet and training. Jeff, Skip and Derik all swear by Micronized
creatine supplementation during their contest preparation. Each one of these
guys is responsible for taking drug-free, competitive bodybuilding to another
level.
Creatine is a zero-calorie, lean mass stimulator. It is an
important part of the bodybuilder’s arsenal to gaining a bigger, stronger,
leaner physique. Of the hundreds of studies that have examined creatine’s
effects on body composition, the vast majority show very favorable increases in
the lean mass to fat ratio. If maximum muscle gains are desired, I cannot see a
reason to exclude creatine during any attempt at fat loss. Combined with the
correct, calorie-restricted eating plan, creatine will only serve to accelerate
your fat loss efforts, not impede them.
1. Huso, M.E., et al.
Creatine supplementation influences substrate utilization at rest. J Appl
Physiol. 2002.
