Creatine Supplement 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.

Creatine Supplement and Fat Loss -The Truth