Creatine

Hello,
Which form of creatine would you recommend? Everywhere I hear/read that the best option is the classic creatine monohydrate (in terms of the number of proven studies regarding safety and ergogenic effect + financial affordability), about which you claim we should avoid.
Furthermore, I would like to request a source proving that creatine monohydrate overburdens the kidneys.

The question of which form of creatine is better/more advantageous is up for discussion, as it's necessary to agree on what "better/more advantageous" means. Creatine monohydrate is the form that has been used the longest, is the most researched, and the most commonly used. It is logical, then, that it generates the most profits for manufacturers, which is why marketing strategies focus on promoting the most profitable product (also economically cheaper than promoting a new and less known one). Since it is the oldest form in use, it has also undergone the most scientific research. This leads to the strong claim that it is the "best." In this context, we can use the analogy of comparing the health impact of sourdough and whole grain bread. Currently, there are approximately 600 serious studies examining the effects of sourdough on metabolic processes. On the same platform, however, you will find nearly 60,000 studies addressing the effects of whole grain (non-sourdough) bread, which is a difference of two orders of magnitude. This volume of data leads to the claim that whole grain bread is more advantageous than sourdough. The fact that there is a smaller absolute amount of evidence for the benefits of sourdough does not mean that its benefits, such as a greater amount of lactic acid and SCFAs (short-chain fatty acids) and a lower proportion of phytates as representatives of antinutritional substances, are not ultimately more advantageous.

If you want to think similarly about creatine, it is necessary to consider not only that monohydrate is cheaper, more accessible, and more researched, but also other factors - overall effect, retention of excess water, kidney load in the form of increased creatinine production...
If you use creatine monohydrate, you can be sure that it will work; no one can dispute this. It's only necessary to individually assess how advantageous it is to work with monohydrate for particular sports activities. If you are involved in strength sports, it most likely won't matter that you retain a larger amount of water. For most other sports disciplines, however, this is counterproductive. Furthermore, not every athlete will appreciate, upon using creatine, that blood tests show elevated creatinine levels. The truth is that no study has proven that an increase in creatinine levels in relation to creatine supplementation correlates with liver or kidney damage, so we cannot say that creatine damages the kidneys; on the other hand, it clearly does place a burden on them. The "problem" here is also that there isn’t enough data (= studies) available for other forms of creatine to prove they are better or worse in these respects. In practice, this often ends with the need to try available options and decide on the right choice based on the results.

If you ask what form of creatine I would recommend, then for strength athletes, virtually any form including monohydrate, because based on available data, their effectiveness does not differ significantly. For other sports, I would avoid monohydrate at all costs due to the risk of retaining more water, and I would also consider whether creatine makes sense at all, because in dynamic sports activities that rely on speed and explosiveness, practice shows that they increase the risk of muscle and tendon injuries - creatine supports muscle mass growth, and this speed often does not correspond with the development of ligaments and tendons, leading to ruptures (very common in athletics, basketball, football...).

Hello,
I would like to ask about the use of creatine. I don't entirely agree with it, but some athletes are demanding it.

Creatine is a supplement suitable only for certain types of sports. Its effect is indisputable, meaning it really works, but it is essential to choose the correct form and, above all, learn how to use it properly. In sports nutrition supplementation, it is common for substances primarily intended for elite athletes to be desired by recreational amateurs, which is a discussion in itself. This is also true for creatine, which is mainly valuable for professionals, particularly in strength sports.