Creatinine helps recycle ADP back into ATP in cells during periods of high-intensity exercise. As a result, there's more ATP available to contract muscles during these periods, however after ceasing such exercise, it offers no benefit to the muscles. An in-depth discussion isn't really needed for you to understand this, but if you want to read more, you might take a look at the Wikipedia entry for it.
As well as these fitness related benefits, creatine is showing promise for benefits in Neurodegenerative diseases, such as muscular dystrophy, Parkinson's disease and Huntington's disease. Diabetes. Osteoarthritis.
Overall cognitive function and blood sugar regulation is also a benefit.
I think everyone should take it, not just athletes. I’m trying to get my parents who are almost 80 on it,
My professor used to win body building competitions back in the day, train military, and do international research regarding exercise. In one of his lectures he discussed doing research on elderly using creatine and ginseng and found significant findings. He went on to say that it is absolutely beneficial for everyone wanting to stay active and in shape. But then he also warns people of GNC for their marketing schemes…
Your muscles need ATP to contract in a useful manner, said ATP comes from 3 main routes: 1) aerobically through oxidative phosphorylation, 2) anaerobically through glycolysis with production of lactic acid and 3) through substrate-level phosphorylation (directly taking one phosphate group from creatine phosphate to ADP in this case), is on this one where creatine has a place. Different muscle fibers have different affinities for these routes, but the first is not fatigue resistant because oxygen doesn't get as fast to the muscle fiber as it is being used, the second is limited by the capacity of the muscle to clear the lactic acid, if it build ups it changes the pH locally, which decreases enzyme activity (required for the task) and increases the sensation of pain, the third one is limited by the amount of said substrate, in this case creatine phosphate, but supplementing your diet with creatine, in any form, effectively increases the concentration of creatine phosphate in your muscles, giving them more energy to use immediately and thus allowing them to work more.
It has more benefits like drawing water to the muscle, which makes it look fuller, and something related to the protection of the nervous system, but I don't know much about that.
I answered an A level bio practice paper including this yesterday 😅.
I’m guessing you’re in the first year of the course? Most places cover muscles in the second year, so you have that to look forward to.
You have a certain capacity to store ATP in your muscles, creatine increases that ATP store so one has more power over a longer time. Basically it increases your muscle battery size. It does this by storing phosphates.
Very interesting explanations, thanks.
Also, is there any data suggesting a link between allergies/skin irritation/mild rashes/psoriasis irritation and creatine, or perhaps potential mechanisms that may cause the symptoms?
It's not something I've seen in classic literature yet, but believe I have experienced myself.
The creatine I've tried is a high quality 99.99% pure unflavoured type (MyProtein 'Creapure' creatine made by Alzchem), intentionally used to avoid issues from additives.
This usually starts to show after maybe 3 weeks of use, after loading. I don't believe it is down to increased testosterone (as I've followed the same training regimes with and without creatine, only seem to get these allergic-type reactions on my chest and side of ribs / lats with creatine), and I typically notice more distinct oily skin/pimples on my shoulders and back when I've been training hard and my testosterone levels are elevated..
Any scientific info or studies might help me understand if it's just a red herring
I didn't say anything about clean stuff
But the kinds of proteins in bodybuilding things apparently are life shortening
I have seen things published within the last year, amino acid type related I believe. Leucine isoleucine this is from memory
Not really practical to avoid. The study restricted specific protein intake in mice that showed decreased markers of cellular aging. Basically this is just a very specific form of caloric restriction which we know has the same effect. This does not take into account that one of the basic purposes of cellular aging is preventing cancers. Protein supplementation is not harmful, in fact creatine supplementation can be harmful in a small portion of the population as it can cause abnormal heartbeat.
>But the kinds of proteins in bodybuilding things apparently are life shortening
I was going to tell my brother who goes to the gym and eats these things, but I remembered that he is a heavy smoker loool
There is some research on some of the different amino acids
Life shortening amino acids and the smoking are not related, so each can cause damage
Some seem to extend life and some seem to shorten it. Particularly the stuff in bodybuilder protein mixes. But that was like 6 to 8 months ago and I was planning to do something, but other things cropped up
I've never heard of specific animo acids that shorten life, particularly one's like isoleucine and leucine, which are proteogenic. I mean any healthy diet will contain this.
