Petyr Baelish
02-09-2006, 12:06 AM
...
3. RESULTS
Measured by the number of vials of creatine returned,
mean compliance for creatine supplement was 91% (range
of 85–100%) and 97% (range of 88–100%) for placebo.
Red blood cell creatine levels, indicative of tissue creatine
levels, increased significantly with supplementation
(p = 0.001) compared with placebo indicating that tissue
creatine levels had been increased by the supplement.
Plasma creatine levels, more indicative of acute creatine
ingestion, did not vary significantly with supplementation.
Supplementation with oral creatine monohydrate significantly
increased intelligence (as measured by RAPMs
done under time pressure, figure 1a) compared with
placebo (F3 ,33 = 32.3, p , 0.0001; repeated-measures
ANOVA). There was no significant effect of treatment
order (F1 ,33 = 1.62, p = 0.21), although there was a signifi-
Oral creatine improves brain performance C. Rae and others 2149
cant interaction with treatment order (F3 ,99 = 6.7,
p = 0.0004). The mean RAPMs raw score under placebo
was 9.7 (s.d. = 3.8) items correct in 10 min versus 13.7
(s.d. = 4.1) items correct under the experimental treatment.
Supplementation with oral creatine monohydrate
(figure 1b) significantly affected performance on BDS
(F3 ,34 = 29.0, p , 0.0001), with no effect of order
(F3 ,10 2 = 0.98, p = 0.40). Mean BDS under the placebo
was 7.05 items (s.d. = 1.19), compared with a mean of 8.5
items under creatine treatment (s.d. = 1.76).
apart from those who consume very high amounts of meat
(ca. 2 kg d21).
4. DISCUSSION
Given that RAPMs are a rather pure measure of g, or
general ability, the data suggest that general ability was
improved by creatine supplementation. These results support
efficiency models of intelligence (Bates & Stough
1998). With this view, differences in intelligence test performance
reflect individual differences in underlying biochemical
and structural factors influencing the energetic
and temporal resources of the central nervous system.
Increasing the energy available for computation increases
the speed and (in a distributed computational system such
as the brain) power of computational resource, reflected
directly in improved general ability.
...
Full Article (http://www.journals.royalsoc.ac.uk/media/7ped06xgqgcutprgtav0/contributions/9/9/5/y/995yme1nnn6qvya1.pdf)
3. RESULTS
Measured by the number of vials of creatine returned,
mean compliance for creatine supplement was 91% (range
of 85–100%) and 97% (range of 88–100%) for placebo.
Red blood cell creatine levels, indicative of tissue creatine
levels, increased significantly with supplementation
(p = 0.001) compared with placebo indicating that tissue
creatine levels had been increased by the supplement.
Plasma creatine levels, more indicative of acute creatine
ingestion, did not vary significantly with supplementation.
Supplementation with oral creatine monohydrate significantly
increased intelligence (as measured by RAPMs
done under time pressure, figure 1a) compared with
placebo (F3 ,33 = 32.3, p , 0.0001; repeated-measures
ANOVA). There was no significant effect of treatment
order (F1 ,33 = 1.62, p = 0.21), although there was a signifi-
Oral creatine improves brain performance C. Rae and others 2149
cant interaction with treatment order (F3 ,99 = 6.7,
p = 0.0004). The mean RAPMs raw score under placebo
was 9.7 (s.d. = 3.8) items correct in 10 min versus 13.7
(s.d. = 4.1) items correct under the experimental treatment.
Supplementation with oral creatine monohydrate
(figure 1b) significantly affected performance on BDS
(F3 ,34 = 29.0, p , 0.0001), with no effect of order
(F3 ,10 2 = 0.98, p = 0.40). Mean BDS under the placebo
was 7.05 items (s.d. = 1.19), compared with a mean of 8.5
items under creatine treatment (s.d. = 1.76).
apart from those who consume very high amounts of meat
(ca. 2 kg d21).
4. DISCUSSION
Given that RAPMs are a rather pure measure of g, or
general ability, the data suggest that general ability was
improved by creatine supplementation. These results support
efficiency models of intelligence (Bates & Stough
1998). With this view, differences in intelligence test performance
reflect individual differences in underlying biochemical
and structural factors influencing the energetic
and temporal resources of the central nervous system.
Increasing the energy available for computation increases
the speed and (in a distributed computational system such
as the brain) power of computational resource, reflected
directly in improved general ability.
...
Full Article (http://www.journals.royalsoc.ac.uk/media/7ped06xgqgcutprgtav0/contributions/9/9/5/y/995yme1nnn6qvya1.pdf)