According to the sales pitches I've heard, Creatine EE is absorbed much faster and more efficiently, eliminating the bloating that usually comes with creatine MH. The main advantage would be that with Creatine EE, there is no longer a need for the loading phase as the Creatine is directly absorbed and not "wasted", like the Monohydrate version that is less able to travel between cell membranes.
I've googled it and looked in every sports science database to see if any studies regarding Creatine EE have been conducted, or if anyone has complained of side effects. So far, the only negative thing I've found is a 1955 study of More et. al. that tends to show that Creatine EE actually has a shorter half-life in the body than Creatine MH because it is less stable in the presence of acids. On the upside, a few threads were created a few years ago in several bodybuilding-related forums that seem to mostly contradict the study and suggest that Creatine EE is more efficient.
As I said, that was a few years ago. I'm sure that more people have tried this out since.
Have you ever tried Creatine Ethyl Ester? What were the effects? If you also tried Creatine Monohydrate, how did it compare?
I've googled it and looked in every sports science database to see if any studies regarding Creatine EE have been conducted, or if anyone has complained of side effects. So far, the only negative thing I've found is a 1955 study of More et. al. that tends to show that Creatine EE actually has a shorter half-life in the body than Creatine MH because it is less stable in the presence of acids. On the upside, a few threads were created a few years ago in several bodybuilding-related forums that seem to mostly contradict the study and suggest that Creatine EE is more efficient.
As I said, that was a few years ago. I'm sure that more people have tried this out since.
Have you ever tried Creatine Ethyl Ester? What were the effects? If you also tried Creatine Monohydrate, how did it compare?
