Quote:
Originally posted by cliche
Sun Tzu - the loading phase isn't as much of a scam as you seem to think. I've seen various studies (Hultman et al, J Appl Physiol. 1996; Theodoru et al, J Sports Sci 1999) showing that acute loading (20g a day for a week) gets creatine into the muscles much quicker (and according to some studies, to higher levels) than just using a maintenance dose. The '96 paper suggests it takes a month to get a decent increase if you take the lower dose, versus a week if you load - creatine seems to have quite a long half life in the body.
However, skipping the loading dose will probably get you the same effects; you save 100g of creatine but you lose 3 weeks of its effects.
|
excerpt from a Vanderbilt University study---
These increased amounts of creatine slow the possibility of fatigue. Creatine promotes the synthesis of protein, which promotes muscle growth. The loading phase consists of 5 grams 4 - 6 times a day for the first 5 to 7 days. 'f his should be accompanied by at least I hour of exercise. The load should then be reduced after a week to no more than IO grams per day. This is what most of the stores that sell the creatine will tell vou because there aim is to sell the product. Since the product has been proven to work many people are going to follow the routine, when in fact loading is not necessary. The loading is done in the first phase so that by the time one finds out that loading isn't necessary it's too late.
The Journal of Applied Physiology published a study to determine the importance of a loading phase of creatine. In the study four separate groups were used and each group was given a different amount of creatine. The study lasted 28 days and the muscle creatine levels were tested. The four doses went like this: Group I - 20 grams for six days and nothing; Group 2 ---20 grams for six days then 2 grams per day; Group 3 -- '3 grams per day for 28 days; Group 4 was given a placebo. After 28 days, muscle biopsies were taken and groups 2 and 3 proved that loading was not necessary to achieve results from creatine. Groups 2 and 3 showed the same amounts of creatine increases. The exercise that was used was not presented in Joe Wieder's article.
Anaerobic indices
Pre Post Pre Post
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
30-s Bike Test
1 (kJ) 22.65 25.98 23.48 23.51
2 (kJ) 20.40 24.49 22.08 22.32
3 (kJ) 18.54 22.73 21.15 21.40
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bench Press I rep max
Absolute (kg) 126.4 134.6 119.1 116.2
Relative 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.4
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lifting Repetitions (70% of I rep max)
11.5 15.5 11.7 11.7
Total Lifting Volume
Absolute (kg) 10177.7 1459.0 975.1 951.7
Relative 11.7 16.5 11.8 11.5
Like every other "grey area" supplement out there's plenty of studies both done and ongoing that support both sides of this. Would you believe there are people out there that acheive zero effects from creatine? There are. I've also seen a case where someone gained 30 lbs of quality lean mass.
I agree if someone's a natural bodybuilder and they have a contest coming up maybe (if they even used it) it would give them a week of being saturated.
Also if someone has purchased a low quality brand of creatine (nasty shit) its no big deal load for two weeks why not. If you've bought premium crystaline creatine monohydrate, or better yet the high grade mixtures with glutamine, glycine, creatine precursors, and delivery glucose mixtures: the directed loading week contrasted against how much is used with third week results; are simply not worth it in my opinion. From personal experience and associates testimony we all agree.
I'll always go back to the genetics issue; one's effect will differ from another and thats the bottom line. If it works for you continue on, I'm not personally mad for being a part of the populus that helped Bill Phillips become a millionare.