Pure Creatine Ethyl Ester

Diet and Nutrition
1

Do you guys think this is legit?? They say you won’t get the bloating you would get with regular monohydrate.

The price range with this stuff jumps so much that it makes me question it as a gimmick.

For example: MRI CE2, 180 Capsules is 64.99 and Higher Power CE3, 240 Capsules is 14.99. Labarda makes his version called Labrada CreaLean2, 120 Capsules for 17.99.

Anyone ever tried this stuff?
I about to give up the regular creatine monohydrate for the summer cause I’m one of the few that it makes bloated.

2

I’m pretty much in your same exact situation. I’ve been relentlessly following thread after thread and trying to come up w/ a conclusion on whether or not to try the CEE and abandon the Monohydrate.

I live in Orange County, CA and for some ANNOYING reason the girls here really don’t dig too much mass. I’ve been slimming down and getting completely cut up since the day I’ve moved here, but it has reached a point to where I feel TOO skinny (ESPECIALLY by T-Nation followers). It is still summer here as well, and from the easy upper to the stubborn lower abdominals, it is vital that all of these muscles show at all times.

I took the bait (although skeptical) and just purchased a tub of some CEE, hoping that the gains from it will be pure, lean muscle mass. Even the slightest bit of bloat or water retention on the lower abdominals is noticed by my girlfriend when taking Mono, so again I’m simply hoping to gain that pure lean mass w/o the aesthetic minor bloat or water retention.

I will post again in 2 weeks letting you know the initial effects (if any).

3

http://www.T-Nation.com/readTopic.do?id=768093

Swoosh! Barrticle to the rescue!

4

[quote]Brant_Drake wrote:
http://www.T-Nation.com/readTopic.do?id=768093

Swoosh! Barrticle to the rescue![/quote]

That’s a very informative link man. I enjoy all literature by Mr. Barr, and have run across him numerous times while Googling different Creatine case studies.

However, it doesn’t give a definitive answer as to whether or not CEE actually works as effectively as Mono while reducing the water retention and bloat. Being that there is no conclusive evidence to back up CEE’s claims, I figured that I’d be the guinea pig in this scenario and try it out. The $50 price tag would be transparent to me if I had found a replacement for Mono w/o the bloat.

I think myself and the OP wanted some specific and more precise testimonials from other T-Nation subscribers regarding CEE.

5

The topic was dicussed here:

http://www.T-Nation.com/tmagnum/readTopic.do?id=1623209

Hope this helps.

6

[quote]michael2507 wrote:
The topic was dicussed here:

http://www.T-Nation.com/tmagnum/readTopic.do?id=1623209

Hope this helps.[/quote]

WOW… I actually have seen this thread before, but in fear of getting advice from a woman I quickly exited without browsing. However, the example from “Cassanova” was extremely helpful. Thanks for the post, I feel pretty stupid while glaring at this tub of CEE. I’ll give it a
week, and if it sucks that badly then I’ll probably be forced to go w/ some more Monohydrate (they’re out of Biotest right now!) or look at a different route to achieve my goals. Thanks again.

7

I can’t find it now, but there was a study done on CEE vs CM. Somehting happened to the CEE in the stomach and it basically is only like 10-15% available compared to like 90% for CM. For some reason, CEE doesn’t survive the stomach. I also remmeber that CEE dramatically increased creatinine levels…very bad!! Avoid CEE like the plaque. I would count the purchase as a loss and not take anymore.

8

I have taken the stuff on two occasions and I didn’t noticed anything, and it tasted so horrible it was hard to take.

I have never ordered from this site, but this is the best creatine product I have used to date.

2687528993.monstercommercesites.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=1766

I don’t really use supps any more, but when creatine first hit the market I tried just about everything that came out. From plain EAS mono and grape juice, to Creatine N’ Honey, effervescent, with arginine, Cell-Tech etc etc, and some of the newer stuff like Cell Mass. No bloating, or breakouts, and I noticed the perpetual pump and strength gains I usually get with mono.

9

Creatine ethyl ester rapidly degrades to creatinine in stomach acid
Here you go:

1Department of Life Sciences, Kingston University, Penrhyn Rd, Kingston-upon-Thames, United Kingdom. 2University of Northumbria, Sport Sciences, Northumbria University, Northumberland Building, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom, DrChild@CR-Technologies.net

Creatine ethyl ester (CEE) is a commercially available synthetic creatine that is now widely used in dietary supplements. It comprises of creatine with an ethyl group attached and this molecular configuration is reported to provide several advantages over creatine monohydrate (CM). The Medical Research Institute (CA, USA) claim that the CEE in their product (CE2) provides greater solubility in lipids, leading to improved absorption. Similarly San (San Corporation, CA, USA) claim that the CEE in their product (San CM2 Alpha) avoids the breakdown of creatine to creatinine in stomach acids. Ultimately it is claimed that CEE products provide greater absorption and efficacy than CM. To date, none of these claims have been evaluated by an independent, or university laboratory and no comparative data are available on CEE and CM.

This study assessed the availability of creatine from three commercial creatine products during degradation in acidic conditions similar to those that occur in the stomach. They comprised of two products containing CEE (San CM2 Alpha and CE2) and commercially available CM (Creapure�?). An independent laboratory, using testing guidelines recommended by the United States Pharmacopeia (USP), performed the analysis. Each product was incubated in 900ml of pH 1 HCL at 37± 1oC and samples where drawn at 5, 30 and 120 minutes. Creatine availability was assessed by immediately assaying for free creatine, CEE and the creatine breakdown product creatinine, using HPLC (UV)

After 30 minutes incubation only 73% of the initial CEE present was available from CE2, while the amount of CEE available from San CM2 Alpha was even lower at only 62%. In contrast, more than 99% of the creatine remained available from the CM product. These reductions in CEE availability were accompanied by substantial creatinine formation, without the appearance of free creatine. After 120minutes incubation 72% of the CEE was available from CE2 with only 11% available from San CM2 Alpha, while more than 99% of the creatine remained available from CM.

CEE is claimed to provide several advantages over CM because of increased solubility and stability. In practice, the addition of the ethyl group to creatine actually reduces acid stability and accelerates its breakdown to creatinine. This substantially reduces creatine availability in its esterified form and as a consequence creatines such as San CM2 and CE2 are inferior to CM as a source of free creatine.