> And yet the OP study claims otherwise. Why is this one study more believable than the others? > Also hell, your own damn link says that elite athletes seem

> And yet the OP study claims otherwise. Why is this one study more believable than the others? > Also hell, your own damn link says that elite athletes seem to get no benefit from creatine vs younger ones, Where are you seeing that? All I could find was the opposite: > In trained athletes, creatine has been reported to reduce body fat and improve some measures of anaerobic exercise performance, strength, and power output. But regardless, > meaning that its not really increasing muscle mass, just a combination of placebo, water retention, and maybe a burst of energy in the early stages of getting fit. doesn't follow; it's perfectly plausible that something could help more in initial training but actually work then.