Bodybuilding.net - Bodybuilding Forum

Bodybuilding.net - Bodybuilding Forum (https://www.bodybuilding.net/)
-   Supplements (https://www.bodybuilding.net/supplements/)
-   -   monohydrate + cardio (https://www.bodybuilding.net/supplements/monohydrate-cardio-12580.html)

4444 02-03-2009 03:45 PM

monohydrate + cardio
 
i'm 6feet2, 177 and i'm currently doing the optimized volume training. I'm thinking about taking some creatine monohydrate. I'm doing 30 min of cardio (running or swimming) 5 or 6 times a week right after my workout. I ask you when should i take my creatine and how much after the loading period. and btw what you think 'bout the optimized volume training.

Pitysister 02-03-2009 04:06 PM

no need to load it...despite what the bottle says....you can take it whenever you want to....it doesn't matter.

Tmno 02-06-2009 07:07 AM

As long as you are taking it consistently every day, it doesn't entirely matter what time. A lot of people say after your workouts, so might as well go with then.

roadrunner 03-09-2009 07:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tmno (Post 76454)
As long as you are taking it consistently every day, it doesn't entirely matter what time. A lot of people say after your workouts, so might as well go with then.


Hate to disagree with you my friend. The instructions on the product is there because of countless years of testing and research on subjects whether human or animal. You want to take it before your workouts to make sure your levels are up. Makes as much since as putting air in a flat tire after you get to your destination. You will have to find out what time frame is best for you taking creatine before your workout. Most suggest 30-45 minutes prior but everyone is different. Types of creatine you take will make a huge difference on how much is actually being absorbed into your system and the benefit you are actually getting.

Ross86 03-10-2009 07:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roadrunner (Post 78009)
Hate to disagree with you my friend. The instructions on the product is there because of countless years of testing and research on subjects whether human or animal. You want to take it before your workouts to make sure your levels are up.

Not true. Try to substantiate your claims. Post up some evidence.

Kane 03-10-2009 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roadrunner (Post 78009)
Hate to disagree with you my friend. The instructions on the product is there because of countless years of testing and research on subjects whether human or animal. You want to take it before your workouts to make sure your levels are up. Makes as much since as putting air in a flat tire after you get to your destination. You will have to find out what time frame is best for you taking creatine before your workout. Most suggest 30-45 minutes prior but everyone is different. Types of creatine you take will make a huge difference on how much is actually being absorbed into your system and the benefit you are actually getting.

1) You can count the years of research thats been done. Countless years is a big exaggeration, to say the least.

2) It is no where near the same as your analogy of inflating tires. If you're saturated, you're saturated. A couple of hours is not going to magically cause your levels to drop.

Start posting some actual evidence to substantiate your claims. Otherwise (like Ross) I'm gonna call bs.

roadrunner 03-10-2009 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kane (Post 78020)
1) You can count the years of research thats been done. Countless years is a big exaggeration, to say the least.

2) It is no where near the same as your analogy of inflating tires. If you're saturated, you're saturated. A couple of hours is not going to magically cause your levels to drop.

Start posting some actual evidence to substantiate your claims. Otherwise (like Ross) I'm gonna call bs.


1--Ok, figure of speech on the "countless years" but 60+ is quite a few...see link below [or if you want to count the original studies in the 1800's]

2--If your saturated then your doing more harm than good. Tough on the liver and the bodies filtration along with continued saturation can cause the body to slow down its own process of creatine. Also, the body can only take so much before it becomes waste.

3--as for documentation, I have given Ross links [independent] to look up to justify my statements. But not a problem. Everybody has their own opinion on what is best but mostly I have discovered many are stuck on obsolete discoveries and older formulas [mono] due to the vast majority of research done on it. Anybody can find ANY research to "justify" their believes. As for me, I have researched and been apart of many studies in the past regarding creatine mono along with others. Trust me mono is old school.

4--As for dosages and times to take...maybe I didnt clarify myself properly and thats my fault. Some say take it before others say after your workout. Your gonna get different opinions. Some research found that taking creatine after your workout is not wrong but depending on the time frame before your next workout levels of creatine could be low. I believe those stats are in one of the links below. If you need more information please let me know. I appreciate the oppertunity to learn if I mistakenly quote improperly.





