Weekly Blog

Oct 2

We never say it's easy. Although simple - not super complicated - it takes consistent effort and can therefore feel hard. But because it unleashes the freedom to thrive, it's worth it. 

This is one of the fundamental arguments we've been making since late September 1998, when Pro-Activity (the entity) was formed 28 years ago. While a LOT has changed as our understanding of "Human Achievement" has been tempered and refined, the key principles and essential truths, including this one, have remained. Of course, we humans don't always love the truth. There are countless ways we try to bend and shape reality to smooth out its edges. Reflections with their pesky imperfections have become digitally enhanced photos, and here in the States we spend more on aesthetic procedures (cosmetic surgery, etc.) than the gross domestic product of one in every five nations on earth - yikes. 

However, when it comes to health, vitality, and thriving, the evidence has always pointed to a sweet spot and the Goldilocks principle that helps us make sense of it. We can certainly overdo it (too hot), but since challenging ourselves forces us to stay strong and not doing so leads to the weakness of underuse (too cold), actively seeking "just right" has always made the most sense.

Recently, however, the lines have been blurred. For example, the list of potential benefits of the appetite-curbing injectables for those with cardiometabolic disease is impressive; yet, our growing understanding of adverse side effects suggests they're not right for everyone.  And even in a world where our "intelligence" is faster (and maybe more dangerous) than ever, it's impossible to predict the long-term risks.

Take glucosamine, for example, the joint supplement historically considered safe for those suffering joint pain. Along with meniscus removal and steroid injections, the long-term data now suggest the benefit may not outweigh the risk, in this case because of an association with Alzheimer's disease. Even a well-established "go-to" for inflammation control like Ibuprofen is back under the microscope for its risk of trading a long-term pain problem for the short-term one it helps solve.

So, yeah, I found myself skeptical when I decided to dive deeper into a study that found participants gained lean muscle and showed modest strength improvement even without exercise when put on a 12-week cycle of Creatine at twice the widely recommended dose. To clarify, I'm not skeptical that supplementing the energy apparatus with creatine appears safe and has positive benefits (I mentioned it as recently as August 28th in this blog, and it is one of very few supplements I take regularly). However, the implication, which is bound to appear in headlines soon enough, that we can (or should attempt to) get stronger without the struggle of effort against resistance seemed questionable. 

To be clear, that's not what the study suggested. Even while the Creatine-only (no exercise) group outperformed the placebo + no-exercise group, and did about the same as the exercise-only group on a few measures, the Creatine + Exercise sub-group outperformed all other groups in nearly every measure, especially those related to the kind of strength and endurance useful in daily life. Distilled all the way down to a far more reasonable headline: making more energy available appears helpful, but USING that added energy to do the work of growth is even better. 

For those who cannot safely exercise for one reason or another, this study might be very welcome news and an interesting avenue to explore. For those of us who can, the long-term trade-off of doubling the dose is yet to be determined. For now, at least for me, it's wait and see.

Have a great weekend,

Mike E.