Your numbers
What to do next
Method
Every figure on this page is either quoted from one of the papers listed at the bottom or worked out from what you typed. Below, first the same evidence read against the six claims people usually arrive with, then the derivation of each number, step by step, so you can disagree with a specific one.
Six things people get wrong
Each verdict below is about the claim, not about you, and each one names the paper it comes from. The full citations are further down.
| Claim | Verdict | What the evidence says |
|---|---|---|
| Take it straight after training or you waste it | Overstated | One four-week trial in 19 recreational bodybuilders leaned toward post-workout. The 2021 review that gathered the timing studies concluded that adapting creatine timing to when you train "is not currently supported by solid evidence and should not be considered a real concern for now". Taking it every day, rest days included, matters more than the hour. Antonio & Ciccone 2013; Ribeiro et al. 2021 |
| You have to cycle off every few weeks | Myth | There is nothing to recover from. The ISSN stand reports that muscle stores take 4 to 6 weeks to drift back to baseline once you stop, and that no evidence suggests they fall below it, so long-term suppression of your own synthesis "does not appear to occur". The same stand describes up to 30 g a day for five years as safe and well tolerated in healthy people. Kreider et al. 2017 |
| It makes you hold water and look puffy | Partly true | Loading does pull water in. The ISSN stand reports roughly 0.5 to 1.0 litres of short-term fluid retention, broadly proportional to the weight jump on the scale, and it is drawn into the muscle cell rather than under the skin. Antonio and colleagues note several studies where total body water did not change at all. Skipping the loading phase removes most of the visible jump. Kreider et al. 2017; Antonio et al. 2021 |
| It damages your kidneys | Myth | In healthy people at these doses, no. Antonio and colleagues state that creatine at recommended dosages "does not result in kidney damage and/or renal dysfunction in healthy individuals", and the ISSN stand found no compelling evidence of harm to renal function. Existing kidney disease is a genuinely different question, and it belongs with your clinician rather than with a web page. Kreider et al. 2017; Antonio et al. 2021 |
| HCl, ethyl ester and buffered forms absorb better | Unproven | The ISSN stand calls claims that other forms degrade less or reach muscle better "currently unfounded". Antonio and colleagues put it plainly: there are no peer-reviewed papers showing that equal amounts of creatine salts raise muscle creatine more than monohydrate does. The one buffered form tested head to head for 28 days showed no group difference in body composition, strength, anaerobic capacity or side effects when it was dosed to match monohydrate, and at the 1.5 g a day printed on its own label it trended toward a smaller rise in muscle creatine. Its authors concluded it was neither more effective nor safer. Price is our point rather than theirs: monohydrate is the cheapest per gram of the lot. Kreider et al. 2017; Jagim et al. 2012; Antonio et al. 2021 |
| I am a non-responder | Possible | The size of the jump depends on where your stores started. Loading raises muscle creatine and phosphocreatine by 20 to 40%, and people who begin low have the most room: the ISSN stand names vegetarians at 90 to 110 mmol/kg of dry muscle as likely to gain the most. Confirming a genuine non-response takes a muscle biopsy, not a fortnight of feeling unchanged. Kreider et al. 2017 |
Where each number comes from
The International Society of Sports Nutrition gives two flat maintenance bands, not one sliding scale: 3 to 5 g a day generally, and a note that larger athletes may need as much as 5 to 10 g a day. Both are flat figures, so a flat band is what this page answers with. The 0.03 to 0.05 g/kg line shown beside it is our arithmetic, not a quotation from the stand, and it does one job: it decides which of the two bands answers you. At or below 100 kg the 0.05 g/kg figure stays at or under 5 g, so the general 3 to 5 g band is the answer and the scaling changes nothing about it. Above 100 kg that figure passes 5 g, so the answer moves to the stand's larger-athlete band, starting at 5 g, with the top end held at the scaled figure and never taken past the stand's own 10 g ceiling. The page names which band it used every time.
Loading is 0.3 g per kilogram of body mass per day, taken as four servings, for 5 to 7 days. Antonio and colleagues write it out without ambiguity: "0.3 g/kg/d for 5-7 days (i.e., 21 g/day for a 70 kg individual)". Per kilogram, per day. Calculators that read that as 0.3 g per pound produce a dose 2.2 times too large, because a pound is 0.4536 kg. At 190 lb that is 57 g a day instead of 26. The danger is not the dose: the ISSN stand records that clinical populations have taken 0.3 to 0.8 g/kg/day, "equivalent to 21–56 g/day for a 70 kg individual", for years with no clinically significant or serious adverse events. The damage is to your wallet, because a week at 57 g buys creatine that leaves in your urine. This page prints both numbers side by side so you can see which one your other calculator handed you.
