The Creatine-Insulin Dilemma
by Alfredo Franco-Obregon, PhD, author of Creatine: A practical guide
Creatine is, by no means, new to this world. Creatine
is, and always has been, a natural constituent of skeletal muscle. Humankind
simply needed to be made aware of its existence. Amazingly, creatine was
first identified nearly two centuries ago! In the early 1800s, the French
scientist and philosopher, Michel-Eugene Chevreul, isolated a novel agent
from skeletal muscle that he later named creatine for kreas,
the Greek word for flesh (1). A few years later (1847), a German scientist
named Justus von Liebig observed that maintaining
foxes in captivity decreased their muscular creatine content (2). Postulating
that physical activity increases creatine uptake by skeletal muscle, Liebig
advanced the hypothesis that muscles utilize certain nitrogen containing
molecules for energy. These nitrogenous molecules, otherwise known as amino
acids, include creatine. Intriguingly, as an extension of his findings,
Liebig later lent his name to a commercial extract of meat, which he asserted
would help the body perform extra "work". In fact, "Liebig's
Fleisch Extrakt" could quite reasonably be considered the original
creatine supplement (complete with marketing plan). Near the turn of the
last century the first studies examining the effects of creatine feeding
were conducted where it was noticed that not all the creatine fed to animals
could be recovered in the urine. Soon afterwards, Otto Folin and W. Dennis
(1912-1914) of Harvard University (Boston) unequivocally corroborated by
that the body’s musculature retains the greater part of any ingested creatine.
Therefore, nearly one century ago scientists had
already come full circle, from discovering that skeletal muscle is the
richest natural source of creatine to the largest sink for dietary creatine
in the body. Nevertheless, up to quite recently, the manner in which to
best promote creatine absorption by skeletal muscle remained largely elusive.
In this respect, a huge leap forward was made with the finding that insulin
assists in the absorption of creatine into skeletal muscle.
And, although this effect was previously hinted at in animal studies, the
studies that first clearly showed this effect in humans were conducted
only a few years ago (3,4). These human studies used glucose to stimulate
the production of insulin, the same agent used by the body for this same
purpose.
Following a meal our blood glucose levels rise, which
then serves as the signal for the release of insulin from the pancreas.
Insulin, in turn, enables the cells of our body to take up nutrients, principally
glucose, but also amino acids, from the blood stream. Creatine, due to
its structural likeness to amino acids, is also transported into the cell
with the assistance of insulin, although via a different transport pathway.
In this respect, insulin sets the stage for muscle
growth (aka, anabolism) by making available to the cell the basic substrates
for the production of new muscle tissues. The problem with the
original studies examining insulin-mediated creatine uptake in humans,
however, was that the amounts of glucose required to evoke a strong enough
release of insulin were exorbitant; nearly 20 grams of glucose for each
gram of creatine consumed and close to the limit of palatability for most
individuals. Furthermore, this amount of glucose, if consumed on a regular
basis, could lead to a state of insulin-resistance, which is the path to
the development of type II diabetes. In other words, cells become immune
to the presence of insulin if constantly bombarded by it, which, in turn,
diminishes the uptake of essential nutrients into muscle cells and increases
the need for insulin to stimulate muscle growth. Furthermore, since fats
cells are the last to become resistant to the effects of insulin, the initial
stages of insulin-resistance causes our fat reserves to swell and our muscle
mass to shrivel up. Therefore, although these results were promising, they
were far from being a complete solution. Since then, there has been a search
for agents that might effectively release insulin into the blood stream
(for the purpose of creatine adsorption) without adversely influencing
insulin-sensitivity. Many creatine manufacturers have consequently taken
to adding a variety of insulin-agonists to their products in hopes of getting
around the insulin-dilemma. These “insulinotropic” strategies are aimed
at either enhancing the release of insulin from the pancreas or augmenting
the effects of upon the cell in order to increase transport rates of creatine
into skeletal muscle. The agents often used for this purpose include chromium
picolinate, alpha-lipoic acid, 4-hydroxyisoleucine, and the amino acids,
taurine, L-arginine, NO-releasers, and L-carnitine. These days it is quite
common to find one, or more, of these agents in many creatine products.
