Six claims, a closer look
The research includes women, too. See the review ↗
Some claims are unsupported. Others need context. Here’s what the studies found, who they included and where the questions remain.
Myth 01
“Creatine makes you fat.”
Not shown.
The research reviewed in 2021 did not support an increase in fat mass with creatine. Water changes can affect scale weight, but that is a different outcome. If weight is your main concern, the more useful question is what a study actually measured and who took part. Source ↗
A review brings together different studies. It cannot promise how one person’s weight will change. Read the evidence ↗
Myth 02
“Creatine makes your hair fall out.”
Not in this trial.
A 2025 trial found no significant difference in hair outcomes between creatine and placebo over 12 weeks. It studied resistance-trained men, with hair measurements available for 37 participants. This is useful direct evidence, but it does not settle long-term effects or establish the same result in women. Source ↗
The trial involved men and lasted 12 weeks. It cannot establish long-term outcomes or an equivalent result in women. Read the evidence ↗
Myth 03
“You have to load first.”
Optional.
A loading phase is one way to raise muscle creatine stores more quickly. The ISSN position stand also describes a gradual approach using lower daily amounts. Maintenance protocols commonly use 3 to 5 g a day. These are research approaches to understand, rather than a personalised dose recommendation. Source ↗
The position stand describes 3 g a day for around 28 days as a slower approach. Individual circumstances still matter. Read the evidence ↗
Myth 04
“The research is all in men.”
Yes.
A 2020 review brought together 29 studies monitoring adverse outcomes in 951 female participants. It found no serious adverse events attributed to creatine in those studies. Reporting was uneven, though, and the findings cannot establish safety in every medical situation, at every dose or over an unlimited time. Source ↗
Clinical review of this guide is pending. For an individual decision, particularly with a medical condition or during pregnancy or breastfeeding, discuss supplements with your GP. Read the evidence ↗
Myth 05
“A newer form must be better.”
Not established.
Creatine monohydrate is the form most extensively studied in the reviewed research. A different name or a higher price does not, by itself, show a better result. Comparisons need evidence using the actual formulation and outcome being claimed, rather than assuming all forms have the same research behind them. Source ↗
Look for a direct comparison with monohydrate. Evidence from one formulation cannot automatically establish another formulation’s effects. Read the evidence ↗
Myth 06
“Creatine improves bone density.”
Not in this trial.
A two-year trial in 237 postmenopausal women found no improvement in bone mineral density with creatine compared with placebo. Both groups followed an exercise programme. Some bone geometry measures improved, but those results are different from a density improvement and do not show that fractures became less likely. Source ↗
The primary outcome was femoral-neck bone mineral density. Positive secondary findings should not hide a negative primary result. Read the evidence ↗
Two studies worth opening
The hair trial measured hair outcomes directly. The bone trial measured bone density and other bone properties. Their populations and timeframes differ, so we show those details alongside the findings. Read a paper’s main outcome before treating a positive secondary result as the whole story.
No significant difference in hair outcomes or DHT between creatine and placebo.
No added bone-density or measured strength benefit; selected bone-geometry measures and walking time favoured creatine.
May we use Google Analytics to understand visits and research-link clicks? It uses cookies. No advertising tracking. You can change your choice below.