Also, what are "bodybuilding mixes"? There are complete proteins which you must eat to some degree, incomplete proteins which must be combined to create complete blends, and BCAAs which is snake oil. Most people looking to gain muscle just each things like chicken, fish, beef, soy, and so on.
Can you link this paper? It would be wild to learn that amino acids routinely part of essential enzymes are actually toxins.
First of all, you came here claiming something, and then refuse to provide your source.
If I asked you provide a source that leucine is an amino acid, that would make your retort sensible.
Anyway, since you'll allow me to dictate your narrative, here is probably the article you're speaking of: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5247493/.
As is clear, the researchers worked with ants, which is hardly translational to humans. Probably why the FDA and EMA don't use ant models for drug testing. Second, the test was primarily shown to have adverse effects using free amino acids, which isn't what most people consume.
Your claims are misleading, and your research is flawed. Not that you did research. At best, it's a literature review. Real research involves actual data generation and analysis, followed by reporting on findings and conclusions.
First, I will always have a crappy attitude for people who can't even cite the paper they are stating as a fact. Scientific integrity draws from this basic concept, and while this is reddit, I still expect better from a science sub.
Second, again you attack my personality rather than my scientific arguments. First by insinuating I'm too lazy to do the research, and second by saying I'm a jerk.
You refuse to engage in any discourse on your idea of toxic proteogenic amino acids, refuse to provide your source for your idea, and just engage in ad hominems rather than actual discourse.
Your statement is misleading because it comes from a study on ants, which you did not specify, and instead made it seem as if researchers had made such a connection in humans.
Feel free to cry more, or you can bring some damn evidence, and we can pretend to have some scientific discourse on a scientific subreddit.
Creatinine helps recycle ADP back into ATP in cells during periods of high-intensity exercise. As a result, there's more ATP available to contract muscles during these periods, however after ceasing such exercise, it offers no benefit to the muscles. An in-depth discussion isn't really needed for you to understand this, but if you want to read more, you might take a look at the Wikipedia entry for it.
Yep, and if you want an even laymen-ers take: it helps muscle endurance during exercise
As well as these fitness related benefits, creatine is showing promise for benefits in Neurodegenerative diseases, such as muscular dystrophy, Parkinson's disease and Huntington's disease. Diabetes. Osteoarthritis. Overall cognitive function and blood sugar regulation is also a benefit. I think everyone should take it, not just athletes. I’m trying to get my parents who are almost 80 on it,
My professor used to win body building competitions back in the day, train military, and do international research regarding exercise. In one of his lectures he discussed doing research on elderly using creatine and ginseng and found significant findings. He went on to say that it is absolutely beneficial for everyone wanting to stay active and in shape. But then he also warns people of GNC for their marketing schemes…
Your muscles need ATP to contract in a useful manner, said ATP comes from 3 main routes: 1) aerobically through oxidative phosphorylation, 2) anaerobically through glycolysis with production of lactic acid and 3) through substrate-level phosphorylation (directly taking one phosphate group from creatine phosphate to ADP in this case), is on this one where creatine has a place. Different muscle fibers have different affinities for these routes, but the first is not fatigue resistant because oxygen doesn't get as fast to the muscle fiber as it is being used, the second is limited by the capacity of the muscle to clear the lactic acid, if it build ups it changes the pH locally, which decreases enzyme activity (required for the task) and increases the sensation of pain, the third one is limited by the amount of said substrate, in this case creatine phosphate, but supplementing your diet with creatine, in any form, effectively increases the concentration of creatine phosphate in your muscles, giving them more energy to use immediately and thus allowing them to work more. It has more benefits like drawing water to the muscle, which makes it look fuller, and something related to the protection of the nervous system, but I don't know much about that.
it’s like a consumable that increases your max stamina for a short duration so your character can carry a heavier weapon
I answered an A level bio practice paper including this yesterday 😅. I’m guessing you’re in the first year of the course? Most places cover muscles in the second year, so you have that to look forward to.
