Creatine = Bad?

Just choose your friends in a wiser fashion from now on.

[quote]tpa wrote:
Are you an Ontario high school student? I’m just wondering what grade 12 textbook says that creatine is unhealthy? I would never tell my students this.[/quote]

Yes I am…which is what I thought too How the hell does this get put in a book that is going to be taught to a ton of students, most of which know no better.

Also prof I understand the whole arguing with the teacher type thing isn’t a good way to go, but there are a lot of discussions in exercise science, why not discuss from the oppisite end?

In Dr. Berardi’s new book, Metabolism Advantage, there is an excellent section on creatine.

[quote]Rookie21 wrote:
I know I shouldve gone with the “uh huh” method and I usually do, however next semister I am gonna be fed the same BS by my teacher, and i think it would be interesting to be able to NOT agree with what hes teaching and actually be able to back it up because well I know creatine isnt bad for you, but I dont know all the science and whatnot behind it ;)[/quote]

When I was in the tenth grade I started to dabble with resistance training. I was freaking skinny at the time and a friend told me, “Don’t do weights because you’ve got no fat on you. It will just eat into your muscle and you will continue to get skinnier.”

I knew it had to be bullshit so I asked my biology teacher if that was true. He replied with “Yes. You have to have fat to turn it into muscle.”

Lucky the Physical Education teachers knocked that crap on the head and I continued with my resistance training to improve my sporting performances.

Many teachers just read out of the text book they are given. Just give them the answers they want to hear as trying to prove them wrong will often lead to more trouble than you need.

It is just staggering to me that people like that are licensed to teach our children. It’s the equivalent of saying Jane Fonda was President during the Civil War.

[quote]mikeh3 wrote:

It is just staggering to me that people like that are licensed to teach our children. It’s the equivalent of saying Jane Fonda was President during the Civil War.[/quote]

Resistance training and supplements are something that the general population know nothing about.

For a High School biology teacher who works out at the local YMCA 2x per week @ 30-45 mins per session, I would really question their knowledge.

Most people who either don’t train with weights or dabble in them, latch onto the myths of training.
IE:

  • Fat to Muscle
  • Resistance training stunts growth
  • Weights make you less mobile
  • And etc.

It’s not just the school age students I worry about. Some of the people taking classes in Colleges would agree that the Sport Science classes teach some pretty poor classes.

I’ve had Sport Science students do their practical hours with me and I have been astounded at the crap they come up with.

Seated rows on a fitball, shoulder press whilst kneeling on a fitball and all those sort of exercises.

Don’t get me started on the anorexic taking the nutrition classes and her “Protein has nothing to do with muscle growth.”

[quote]The Grizzly wrote:
Many teachers just read out of the text book they are given. Just give them the answers they want to hear as trying to prove them wrong will often lead to more trouble than you need.[/quote]

My biology teacher freshman year taught us that prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men. I told him in class that skin cancer is the most common. He gave us a pop quiz later that week and I didn’t know what he told us in class so I put skin cancer, and had to take it to the academic dean to get credit on it. It really is nuts.

[quote]hockechamp14 wrote:
The Grizzly wrote:
Many teachers just read out of the text book they are given. Just give them the answers they want to hear as trying to prove them wrong will often lead to more trouble than you need.

My biology teacher freshman year taught us that prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men. I told him in class that skin cancer is the most common. He gave us a pop quiz later that week and I didn’t know what he told us in class so I put skin cancer, and had to take it to the academic dean to get credit on it. It really is nuts.[/quote]

Your professor was right, however. Skin cancer is the most common cancer in men over 50. Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in all men.

There`s nothing worse than being a knowledgable person, and not being able to share it with anyone, because they are so goddamn narrow minded, that they think Creatine is " Steroids".

[quote]Professor X wrote:
hockechamp14 wrote:
The Grizzly wrote:
Many teachers just read out of the text book they are given. Just give them the answers they want to hear as trying to prove them wrong will often lead to more trouble than you need.

My biology teacher freshman year taught us that prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men. I told him in class that skin cancer is the most common. He gave us a pop quiz later that week and I didn’t know what he told us in class so I put skin cancer, and had to take it to the academic dean to get credit on it. It really is nuts.

Your professor was right, however. Skin cancer is the most common cancer in men over 50. Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in all men.[/quote]

Damn it. Thanks for at least letting me know now, I think I’m going to send him an e-mail. He even told me I was right, but just to put his answer. Geez, damn my teacher in 8th grade who told me skin cancer was most common in men! At least I won’t be one of the idiots who doesn’t believe you. :wink:

He still gave me a C because I advocated ephedra as an available supplement for people over age 20 in one of my reports!

[quote]The Grizzly wrote:

Resistance training and supplements are something that the general population know nothing about.[/quote]

In all fairness, the solid science behind nutrition is in its infancy. Plus there is so much about resistance training that is not well understood by science. So it’s not really all that strange that people don’t know bupkus about it. This means people will simply repeat something that initially makes sense to them in an effort to sound important.

