Strategic Creatine Supplementation and Resistance Training in Older Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Darren Candow, Tim Bolton, Katherine Mcleod, Jessica Lewis, James Lazorko, Nathan Hass. The timing of creatine supplementation is crucial for creating an anabolic environment for muscle growth. Recent evidence suggests that creatine ingestion before and after resistance training (RT) sessions may be more beneficial than ingesting creatine at other times of the day. However, it is unknown whether there is an advantage in supplementing creatine immediately before compared to immediately after RT in older adults. PURPOSE: To determine the effects of the timing of creatine supplementation and RT in older adults. METHODS: Healthy older adults were randomized to one of three groups: CR-Before (0.1g/kg-1 creatine before + placebo (rice flour) after RT, N=11, 56yrs), CR-After (placebo before + creatine after RT, N=11, 55yrs), and PLA (placebo before and after RT, N=11, 60yrs). RT (9 whole-body exercises) was performed 3x/week for 12 weeks. Prior to and following the study, measures were made for body composition (air-displacement plethysmography), muscle hypertrophy (ultrasound), and strength (1-repetition maximum leg press and chest press). RESULTS: Muscle mass and strength increased in all groups with training (p<0.05). There was a greater change in lean tissue mass in the Cr-After group compared to PLA (CR-After: 53.9±11→56.1±11.6kg, 4%; CR-Before: 50.6±14→52.1±15kg, 2.9%; PLA: 51.7±9→52.1±8kg, 0.8%; p<0.05). Both creatine groups experienced a greater increase in strength compared to PLA (leg press: Cr-After: 142±56→188±66kg, 32%; CR-Before: 134±52→187±75kg, 40%; PLA: 165±55→192±41kg, 16%; chest press: Cr-After: 52±33→74±31kg, 42%; CR-Before: 43±26→67±28kg, 56%; PLA: 65±28→74±30kg, 14%; p<0.05). The CR-After group had a greater increase in elbow flexor muscle hypertrophy compared to the Cr-Before and PLA groups (Cr-After: 3.7±0.8→4.4±1.0cm, 19%, CR-Before: 3.7±0.4→4.0±0.6cm, 8%, PLA: 3.0±0.4→3.1±0.5cm, 3%; p<0.05), with no other differences. CONCLUSIONS: Creatine supplementation and resistance training has a positive effect on muscle mass and strength. Supplementing with creatine immediately following exercise is an important factor for stimulating muscle accretion in healthy older adults. Supported by RIVALUS
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".