Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Creatine: Mono vs Ethyl Ester?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Gaborone, Botswana
    Posts
    2

    Creatine: Mono vs Ethyl Ester?

    I am very keen to take creatine, as I'm told that it produces very good results if taken properly. I understand that CM is the traditional creatine, but then what about CEE? Is CEE better, or what are the fundamental differences, can anyone tell me?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Kabutzkatura
    Posts
    4,665
    CEE absorbs better but it's fatal flaw is that it doesn't assimilate into the muscles as well as CM. So CM will produce better results.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Gaborone, Botswana
    Posts
    2
    how come you do not need a loading phase for CEE?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Kabutzkatura
    Posts
    4,665
    You don't technically need to load for any creatine.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    SK
    Posts
    171
    In theory: mono does need a loading phase and preferably needs to be taken with fructose so with fruit juice. This aids in absorbtion. Mono causes water retention which makes it seem that more weight is gained when it is actually water.

    Creatine EE does not need to be loaded, something to do with the ester. And it does not cause water retention.

    But in personal experience I find mono to be better for me. If you dont mind the water bloat I d go for the mono

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Anywhere...
    Posts
    15,725
    Mono, no comparison.

    The rest a meerly gimicks.

  7. #7
    ^^ sorry, but that just is not factual. it does not need to be taken with any kind of sugar, or carb for that matter. Mono can cause water retention, but if you purchase a buffered form, (micronized) you won't experience bloat. CEE is unproven with close to no solid scientific evidence behind it. Meanwhile, Monohydrate has been tested and proven over and over since the 70's. micronized creatine Mono is always the best choice.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Plano, TX
    Posts
    518
    Quote Originally Posted by RATTLEHEAD View Post
    ^^ sorry, but that just is not factual. it does not need to be taken with any kind of sugar, or carb for that matter. Mono can cause water retention, but if you purchase a buffered form, (micronized) you won't experience bloat. CEE is unproven with close to no solid scientific evidence behind it. Meanwhile, Monohydrate has been tested and proven over and over since the 70's. micronized creatine Mono is always the best choice.
    While it is not NEEDED, there is a scientific study that shows simple carbs aid in the absorbtion of creatine.

    But we've been down this road before.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    dont ask for a source thx
    Posts
    8,949
    i read recently in MD i think that there was a recent study that proved creatine EE was inefective.

  10. #10
    pick up last months issue of mens health. Their university study explained things pretty well.. I think you'll find it interesting.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    6,150
    mono is the way to go, from my experience with both.
    do you need to load on any? no you dont
    can you load? yes you can

    whats the best results?
    loading may spead up the strength process but only due to holding abit more water and absorbing a lot more creatine into the muscle.

    ATP thats all its about.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •