What is Con-Cret Creatine?
Con-Cret is a specific brand of creatine supplement that primarily uses creatine hydrochloride (HCl), a newer, patented form of creatine. Unlike creatine monohydrate, which is a creatine molecule bonded to a water molecule, creatine HCl is bonded with a hydrochloride salt. The manufacturer, Promera Sports, claims this chemical modification makes Creatine HCl significantly more soluble and bioavailable, meaning it's easier for the body to absorb.
The manufacturer's key claims for Con-Cret are:
- Higher Solubility: The creatine HCl form is said to dissolve much more readily in water compared to monohydrate.
- Micro-Dosing: Due to better absorption, smaller serving sizes (typically 750mg) are claimed to be sufficient for achieving results comparable to a full 5g dose of monohydrate.
- No Loading Phase: The alleged superior absorption eliminates the need for an initial 'loading phase' common with monohydrate.
- Reduced Side Effects: The brand asserts that its product avoids the common side effects associated with monohydrate, such as bloating, cramping, and gastrointestinal distress.
Con-Cret vs. Creatine Monohydrate: A Scientific Comparison
While the marketing for Con-Cret and other Creatine HCl products is compelling, the scientific community holds a more skeptical view. The vast majority of research on creatine's efficacy is based on the monohydrate form, which is considered the gold standard.
Scientific findings regarding Creatine HCl:
- Limited Research: Despite Con-Cret's claims, there is currently less extensive research on Creatine HCl compared to the mountain of evidence supporting creatine monohydrate. Some studies have failed to find a significant difference in performance benefits between the two.
- Bioavailability Debate: The concept that higher solubility directly translates to superior effectiveness once absorbed by the muscle is controversial. Research shows that creatine monohydrate is already absorbed at a very high rate (around 99%). Higher plasma levels of creatine do not automatically mean more is reaching the muscles.
- Dosing Discrepancy: The micro-dosing strategy is a significant point of contention. The clinically recommended maintenance dose for monohydrate is 3-5 grams per day. A Con-Cret serving contains only 750mg, far below this standard. While Creatine HCl is more concentrated, most experts agree that this small dose is likely insufficient to fully saturate muscle creatine stores.
What do users say about Con-Cret?
- Taste and Mixability: Many customer reviews praise Con-Cret's taste and its ability to dissolve completely in water without leaving a gritty residue, a common complaint with monohydrate.
- Gastrointestinal Comfort: Users who experience bloating or stomach discomfort with creatine monohydrate often report that Con-Cret is easier on their digestive system. This is a primary driver for many choosing the more expensive HCl form.
- Effectiveness: Some users report similar strength and endurance benefits to monohydrate, while others feel no noticeable difference. The subjective nature of these reports highlights the lack of definitive, large-scale clinical trials supporting HCl's superiority.
Comparison of Con-Cret (Creatine HCl) vs. Creatine Monohydrate
| Feature | Con-Cret (Creatine HCl) | Creatine Monohydrate |
|---|---|---|
| Research Support | Limited; newer form | Extensive; gold standard |
| Cost per Serving | Higher | Lower; budget-friendly |
| Dosage | Micro-dosing (750mg) | Standard (3-5g maintenance) |
| Loading Phase | Not required | Often recommended initially |
| Solubility | Very high; mixes easily | Lower; can be gritty |
| Bloating/GI Issues | Less commonly reported | Possible, especially during loading |
| Manufacturing | Made in USA, patented | Often made in China, established quality |
Making the Right Choice for Your Goals
Ultimately, deciding if Con-Cret is a good brand depends on what you prioritize. The core benefits of creatine—increased strength, power, and muscle mass—are well-documented for both forms, but the certainty and value proposition differ significantly.
Consider Con-Cret if:
- Digestive Sensitivity is an Issue: If you've tried creatine monohydrate and experienced uncomfortable bloating or stomach issues, the high solubility of Creatine HCl may be a worthwhile trade-off despite the higher cost.
- Convenience is Key: The smaller serving size and elimination of a loading phase make it a more convenient option for some users.
Stick with Creatine Monohydrate if:
- Budget is a Factor: Creatine monohydrate is substantially more affordable and is proven effective for long-term use.
- You Prefer Proven Results: The extensive body of research on monohydrate provides a higher degree of certainty regarding its efficacy and long-term safety.
For most people, creatine monohydrate offers the most proven and cost-effective path to maximizing creatine stores for performance benefits. While Con-Cret's Creatine HCl provides a compelling alternative, especially for those with digestive issues, it comes at a premium without conclusive evidence of superior results. Regardless of the form you choose, maintaining consistent daily intake is the most important factor for seeing results.
A note on third-party testing
When purchasing any supplement, consider choosing a product that has been third-party tested (e.g., NSF Certified for Sport). This ensures the product is free of banned substances and contains the ingredients listed on the label. Some Con-Cret products carry this certification, while others may not.
Conclusion
Is Con-Cret a good creatine brand? For consumers who value convenience and seek to avoid potential gastrointestinal issues associated with monohydrate, Con-Cret is a viable and highly mixable product. However, it's crucial to understand that its key differentiator, the use of Creatine HCl, comes with a higher price tag and relies on less comprehensive scientific evidence than creatine monohydrate. For the average gym-goer, the reliable, affordable, and well-researched creatine monohydrate remains the most practical and proven option for enhancing performance. The choice ultimately comes down to a personal trade-off between established proof, cost, and potential digestive comfort.