For example, my mother-in-law believes that muscle turns to fat if you stop lifting. She’s convinced that I’ll someday look like Louie Anderson.

Why does she believe this? It’s a combination of that ambiguous “someone” who once told her it was true and her own observation of people who were once muscular but are now fat.

I did my best to explain that muscle does not magically turn into fat, that it’s a combination of those people losing muscle by not lifting and gaining fat due to eating the same amount while no longer needing so many calories.

But she will hear none of it. She was proud at possessing a nugget of knowledge regarding weightlifting and human physiology. And my attempt to correct her stung her pride. People simply don’t like to be told they are wrong.

Still wondering, how the hell does something like “creatine/protein/whatever supplement is unhealthy” get put into books that are being taught to people across the province…I just dont get it.

[quote]mikeh3 wrote:
It’s the equivalent of saying Jane Fonda was President during the Civil War.[/quote]

That’s jist silly, everybody knows Jane Fonda was President during the Clinton administration.

–Tiribulus->

[quote]Rookie21 wrote:
Still wondering, how the hell does something like “creatine/protein/whatever supplement is unhealthy” get put into books that are being taught to people across the province…I just dont get it.[/quote]

Textbooks and their contents are regulated by the government, who is no doubt guided in this particular subject by an experienced council of academic experts. Basically, the government is told what its opinion is on the matter of health and nutrition by a select group of appointees.

One of my profs told me that you don’t change prevailing scientific thought overnight. In fact, you can’t really change the minds of the old codgers who are entrenched in positions of power.

No, the way you change science is by teaching new theories to the up and coming scientists who will eventually replace the old farts.

I remember reading a book by Charles Townes where he described a conversation he had with Neils Bohr about the possibility of building a laser. Bohr, who had a Nobel in physics and is one of the great scientific minds of the 20th century, told him it was impossible. It seems even the brightest are not immune to believing in the infallability of their own beliefs.

Just think about how much more scientific information is available on exercise and nutrition now compared to 10 years ago. It’s an enormous amount!

So it shouldn’t be surprising that the old guard, who is responsible for ensuring the integrity of our scientific teachings, is somewhat behind the times (decades, in some areas). Things will eventually catch up more.

But it won’t be because the current crop of experts change their collective tunes. It will be because new experts like Berardi and Lowery will rise through the ranks and eventually be the ones influencing textbooks.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Rookie21 wrote:
I know I shouldve gone with the “uh huh” method and I usually do, however next semister I am gonna be fed the same BS by my teacher, and i think it would be interesting to be able to NOT agree with what hes teaching and actually be able to back it up because well I know creatine isnt bad for you, but I dont know all the science and whatnot behind it :wink:

That’s also a waste of time. Not only that, but should you actually succeed at putting your teacher on the spot, many of them lack the personalities to take that lightly. Trust me, no one cares that you know that high protein intakes won’t kill you. The goal is to ace the class, not go on a personal war with every doofus you run across.

Yes, you should research this stuff for your own knowledge. However, you will eventually learn that people absolutely hate to feel inferior to anyone and the attitudes that manifest when they do feel that way may alienate you at the wrong times. Call it the “superman effect”. You need to learn to be Clark sometimes.[/quote]

I agree with Professor X. No teacher who has gone to college for a subject, especially if they hold an advanced degree, will like being shown up by a
high school kid. It might feel gratifying to do so but it will likely cause you more grief than its worth.

[quote]Rookie21 wrote:
Still wondering, how the hell does something like “creatine/protein/whatever supplement is unhealthy” get put into books that are being taught to people across the province…I just dont get it.[/quote]

Because there are articles such as this one.

http://www.armpullers.com/nutirtion/creatine.htm

[quote]Defender wrote:
But she will hear none of it. She was proud at possessing a nugget of knowledge regarding weightlifting and human physiology. And my attempt to correct her stung her pride. People simply don’t like to be told they are wrong.[/quote]

You raise good points.

One reason I think that people latch onto these idiodic beliefs is that resistance training looks like ‘too much work’ for them.

For a lazy bastard, it is easier to say “Why work out? Because when I stop doing weights it will all turn to fat and I’m worse off than when I started.”

It gives them good excuses and makes them feel better when they see the people who are making the effort to get to the gym and improve their bodies and lives.

That’s exactly it. When someone is better than you at something, there are two ways for you to equalize things. One is to raise yourself to the level of the other one. The second way is to cut them down to your level.

Too many people opt for the easy way out.

[quote]The Grizzly wrote:
Rookie21 wrote:
Still wondering, how the hell does something like “creatine/protein/whatever supplement is unhealthy” get put into books that are being taught to people across the province…I just dont get it.

Because there are articles such as this one.

http://www.armpullers.com/nutirtion/creatine.htm

[/quote]

Where’s the eye soap?

“to say that i know better then a gr.12 exercise science book”

Wow.

College textbooks are usually 5 or so years behind the research if they have very good contributors due to the publication and distribution process… I hate to think how far behind a 12th grade exercise science book would be.

Who was the author for the creatine section in the book?

-Dan