Yeah i read some research that said loading will is pointless since by the 2nd or 3rd week you will be at the same level as if you didn't load.

I think it's a just in case type statement to load, i do it because i want to ensure i have enough in my body and because i always have since i started, i dont think it will make a huge difference though, you're right.

Well i think companies do it for two reasons. 1. To make your body used to the creatine and see how well you handle it. 2. to make you use more creatine since some loading cycles involve upto 5 scoops a day, and obviously the moor scoops you use the quicker your going to have to buy a new tub. Anyone know how high the creatinine levels increase when you load?

depends on if its mono or ethly ester or what ever other crazyness they've come out with. Mono is the only one that they suggest to load, even though as you said you reach the saturation point within a few weeks load or no load. mono is also the only one that has research behind it supporting muscle growth.

your body has creatine in it and it is slowy pushed out when you work out so the point of loading is to get a huge jump start of creatine in you system so when you work out and muscle tisse expands and the cells are washing out there is still an ample amount of creatine in there from the loading which inturn will allow a greater amount of water and creatine from the body and what your taking to over expand the cells in your muscle tisse hence the semi watery look you get after taking creatine mono for about a month or two.

I would go with Krea alkalyn. Its a pure creatine and you don't get the bloat. No waste.

I went with celltech. Going to begin a celltech blog.

I know this is kinda old, but I go with Kre-alkyln from Sci-Fi, also their Kreation is good too. I used Creatine Mono, when it first came out, and it bloats me like a water ballon. I then switched to all different brands of the creatine ethl, same result until I went with CE2, no bloat on CE2, but didn't seem as effective with my workouts. My preference is to go with a micronized creatine. Doing research on all these different creatines, like ethl, the creatine has to be processed again to add that extra molecule to it. There is only one way to make creatine, but to further reprocess it by adding to it can take some of the good effects from it. Just my thought.

i dig vitargo cgl by nutrex

Don't go with Cellmass, As a old employee of BSN I can honestly tell you that this creatine is not a fifth as powerfull as it claims to be. I am not bias at all, but if you want a good "name brand" creatine, I would say that Gaspari's "Size On" or MHP's new "Dark Matter" are probably some of the best post workout! Although I don't care for it, Cellteh Hardcore seem to a pretty descent product. These all have gylcogen replenshing additives along with a legitament make up of quality creatines. It Seems like a lot of companies are adding an "ester molecule" to every product they make an are now making claims to have the "Most Absorbable" products on the market.