Did you know that 28 per cent of players involved at a high standard in the most commonly played contact sports in Ireland today (soccer, Gaelic football and rugby) either use creatine now or have done so in the past? Would it surprise you to know that the vast majority of these have actually stopped using it? Why do think this is so?

It might surprise you to know that there is no difference in creatine use between these three sports. Do players who use creatine understand what it is and what it does? Why do some players use it? How many players think the use of creatine should be banned? These are important questions which have not been addressed properly in Ireland. The answers will inform and contribute to the international debate about the use of creatine in sport. The results of a large research project examining these questions will be presented at a public seminar in the University Industry Centre, Belfield, tonight (6.30 p.m.). The project involved a large survey of successful squads in these three sports at schoolboy and adult level. It was carried out in the Medical Faculty and the Department of Psychology in UCD.

Tonight's seminar will also provide a discussion of the nature of creatine and why athletes use it in the first place, as well as a review of what is known of its safety. There will be a public debate about whether creatine use should be banned.

What is Creatine? Creatine is a naturally-occurring dietary constituent made from three amino acids (which are the building blocks for proteins). It is found in meat and fish. We all need about 2 gm of creatine daily. Of this, we usually ingest 1 gm and manufacture the rest within our bodies. If for some reason we ingest less than normal we tend to compensate by manufacturing more. But we may not make up the balance. Vegetarians may find themselves in this situation.

Most of the body's creatine is found in skeletal muscle in the form of creatine phosphate. This contains a high-energy phosphate bond which releases a great deal of energy when broken down. Some of this energy is available to be used by exercising muscle.

The critical point to appreciate is that creatine's energy is available immediately when required. When performing high-intensity exercise (sprinting, jumping, throwing and other explosive efforts), it is vital to have energy available instantly. It is the rate of energy provision which limits the exercise intensity you can achieve.

The creatine in muscle rapidly runs out during intense exercise. By using creatine supplementation, athletes hope to start off exercise with increased muscle stores of this source of energy, therefore postponing the onset of fatigue which inevitably occurs.

Does it Work? Laboratory studies do show that creatine supplementation can improve performance in explosive tasks. There is less evidence to objectively show measurable beneficial effects in contact sports. Anecdotally, players in sports requiring explosive efforts (especially rugby) do report benefit. It may actually give better results in athletes who are initially relatively unfit. Is it Safe? The long-term safety of creatine supplementation cannot be proven simply because its use over many years has not yet been studied. Clearly there is no justification for promoting the use of an agent which is known to be harmful. This is, of course, different from actually banning it, and the comparison with alcohol and cigarette smoking makes this point.

Side-effects have been reported by athletes using creatine and include abdominal discomfort, muscle cramps, muscle injuries and aggression. A small number of cases of serious illness (kidney and heart damage) have been reported.

There is no robust scientific evidence that creatine use in the recommended dose regime in healthy, well-hydrated individuals causes any harm. It is suggested that some of the reported side-effects occur in individuals who either exceed recommended doses of creatine or combine it with other substances.

Is creatine use a form of cheating? This is where the controversy arises. The use of creatine supplementation to postpone the onset of fatigue in sprint activities is precisely analogous to the use of carbohydrate loading to postpone the onset of fatigue in endurance events. It is very odd that one practice can be viewed as cheating while the other is not.

Should it be banned? Banning an agent does not necessarily mean it is a form of cheating, because there is very good justification for banning the use of an agent known to be unsafe or hazardous, even if it has no beneficial effect on performance. Similar justification may apply if the use of an agent is known to lead on to use of banned or dangerous substances.

Come along and give your opinion.

UCD Research Team: Dr Noel McCaffrey (Medical Faculty), Professor Aidan Moran, Suzanne Guerin, Alison Byrne (Dept of Psychology).