Cost per gram is price divided by net grams, and everything else follows from it: 30 days at your dose, 365 days at your dose, and how long one tub lasts. When loading is selected, the loading grams come off the tub first, so "tub lasts" is 5 to 7 days of loading plus whatever the remainder buys at maintenance. Loading is a one-off, so it is priced on its own line instead of being folded into a monthly figure that would then be wrong for every month after the first. Ranges appear wherever the dose is a range, because pretending to a single day count would be false precision.
Plain creatine monohydrate powder. The net weight printed on the label is accurate. You take it daily, rest days included, because the point is a filled store rather than a pre-workout hit. Price is what leaves your account, so add shipping yourself if it is not free. A month here is 30 days and a year is 365. No currency is converted: the symbol you pick is a label, nothing more.
The scoop is the loose end. It measures volume, not mass, and a powder packs differently depending on how the tub has been shipped, stored and shaken, so a level scoop labelled 5 g can be out either way and a real tub can run shorter or longer than the day count here. We have not put a figure on that, because we have no source we would stand behind for one. Weigh a week of servings on a kitchen scale if the count matters to you. Bodyweight is taken exactly as entered, and a swing of a kilo or two moves the loading total by well under a gram a day.
Whether creatine will do anything you can feel. The EU authorises two health claims for creatine, and both are narrower than the marketing around them. The first, on the 2012 list: "Creatine increases physical performance in successive bursts of short-term, high intensity exercise", conditional on 3 g a day and on foods aimed at adults doing high-intensity exercise. The second was added in 2017: "Daily creatine consumption can enhance the effect of resistance training on muscle strength in adults over the age of 55", conditional on 3 g a day taken alongside resistance training at least three times a week at 65 to 75% of a one-repetition maximum, and permitted only on foods aimed at that group. So there is one authorised muscle-strength claim, it is age-specific, and it comes with a training requirement attached. That is the whole of what a label may lawfully claim in the EU. This page promises nothing past those two, will not name a best brand and will not rank tubs for you. It gives you the cost per gram and the evidence behind the dose, and the choice stays yours.
Your dose, your loading total and your cost per gram are worked out before any link is considered, and none of them can be moved by one. The link under the answer is a partner because creatine monohydrate is the product this page is about, and it is labelled as one. The free route sits above it and says the same thing the method does: any plain monohydrate works, and the only number worth comparing between tubs is the price per gram. Take that number to whichever shop you like.
Sources
Every figure above traces to one of these. All seven were opened and checked on 23 August 2026.
- Kreider RB, Kalman DS, Antonio J, et al. (2017). International Society of Sports Nutrition position stand: safety and efficacy of creatine supplementation in exercise, sport, and medicine. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 14:18. Both maintenance bands (3 to 5 g a day, and 5 to 10 g a day for larger athletes), the loading protocol, the clinical high-dose range of 0.3 to 0.8 g/kg/day, the 20 to 40% rise in muscle stores, the 4 to 6 week washout, fluid retention, renal safety, and the verdict on alternative forms. Open access checked 2026-08
- Antonio J, Candow DG, Forbes SC, et al. (2021). Common questions and misconceptions about creatine supplementation: what does the scientific evidence really show? Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 18:13. The unambiguous 0.3 g/kg/d loading wording, the four-week saturation figure for 3 to 5 g a day, kidneys, hair loss, cramping, fat mass, and creatine salts versus monohydrate. Open access checked 2026-08
- Commission Regulation (EU) No 432/2012, Annex. The original EU list of permitted health claims, and the source of the first creatine claim quoted in the method above, on physical performance in successive bursts of short-term, high intensity exercise, with its conditions of use. This is the 2012 text as adopted; the Annex has been amended since, so read it together with the next entry. EUR-Lex checked 2026-08
- Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/672. The amendment that inserted a second creatine claim into the Annex of Regulation 432/2012: daily creatine consumption enhancing the effect of resistance training on muscle strength in adults over 55, with its 3 g a day and 65 to 75% of one-repetition maximum conditions, quoted verbatim in the method above. In force since April 2017. EUR-Lex checked 2026-08
- Ribeiro F, Longobardi I, Perim P, et al. (2021). Timing of creatine supplementation around exercise: a real concern? Nutrients 13(8):2844. The review that pooled the timing trials and declined to call timing a concern. Open access checked 2026-08
- Antonio J, Ciccone V (2013). The effects of pre versus post workout supplementation of creatine monohydrate on body composition and strength. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 10:36. The small four-week trial that leans post-workout, cited here for its size as much as its result. Open access checked 2026-08
- Jagim AR, Oliver JM, Sanchez A, et al. (2012). A buffered form of creatine does not promote greater changes in muscle creatine content, body composition, or training adaptations than creatine monohydrate. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 9:43. The 28-day head to head that the exotic forms are usually sold without mentioning. Open access checked 2026-08
Syrotuik and Bell's 2004 responder profile is the primary paper behind the non-responder row. It sits behind a paywall, so that row is sourced to the ISSN stand's own figures on baseline stores instead.