Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Sports supplement creatine makes no difference to muscle gains, trial finds

unsw.edu.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 177 posts

Re: Sports supplement creatine makes no difference to muscle gains, trial finds

#61

Post by maerF0x0 »

parthdesai wrote: post #47
laszlojamf wrote: post #4

The way I understood it creatine by itself doesn't promote muscle gain all that much. It's the fact that you can potentially do one to three more reps which does. But that still means you have to do the reps. https://leangains.com/supplements-you-might-actually-find-us...

Yeah, that's also the case when people scoff at pro bodybuilders due to steroids. Steroids don't magically give you the gains, you still have to put the work in. You just get rewarded more, and quicker at cost of other side effects.

> Steroids don't magically give you the gains, you still have to put the work in.

That's not an entirely fair description of the situation actually.

Imagine the 4 groups from the cross product of WorksOut?(Yes/No) cross Steroids?(Y/N).

It's intuitive, obvious, and supported by the data that The WorksOut(Y) + Steroids(Y) Group reliably gains more muscle over time than other groups. And similarly that the WorksOut(N) + Steroids(N) group gains the least (including losses too!) .

The interesting groups are WorksOut without Steroids, vs Steroids without WorksOut.

The sad truth is those on steroids, though sedentary, gain more muscle than those who workout without steroids.

Here's the source of what I'm talking about from Jeff Nippard's Youtube channel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VD9p9tEP9RE around 4:05

And it's important we educate folks about who is likely on them and what's realistic naturally. Because many young people are innudated with drug enhanced bodies on social media and think that's possible without steroids (and their negative sideeffects). It's particularly troublesome in the case of sexual selection and competition, for example using the hetero normative pairings, when young women are attracted to the steroidal bodies and when young men are pressured to take damaging gear to compete with peers who are. (There's the equivalent analogues for other sexual pairings/preferences).

Re: Sports supplement creatine makes no difference to muscle gains, trial finds

#62

Post by tekla »

globular-toast wrote: post #49
LostMyLogin wrote: post #5

I've been lifting five to six days a week since 2012, with some de-loading periods between, and have had my nutrition and sleep locked in for the majority of that time. Anecdotal of course, but I will still sit here and say that creatine is the only supplement that has actually worked over all those years - in fact, it's the only one I currently take. I recover so much better when on roughly 5mg of Creatine for an ex…

I've never really understood what people mean when they talk about recovery. Is this something you can feel? Or does it mean you couldn't lift the same weights the very next day or something? I lifted consistently for years, no supplements, 1RM around 65kg OHP, 115kg BP, 140kg squat, 200kg DL and apart from immediately after the gym I never felt like I needed to recover. Maybe my volume wasn't high enough? I was very…

I mean your 1RM for any of those lifts isn't particularly interesting if you're around a young man 180-220lbs or so.

You weren't loading enough. At my max weights (600lbs Deadlift, 400lbs Squat, 340 Bench) , I needed to take 2-3 days off minimum

Re: Sports supplement creatine makes no difference to muscle gains, trial finds

#63

Post by Fredkin »

NotGMan wrote: post #26
rd11235 wrote: post #7

I don’t understand the trend of individual studies making it to the top of HN, while metaanalyses are ignored, despite examining 10s or 100s of such individual studies in aggregate to reduce noise. There are we-are-human reasons, but are there any logical reasons?

Because if studies are trash the meta-result is also trash. This is what is happening in all nutrition science, where most studies are trash. That is why you can prove any hypothesis you want by picking (meta) studies in nutrition science.

It's like the CDO of science.

Re: Sports supplement creatine makes no difference to muscle gains, trial finds

#64

Post by RamRodification »

parthdesai wrote: post #47
laszlojamf wrote: post #4

The way I understood it creatine by itself doesn't promote muscle gain all that much. It's the fact that you can potentially do one to three more reps which does. But that still means you have to do the reps. https://leangains.com/supplements-you-might-actually-find-us...

Yeah, that's also the case when people scoff at pro bodybuilders due to steroids. Steroids don't magically give you the gains, you still have to put the work in. You just get rewarded more, and quicker at cost of other side effects.

I regularly see people pointing out that this is a myth. That even with no work being put in, there are serious gains when using steroids. I have absolutely zero sources though (like you).

