Buffered creatine vs creatine monohydrate

Does buffered form of creatine promote greater creatine retention and training adaptations with fewer side effects at lower doses?

Neither manufacturers recommended doses of buffered creatine monohydrate (KA) (1.5 g/d) or KA with equivalent loading (20 g/d for 7-days) and maintenance doses (5 g/d for 21-days) of creatine monohydrate (CrM) promoted greater changes in muscle creatine content, body composition, strength, or anaerobic capacity than CrM (20 g/d for 7-days, 5 g/d for 21-days). There was no evidence that supplementing the diet with a buffered form of creatine resulted in fewer side effects than CrM. These findings do not support claims that consuming a buffered form of creatine is a more efficacious and/or safer form of creatine to consume than creatine monohydrate.

J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2012 Sep 13;9(1):43. – A buffered form of creatine does not promote greater changes in muscle creatine content, body composition, or training adaptations than creatine monohydrate

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)

Leave a Reply

Be the First to Comment!


wpDiscuz