CREATINE: THE TRUTH ABOUT HIS DANGEROUSNESS

Unlike other European countries, France does not allow the sale of creatine, a substance that can improve muscle mass and tone and athletic performance.These differences in legislation covering many more differences of opinion, including its dangerousness.

• 
  

The publication of an article in the latest batch of Medicine & Science in Sports Exercise marks a new chapter in the saga of creatine. Recall the plot. In 2000, specialists from the French Agency for Food Safety (AFSSA) sounded the alarm.According to them, creatine is a dangerous product, capable of producing genetic mutations and cancer . In the eyes of experts, such risks entirely justified the ban on its release in France. At the time, the assertion of a categorical opinion was nonetheless surprised the international scientific community. Certainly, experiments in mice showed indeed that high doses of creatine well favored the formation of potentially toxic to organs like the liver and kidney. But could we extrapolate these findings to humans? It happens that the species behave very differently compared to the same poison. For example, we know that a tablet of paracetamol can kill a cat.

Creatine is not trivial

So what about creatine in men? To find out, he had to undertake new experiences. Initially, they met with no concerns raised by AFSSA. Monitoring consumer of creatine for months or even years, revealed nothing of concern or on renal function, or on liver function. Creatine was she safe? To be sure, he still had to test the impact of consuming high doses for a short period. Twenty young subjects were advised to consume 21 grams of creatine for two weeks and to provide samples of blood and urine. And for the first time, the authors observed in vivo formation of these famous toxic compounds: formaldehyde and methylamine. Certainly, their concentration remained below alert thresholds and various tests such as measurement of albumin in the urine did not allow either of them ascribe any deleterious effect on renal function. Nonetheless there is concern the effects of supplementation with high doses over long periods of time.

In summary, the potential risk of toxicity at high doses does indeed exist. AFSSA's mistake was to amplify the point of absurdity. As (almost) always, the truth seems to lie halfway.