Primary Research · 1992
Elevation of creatine in resting and exercised muscle of normal subjects by creatine supplementation
Harris, Söderlund, and Hultman · Clinical Science, 1992
Key finding
Landmark paper establishing that oral creatine supplementation raises muscle creatine concentration — founding the loading-phase protocol.
Abstract
PubMed · PMID 1327657 →1. The present study was undertaken to test whether creatine given as a supplement to normal subjects was absorbed, and if continued resulted in an increase in the total creatine pool in muscle. An additional effect of exercise upon uptake into muscle was also investigated. 2. Low doses (1g of creatine monohydrate or less in water) produced only a modest rise in the plasma creatine concentration, whereas 5g resulted in a mean peak after 1h of 795 (SD 104) mumol/l in three subjects weighing 76-87 kg. Repeated dosing with 5g every 2h sustained the plasma concentration at around 1000 mumol/l. A single 5g dose corresponds to the creatine content of 1.1 kg of fresh, uncooked steak. 3. Supplementation with 5g of creatine monohydrate, four or six times a day for 2 or more days resulted in a significant increase in the total creatine content of the quadriceps femoris muscle measured in 17 subjects. This was greatest in subjects with a low initial total creatine content and the effect was to raise the content in these subjects closer to the upper limit of the normal range. In some the increase was as much as 50%. 4. Uptake into muscle was greatest during the first 2 days of supplementation accounting for 32% of the dose administered in three subjects receiving 6 x 5g of creatine monohydrate/day. In these subjects renal excretion was 40, 61 and 68% of the creatine dose over the first 3 days. Approximately 20% or more of the creatine taken up was measured as phosphocreatine. No changes were apparent in the muscle ATP content.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
Abstract sourced from PubMed, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine. Displayed in the authors’ own words for context; our critique is in the sections below.
Read the full paper
Cited in 1 guide
How to read a study like this
The same questions worth asking about any research paper, not just this one. Worth a minute even if you trust the grade.
Who was studied, and do you resemble them?
Supplement effects often depend on baseline status. Vitamin D helps people who are deficient; iron helps people who are anemic. A result in people unlike you may not apply to you.
What was measured, and does it matter in daily life?
A study that shows a blood marker moved isn't the same as a study that shows people felt or functioned better. Ask what the outcome means in practice.
How large was the effect — not just whether it was significant.
'Statistically significant' only means the effect is unlikely to be zero. It doesn't tell you the effect is large enough to notice. Look for effect sizes, not just p-values.
Who paid for the trial, and what did they stand to gain?
Industry-funded trials are several times more likely to report positive results than independent ones. It's not usually fraud — it's subtle design and reporting choices. Weight accordingly.
Has anyone else replicated this?
Single positive trials are hypotheses. Replication by independent groups is what turns a hypothesis into reliable evidence. If the only positive trial is the one you're reading, wait.
Does the dose in the trial match what's being sold?
Supplement marketing routinely cites trials that used 5–10× the dose in the product. If the effective dose was 2 g/day and the capsule has 200 mg, expect roughly no effect.
About this page
Formulate maintains a registry of clinical studies cited across its guides and evidence grades. This page links the study metadata to the content that cites it — one canonical entry per landmark study.
The full citation chain is public so readers can verify claims without hunting through individual guide pages. Browse all cited studies →
Note: Study summaries on this page are editorial interpretations of the research. Always consult the primary source before drawing clinical conclusions.