Effects Of A Short Duration Creatine Loading Protocol On A 1 Minute Anaerobic Cycling Test
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A typical Creatine (Cr) loading protocol of 20g/day for 5 days has been shown to increase muscle Cr and Phosphocreatine (PCr) by 20–50% and to improve strength, power, sprint performance, and work performed during multiple sets of maximal effort. Evidence also indicates that PCr stores are elevated within 2 days of Cr supplementation but little information exists concerning exercise performance following 2 days of supplementation. The purpose of this study was to determine if a short duration 2 day creatine loading protocol would enhance exercise performance during a 1 minute anaerobic cycling test. Twenty-two active volunteer males were randomly assigned in a double-blind fashion to either an experimental (creatine monohydrate) group or placebo (maltodextrin) group for 5 full days. Doses were taken four times a day at evenly spaced intervals. To simulate a high intensity bout of exercise subjects performed a 1 minute anaerobic cycling test; before supplementation, following 2 days and again following 5 days of supplementation. Lactate measurements were taken at 1, 3, and 5 minutes post exercise. Results: Peak power significantly increased by 7.1% following 2 days and 9.9% following 5 days of supplementation. There was also a significant 6.38% increase in total work after 2 days and 10.35 % increase in total work after 5 days. There were no significant differences in any of the measurements for the placebo group after 2 or 5 days. The rate of power decline (measured in 5 sec intervals) and post exercise blood lactates were not significantly different following 2 or 5 days of Cr supplementation in either group. These results suggest that 2 days of Cr supplementation similar to a 5 day protocol in active males is effective in increasing peak power output and total work in high intensity anaerobic exercise lasting up to 1 minute in duration.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".