View Full Version : Creatine and Hydroxycut


Rugbyboy
Wed, November 12th, 2008, 11:01 AM
Is it pretty counter productive to run both these supplements at the same time? or will i still get the increase in strength etc... from the creatine and be able to drop Lbs on the Hydroxycut?

J_W
Thu, November 13th, 2008, 01:27 AM
Is it pretty counter productive to run both these supplements at the same time? or will i still get the increase in strength etc... from the creatine and be able to drop Lbs on the Hydroxycut?

IMO take the creatine and drop the Hydroxycut. Not because they interfere with one another but because the Hydroxycut is pretty much a waste of money. Just drink coffee.

EDIT: You can do a search for Hydroxycut on the forums, by the way, to see what I mean. :)

kevin_in_ga
Thu, November 13th, 2008, 09:24 AM
They are not counterproductive - one works, the other is all hype. Caffeine (the active ingredient in Hydroxycut) is more easily and cheaply obtained through coffee, if you still want some.

digitalnebula
Thu, November 13th, 2008, 03:15 PM
Hydroxycut ceased to work once they dropped the ephedra...

As others stated, its an expensive caffeine source...

CuTe PoIsOn
Fri, November 14th, 2008, 07:47 AM
double shot of espresso twice a day will start a furnace in your body. Yet important to remain hydrated throughout the day whilst taking espresso.

seripham4
Sun, November 23rd, 2008, 10:25 AM
Remember also that for every lean pound of muscle you add you'll burn an extra 50 calories a day. So an extra 4lbs of muscle equals about 200 calories a day being burned just through regular activity. So pump up.

MannishBoy
Sun, November 23rd, 2008, 11:29 AM
Remember also that for every lean pound of muscle you add you'll burn an extra 50 calories a day. So an extra 4lbs of muscle equals about 200 calories a day being burned just through regular activity. So pump up.


That's kind of a myth. I don't think there is an exact number of calories per lb of muscle that's been scientifically determined.

I agree with the general idea that more muscle=higher metabolism, but I don't think it's 50 calories per lb, even though it's often quoted.

seripham4
Sun, November 23rd, 2008, 07:31 PM
Yur right. 50 is not a magic number that works for everyone, it's actually more like 35-60 calories a day. This is however not a myth and has been scientifically proven. Because muscle is a living tissue it requires energy. It's perpose is to move you out of harms way or into a prospective meals way (naturally speaking) as well as helping to protect your organs and bones. Because of this your body keeps fuel stores (carbs=cals) burning at all times in your muscle so that if at any moment you need to get out of the way of a flying spear or launch one yourself at a boar or dear your muscles will be ready to do so. The more muscle you have the more fuel your body needs to keep burning for that muscle. And after all, a calorie is really just a unit of measure for energy.

MannishBoy
Mon, November 24th, 2008, 09:37 AM
Yur right. 50 is not a magic number that works for everyone, it's actually more like 35-60 calories a day. This is however not a myth and has been scientifically proven. Because muscle is a living tissue it requires energy. It's perpose is to move you out of harms way or into a prospective meals way (naturally speaking) as well as helping to protect your organs and bones. Because of this your body keeps fuel stores (carbs=cals) burning at all times in your muscle so that if at any moment you need to get out of the way of a flying spear or launch one yourself at a boar or dear your muscles will be ready to do so. The more muscle you have the more fuel your body needs to keep burning for that muscle. And after all, a calorie is really just a unit of measure for energy.


So if you put on 10 lbs of muscle, you'd burn 350-600 calories extra a day? I just haven't seen that.

I agree it increases your metabolism, but this is an exaggerated number that after I started digging into, I could see no scientific studies that supported it when you look back out exercise, etc from the studies.

Just a quick google finds several articles like this (http://www.thefactsaboutfitness.com/news/cals.htm). You can look up the studies referenced if you want. But the logic makes sense to me along with my real world experience with myself.

Muscle is a good thing, and using it is what burns the extra calories. Much more than just having it.

Doubleoqueso
Mon, November 24th, 2008, 10:05 AM
Hydroxycut is worthless. Creatine actually works for many (myself included).