June 1999, issue Albion Research Notes (Vol. 8, No. 2)

Perspective in Biology and medicine Volume 46, number 3, summer 2003, pgs 445-451----Soviet experimenting with creatine during WW II (1943)

Gain-weight-muscle-fast.com [I have no affiliation]

Kane 03-10-2009 11:04 AM

Albion Research Notes are also promoting their own patented magnesium creatine chelate...Sorry to say but that loses credibility right off the bat.

Gain-weight-muscle-fast.com....couldn't find anything about mono being bad or 'old school'. Didn't see any citations either. How can you say studies have shown and then not provide any of them?

Sorry, but I'm still calling bs :)

Ross86 03-10-2009 07:58 PM

Based on my understanding, blood creatine levels don't make a difference during a workout. If you're training once a week, then taking it only on training days doesn't make sense. That might explain the time frame argument you made.

Quote:

If your saturated then your doing more harm than good. Tough on the liver and the bodies filtration along with continued saturation can cause the body to slow down its own process of creatine. Also, the body can only take so much before it becomes waste.
bs, bs, bs. It's not hard on the liver if you're dosing around 5g/day. Endogenous production might slow after a few months...that's why lots of people choose to cycle it. Obviously it becomes waste after a certain point. Otherwise people would be taking 1000g/day.

No other form has been proven to work BETTER than CM. Like I've said before, creatine is creatine is creatine. The only question is absorption and monohydrate has been proven to be absorbed effectively.

All I'm hearing is idle speculation. Still.

roadrunner 03-16-2009 07:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ross86 (Post 78051)
Based on my understanding, blood creatine levels don't make a difference during a workout. If you're training once a week, then taking it only on training days doesn't make sense. That might explain the time frame argument you made.


bs, bs, bs. It's not hard on the liver if you're dosing around 5g/day. Endogenous production might slow after a few months...that's why lots of people choose to cycle it. Obviously it becomes waste after a certain point. Otherwise people would be taking 1000g/day.

No other form has been proven to work BETTER than CM. Like I've said before, creatine is creatine is creatine. The only question is absorption and monohydrate has been proven to be absorbed effectively.

All I'm hearing is idle speculation. Still.



Ok, obviously you didnt read all the links that were attached to my earlier response. You claimed that one of my sources, Albion International, is promoting their product and Im sure they are...along with every other site and study. The part I dont think you read was the research done on creatine monohydrate and the lack of the stomachs ability to absorb it due to the acidic condition. Quote--"Although creatine [as monohydrate] has been shown to be a very effective substance, it is important to note that creatine, with the amino group [NH] gamma to the carboxylic acid, makes it prey to acid hydrolysis. Whatever the rationale, it has been CLEARLY shown that creatine has a propensity to form creatinine, under acidic conditions. In fact, in acidic aqueous solutions, the formation of creatinine from creatine is nearly total and irreversible. From this, one can see that a great deal of creatine can be transformed irreversibly into creatinine, when exposed to the stomachs acidic conditions. Once creatinine is formed, it is no longer of any physiological benefit". [Albion Research Notes Volume 8, No.2]. This non absorbed, up to 66% of the product, bile is what causes the bloating, gastrointestinal distress, required loading period, having to stop taking mono for periods of time and the need for large doses of product and liquids. What has been discovered is by using a chelate formula, the absorbtion, using the small intestines, avoiding the acidic conditions of the stomach now making it almost 100% absorbed without ANY side effects.-[Studies done in powder form]. Gells and pills are ingested throught the stomach no matter what form of creatine is being used.

I hope this new information is what you were looking for. I used Albion International Research [ to end any speculation] as a referrence since they are known and respected worldwide along with their study findings being highly regarded.

Albion Research [Dec 1999 Vol 8, No.3]

CreXtreme.com

Creatinemonohydrate.net

"What you dont know about creatine can hurt you"
www.trulyhuge.com

Ross86 03-16-2009 07:46 PM

Blah blah blah. You still haven't proven that creatine malate or whatever is more effective than taking creatine monohydrate. Even if a portion of the CM turns into creatinine, enough is still absorbed. You're just proving my point further. The vast majority of people don't have GI distress, or bloating. The loading period isn't required. And this part, "having to stop taking mono for periods of time", doesn't make sense. It's a very biased article. It reminds me of a...sales pitch.