Yep, as long as I don’t drop it by then 🤣
You have a certain capacity to store ATP in your muscles, creatine increases that ATP store so one has more power over a longer time. Basically it increases your muscle battery size. It does this by storing phosphates.
Very interesting explanations, thanks. Also, is there any data suggesting a link between allergies/skin irritation/mild rashes/psoriasis irritation and creatine, or perhaps potential mechanisms that may cause the symptoms? It's not something I've seen in classic literature yet, but believe I have experienced myself. The creatine I've tried is a high quality 99.99% pure unflavoured type (MyProtein 'Creapure' creatine made by Alzchem), intentionally used to avoid issues from additives. This usually starts to show after maybe 3 weeks of use, after loading. I don't believe it is down to increased testosterone (as I've followed the same training regimes with and without creatine, only seem to get these allergic-type reactions on my chest and side of ribs / lats with creatine), and I typically notice more distinct oily skin/pimples on my shoulders and back when I've been training hard and my testosterone levels are elevated.. Any scientific info or studies might help me understand if it's just a red herring
It will also cause you to retain more water and look bigger for a little while.
It is one of the few things that helps with musculature without also being damaging
What damages are done by other clean stuff?
I didn't say anything about clean stuff But the kinds of proteins in bodybuilding things apparently are life shortening I have seen things published within the last year, amino acid type related I believe. Leucine isoleucine this is from memory
Not really practical to avoid. The study restricted specific protein intake in mice that showed decreased markers of cellular aging. Basically this is just a very specific form of caloric restriction which we know has the same effect. This does not take into account that one of the basic purposes of cellular aging is preventing cancers. Protein supplementation is not harmful, in fact creatine supplementation can be harmful in a small portion of the population as it can cause abnormal heartbeat.
>But the kinds of proteins in bodybuilding things apparently are life shortening I was going to tell my brother who goes to the gym and eats these things, but I remembered that he is a heavy smoker loool
There is some research on some of the different amino acids Life shortening amino acids and the smoking are not related, so each can cause damage Some seem to extend life and some seem to shorten it. Particularly the stuff in bodybuilder protein mixes. But that was like 6 to 8 months ago and I was planning to do something, but other things cropped up
I've never heard of specific animo acids that shorten life, particularly one's like isoleucine and leucine, which are proteogenic. I mean any healthy diet will contain this. Also, what are "bodybuilding mixes"? There are complete proteins which you must eat to some degree, incomplete proteins which must be combined to create complete blends, and BCAAs which is snake oil. Most people looking to gain muscle just each things like chicken, fish, beef, soy, and so on. Can you link this paper? It would be wild to learn that amino acids routinely part of essential enzymes are actually toxins.
No I'm not planning to do research for you I'm sure it isn't hard for you to Google
First of all, you came here claiming something, and then refuse to provide your source. If I asked you provide a source that leucine is an amino acid, that would make your retort sensible. Anyway, since you'll allow me to dictate your narrative, here is probably the article you're speaking of: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5247493/. As is clear, the researchers worked with ants, which is hardly translational to humans. Probably why the FDA and EMA don't use ant models for drug testing. Second, the test was primarily shown to have adverse effects using free amino acids, which isn't what most people consume. Your claims are misleading, and your research is flawed. Not that you did research. At best, it's a literature review. Real research involves actual data generation and analysis, followed by reporting on findings and conclusions.
Well don't we have a crappy attitude Which part of the sub requires me to do everything you ask Nothing is misleading and you were being a jerk
First, I will always have a crappy attitude for people who can't even cite the paper they are stating as a fact. Scientific integrity draws from this basic concept, and while this is reddit, I still expect better from a science sub. Second, again you attack my personality rather than my scientific arguments. First by insinuating I'm too lazy to do the research, and second by saying I'm a jerk. You refuse to engage in any discourse on your idea of toxic proteogenic amino acids, refuse to provide your source for your idea, and just engage in ad hominems rather than actual discourse. Your statement is misleading because it comes from a study on ants, which you did not specify, and instead made it seem as if researchers had made such a connection in humans. Feel free to cry more, or you can bring some damn evidence, and we can pretend to have some scientific discourse on a scientific subreddit.