Articles
Deep dives into the science of creatine, optimal dosing strategies, and the latest research findings.
Guides — 6 evergreen explainers
Written by hand on the questions that come up over and over: how much creatine to take, whether a loading phase is worth it, which form to buy, what the safety evidence actually shows, and why vegetarians respond more strongly. These are the articles that sit behind the calculators — every constant the dosing model uses is argued for in one of them.
Study write-ups — 13 papers covered
One newly published creatine paper at a time, read against its own abstract and then argued with. Each write-up sets out the design, reports what was found, and then says where the study is weak — small samples, unregistered endpoints, industry funding, conclusions that outrun the data. Coverage here is not endorsement, and several of these articles conclude that the paper they cover does not support what it claims.
How a study ends up here
Candidate papers are pulled from PubMed each week, passed through hard eligibility gates, and then scored against a published six-criterion rubric — design rigour, sample and power, effect size, novelty, population reach, and independence from the industry selling the product. The highest-scoring paper is the one written up. The rubric, its weightings and the model constants are set out in full on our research methodology page, and who writes these articles, where AI is used in producing them and what review they pass through before publication are covered in our editorial policy.