You have a fetish for creatine chelate & creatine malate. It is not more effective than taking 5g of CM and you can't find any evidence that is contrary to this. If the creatine makes it into the muscle, then it's there. Creatine monohydrate gets into the muscle. Period. Quit arguing about it.

roadrunner 03-26-2009 07:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ross86 (Post 78230)
Blah blah blah. You still haven't proven that creatine malate or whatever is more effective than taking creatine monohydrate. Even if a portion of the CM turns into creatinine, enough is still absorbed. You're just proving my point further. The vast majority of people don't have GI distress, or bloating. The loading period isn't required. And this part, "having to stop taking mono for periods of time", doesn't make sense. It's a very biased article. It reminds me of a...sales pitch.

You have a fetish for creatine chelate & creatine malate. It is not more effective than taking 5g of CM and you can't find any evidence that is contrary to this. If the creatine makes it into the muscle, then it's there. Creatine monohydrate gets into the muscle. Period. Quit arguing about it.

Whos arguing? You are the one asking for proof that there is a difference between straight mono and newer formulas whether Chelate or Malate formulas. I have given you ample evidence that there is from unbiased studies. Sales pitch?? Whats in it for me...nothing. I have zero ties to any of the research, studies or manufacturers I have used in my referrances. I do prefer certain products but have never mentioned them so wheres your allegations of me doing the sales pitch? Obviously you are set in your ways and thats fine but Im sure others may actually want to know that there are better alternatives available to them. You just need to admit that mono, MAYBE being 30% abosbed into the muscle, is not a fully effective product. That 5gms you THINK your getting in your muscle is actually on a good day maybe 2gms--thus the loading period you state "Isnt required". EVERY study, research and manufacturer I have given you shows these as facts. Show me it doesnt. Ive proved to you Im not making all this up or being "biased" in your words. And yes I have proved to you that mono is not as effective as some of the newer formulas I have mentioned.

I would like YOU to prove to me why mono is superior or equal to any of the formulas I have given you research studies on: How much mono is actually absorbed into the muscle, Why there is bloating--of any kind, why there is a loading period required, why mass doses of fluids are required, why there are ANY gastrointestinal problems reported when all the new formulas dont have any of these requirements/problems and are more effectively absorbed.

Im not trying to be defensive with you in any way, in fact, enjoy the debate and am always willing to learn when the opportunity comes along.

roadrunner 03-26-2009 08:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kane (Post 78028)
Albion Research Notes are also promoting their own patented magnesium creatine chelate...Sorry to say but that loses credibility right off the bat.

Gain-weight-muscle-fast.com....couldn't find anything about mono being bad or 'old school'. Didn't see any citations either. How can you say studies have shown and then not provide any of them?

Sorry, but I'm still calling bs :)

Ok, so I used Albions research. I only used their studies since they are one of the worlds largest most respected research laboratories. I dont know if you actually read the report regarding their findings on creatine mono or not but what was in their report, and all others, is that mono by itself is not the most effective formula. Whether or not Albion has their own creatine product is not what I was trying to relay in my referrance. The report was done showing the ineffeciancey of straight mono. Quote:

"Although creatine [as a monohydrate] has been shown to be a very effective substance, it is important to note that creatine is susceptible to cyclicaztion. It may be that the molecular configuration of creatine with the amino group [NH] gamma to the carboxylic acid, makes it prey to acid hydrolysis. Whatever the rationale, it have been clealy shown that creatine has a propensity to from creatinine, under acidic conditions. In fact, in acidic aqueous solutions, the formation of creatinine from creatine is nearly total and irreversible. From this, one can see that a great deal of creatine can be transformend irreversibly into creatinine, when exposed to the stomach's acidic conditions. Once creatinine is formed, its is no longer of any physiological benefit" [Albion research December, 1999, Vol. 8 No. 2]

What this study, and all others done with a Chelate or Malate formula whether using magnesium or malic acid, found is that with the attachment of other molecules to the creatine monohydrate has been proven to be substantially more absorbed into the muscle through the small intestines [in powder form] void the acidic conditions of the stomach, thus, the eliminating the creatinine process ie; intestinal discomfort, loading periods, mass amounts of fluids etc.

Like I mentioned to Ross, I enjoy the debate and am always willing to learn more. Thank you for your concern regarding you not being able to find what I was referring to on a site quoted. I will go back to the site and find the quotes I was trying to relay. :)


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:27 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.