Comment on: “Creatine Monohydrate Supplementation, but not Creatyl-L-Leucine Increased Muscle Creatine Content in Healthy Young Adults: A Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Trial”

Abstract

Recently, an article by Askow et al. (2022) was published ahead of print in the journal on August 25, 2022. Researchers in this study recruited 29 participants and had them consume 5 g/day of either creatine monohydrate (CM), creatyl-l-leucine (CLL), or a placebo for 14 days in a randomized, double-blind design. During this time, participants also performed three resistance training sessions per week. Muscle creatine content was quantified via muscle biopsies pre-and postintervention. The authors reported that CM supplementation significantly increased muscle creatine content within 14 days of supplementation, but no significant changes in muscle creatine content were observed for the placebo or CLL groups.This letter will highlight a critical flaw in the design of the study, draw attention to other study limitations or inconsistencies, and point to a calculation error in the discussion. It will also Escalante

Reply to G. Escalante and D. St. Mart

“…Instead, we chose to use a translationally relevant dose of Cr (5 g/day). As rightfully stated by Escalante & St. Mart (2023), CLL is not available on the market as an isolated supplement.…”

“…For future reference, generally, a concerned reader who would like more information on COI reporting should contact the university directly to initiate a formal review as opposed to pursing this information via an academic journal within a public forum. Nonetheless, I (Burd) preemptively did this for Escalante & St. Mart (2023).…”

“…

We have addressed the scientifically relevant points put forth by Escalante & St. Mart (2023), and we appreciate the opportunity to put their comments on our study (Askow et al, 2022) in proper context to the readers of your journal.

…”

“…Mart (2023), and we appreciate the opportunity to put their comments on our study (Askow et al, 2022) in proper context to the readers of your journal. In the following, we have provided our responses to Escalante & St. Mart (2023).…”