J Appl Physiol 2001, 91:1055–1060 PubMed Competing interests This

J Appl Dinaciclib price Physiol 2001, 91:1055–1060.PubMed Competing interests This study was funded by Thermos L.L.C. (Schaumburg, IL, USA). Authors’ contributions DL was the study coordinator and was involved in research design, data collection and analysis, as well as manuscript preparation. ACP and was involved in research design, analysis and manuscript preparation. SS assisted in research design. ER assisted in data analysis and manuscript development. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.”
“Background Selleckchem Danusertib Creatine has proven to be one of the most effective and popular

dietary supplements for resistance-trained athletes [1–3]. The form of creatine that has been most extensively studied has been creatine monohydrate (CrM) [1]. Studies Epacadostat ic50 have consistently indicated that creatine supplementation increases muscle creatine and phosphocreatine concentrations by approximately 15-40%, enhances anaerobic exercise capacity, and increases training volume leading to greater gains in strength, power, and muscle mass [1–10]. A number of potential therapeutic benefits

have also been suggested in various clinical populations [11–17]. Studies have indicated that creatine monohydrate is not degraded during normal digestion and that nearly 99% of orally ingested creatine is either taken up by tissues or excreted in urine [18–20]. Further, no medically significant side effects have been reported in the literature [21–27]. Nevertheless, supplement manufacturers have continually Chloroambucil introduced newer forms of creatine into the marketplace [1]. These newer forms have been purported to have better physical and chemical properties, bioavailability, efficacy, and/or safety profiles than creatine monohydrate [1]. However, there is little to no evidence that any of the newer forms of creatine are more effective and/or a safer form of creatine than CrM whether ingested alone and/or in combination with other nutrients [1]. In addition, whereas the safety, efficacy, and regulatory status of CrM is clearly defined in almost all global markets; the safety, efficacy and regulatory

status of other forms of creatine present in today’s marketplace as a dietary or food supplement is less clear [1]. A buffered form of creatine (Kre-Alkalyn® [KA], All American Pharmaceutical, Billings, MT, USA) has been marketed as a more efficacious and safer form of creatine than creatine monohydrate [28]. According to the manufacturer’s website [28], this patented form of creatine [29] is a “buffered” or “pH-correct” form of creatine that remains more stable in the stomach, is not degraded to creatinine, and thereby has greater bioavailability. According to patent filings [29], this is accomplished by adding an alkaline powder (e.g., soda ash, magnesium glycerol phosphate, bicarbonate) to creatine (e.g., creatine monohydrate, creatine phosphate, creatine pyruvate, creatine citrate) in order to adjust the pH to a range between 7–14.

Comments are closed.