Re: Sports supplement creatine makes no difference to muscle gains, trial finds

#66

Post by sollewitt »

globular-toast wrote: post #49
LostMyLogin wrote: post #5

I've been lifting five to six days a week since 2012, with some de-loading periods between, and have had my nutrition and sleep locked in for the majority of that time. Anecdotal of course, but I will still sit here and say that creatine is the only supplement that has actually worked over all those years - in fact, it's the only one I currently take. I recover so much better when on roughly 5mg of Creatine for an ex…

I've never really understood what people mean when they talk about recovery. Is this something you can feel? Or does it mean you couldn't lift the same weights the very next day or something? I lifted consistently for years, no supplements, 1RM around 65kg OHP, 115kg BP, 140kg squat, 200kg DL and apart from immediately after the gym I never felt like I needed to recover. Maybe my volume wasn't high enough? I was very…

Generally it’s the time it takes for you to get back to physiological baseline.

If you do a lot of activity, the amount of exertion can be measured in EPOC - how much extra oxygen your body needs for the extra metabolism to support repair (this is when any gains happen, growth, endurance, efficiency). When that’s back to baseline your body has done repairing, you’ve “recovered”.

If you aren’t recovered, your body still hasn’t repaired the damage you’ve done to it in the previous round, and you probably won’t be able to repeat the effort, whichever discipline. You’re digging yourself deeper in a hole. If you keep doing this, that’s overtraining, and you can get worse.

If you never experienced this, congratulations, you were operating inside your body’s natural limits! You may have good genes, and having good sleep and nutrition is probably more important than supplements.

Re: Sports supplement creatine makes no difference to muscle gains, trial finds

#67

Post by kibwen »

parthdesai wrote: post #47
laszlojamf wrote: post #4

The way I understood it creatine by itself doesn't promote muscle gain all that much. It's the fact that you can potentially do one to three more reps which does. But that still means you have to do the reps. https://leangains.com/supplements-you-might-actually-find-us...

Yeah, that's also the case when people scoff at pro bodybuilders due to steroids. Steroids don't magically give you the gains, you still have to put the work in. You just get rewarded more, and quicker at cost of other side effects.

This too is oversimplification. For example, due to differences in testosterone levels, a woman would need to put in significantly more effort than a man in order to approach similar strength levels.

Re: Sports supplement creatine makes no difference to muscle gains, trial finds

#68

Post by iambateman »

laszlojamf wrote: post #4

The way I understood it creatine by itself doesn't promote muscle gain all that much. It's the fact that you can potentially do one to three more reps which does. But that still means you have to do the reps. https://leangains.com/supplements-you-might-actually-find-us...

For what it’s worth, I didn’t know this and I suspect a lot of people don’t. Thanks for this!

Re: Sports supplement creatine makes no difference to muscle gains, trial finds

#69

Post by ddorian43 »

LostMyLogin wrote: post #5

I've been lifting five to six days a week since 2012, with some de-loading periods between, and have had my nutrition and sleep locked in for the majority of that time. Anecdotal of course, but I will still sit here and say that creatine is the only supplement that has actually worked over all those years - in fact, it's the only one I currently take. I recover so much better when on roughly 5mg of Creatine for an ex…

But isn't it like 1kg more water retention? How did you notice it?

Re: Sports supplement creatine makes no difference to muscle gains, trial finds

#70

Post by joncrocks »

LostMyLogin wrote: post #5

I've been lifting five to six days a week since 2012, with some de-loading periods between, and have had my nutrition and sleep locked in for the majority of that time. Anecdotal of course, but I will still sit here and say that creatine is the only supplement that has actually worked over all those years - in fact, it's the only one I currently take. I recover so much better when on roughly 5mg of Creatine for an ex…

I've been lifting a similar period of time (although only 3 days a week, with some breaks during COVID etc.) and would concur. I have improved intra-workout endurance when taking creatine, i.e. I can do more reps/the last reps feel easier.

Anecdotally I do also notice a cognitive impact when taking it, e.g. I seem to have improved concentration. Or more that when I have stopped taking it I have decreased concentration. Anecdata 1 of 1.

Post reply on HN