Unfortunately, with the exception of alpha-lipoic
acid (5), none of these agents have been specifically shown in scientific
studies to potentiate the uptake of creatine into the cell. This in time
may come, but for the moment, it’s still too early to say whether these
other agents actually promote creatine absorption by muscle cells.
There’s a safer, and much more reliable, method of promoting
insulin release that has been overlooked by many creatine manufacturers.
Ignored, in fact, simply because it isn’t sexy enough to appear innovative
and, consequently, will not serve to jack up the price of the product;
the agenda of most creatine manufacturers. By now, the ability of glucose
to release insulin is without dispute. Ten years ago, however, a study
showed that protein greatly potentiates the ability of glucose to release
insulin into the blood stream from the pancreas (6). The effect of protein
was so powerful that half the amount of carbohydrates could be used to
elicit the same amount of insulin release. What remained to be shown was
whether the combination of carbohydrates and protein is equally as effective
at promoting creatine absorption by skeletal muscle. This awaited study
finally appeared in 2000 and showed that protein in combination with simple
carbohydrates augments creatine absorption by skeletal muscle to a similar
extent as high doses of carbohydrates (7). In this study experimental subjects
were given one of four different supplement combinations 30 minutes after
ingesting creatine, 5 grams of glucose (placebo), 50 grams of protein
and 47 grams of glucose (PRO-CHO), 96 grams of glucose (Hi-CHO),
or 50 grams of glucose (Lo-CHO). The results were clear, PRO-CHO
and Hi-CHO were equally effective at promoting creatine absorption,
which were both greater (~10-25%) than either Lo-CHO and placebo.
Again, adding protein reduced the glucose requirement
by half!
Another advantage of adding glucose to your creatine is
that it aids in the replenishment of your glycogen reserves following exercise.
This effect arises from the ability of insulin’s to increase the number
of glucose transporters (GLUT 4) expressed on the cell surface. GLUT 4
is the principal protein complex responsible for transporting glucose into
the cell once stimulated by insulin. And, since exercise makes the cells
of our body more sensitive to the effects of insulin, exercise likewise
increases the expression of GLUT 4. On the other hand, inactivity, either
by choice or because of injury, reduces GLUT 4 expression. Along these
lines, a recent study has shown that creatine protects against the loss
of GLUT 4 during limb immobilization and, furthermore, accentuates the
increased expression of GLUT 4 during subsequent rehabilitation (8). Not
surprisingly, the creatine and glucose treated subjects exhibited larger
muscle glycogen (and creatine) reserves during rehabilitation. Finally,
a new study just appeared indicating that protein exerts a similar effect
on GLUT 4 expression, but without adversely affecting insulin-sensitivity
(9). Specifically, this study compared the effects of creatine supplementation
with glucose or glucose plus protein during the rehabilitation of a previously
immobilized limb. The authors of this study found that retraining (6 weeks)
a previously immobilized limb (2 weeks placed in a cast) in conjunction
with a post-exercise creatine, protein and glucose meal increased GLUT
4 expression and muscle glycogen content to the same extent as a creatine
and glucose meal. Most importantly, since the protein meal contained less
than one third the amount of glucose (20 grams versus 70 grams!), insulin
sensitivity was improved as a result. Furthermore, the effect on glycogen
storage was specific for the exercised limb. That is, the un-exercised
limb exhibited no change in GLUT 4 expression or muscle glycogen content.
This result clearly indicates that simply upplementing with creatine, irrespective
of the manner in which it is done, in the absence of exercise is a fruitless
endeavor. The solution seems clear. Adding protein
to your creatine and carbohydrate mix will promote muscle creatine uptake
(and glycogen synthesis) WITHOUT adversely affecting the sensitivity
of your cells to insulin.
Author’s Note: Due to space constraints, other
very important anabolic benefits of combining protein and creatine were
not covered in this article. These other anabolic attributes, and how to
best make use of them, are discussed in my Creatine
Guide. Click
here for more information about the guide.
About The Author
Dr. Alfredo Franco-Obregon, research scientist, author,
and owner of Nutritional Supplements Newsletters. Dr. Alfredo Franco-Obregon
has had over 20 years of in depth research experience in major laboratories
world-wide. His principal scientific interest is the understanding of the
cellular mechanisms leading to muscle cell death.
Dr. Franco-Obregon is also the author of Creatine:
A practical guide. Click
here for more information about the guide
to the top
|