Overall, I did not like this journal article, it did not tell me much that I would want to hear if I were a consumer of this product. I did however like how he lessened the articles length, and made it less boring in abbreviating the words creatine, and creatinine to Cr and Cn. It made the paper much easier to read.

There are also some interesting statistics on the effects of creatine on athletes of different ages and statures. In this article, I also liked how the author split up the categories, and gave heading in bold to each type of subject for what was to be talked about, giving the reader an idea to what he was to read about.

However, the article only did a study for the use of creatine over a seven-day period. I am sure that most creatine users would rather no long-term effects of creatine, what benefits the supplements would bring, along with the consequences.

Also, the article only dealt with the relationship of creatine and your urine, not many things dealing with what the supplement actually did to your body, and why it would work to do the things it claims it does.

The article was not fun to read, even though I am an avid weightlifter, and have used creatine myself. There were no real interesting parts for even those intrigued by the subject. Pretty much, what I am trying to say is that there is no person that is really interested in how creatine shows up in an athletes pee. They are more interested in what the product will do to the athlete while taking the supplement. Maybe a study on if the supplement actually works or not? There's a no-brainer.

I mentioned before that fifty

Some common words found in the essay are:
Cr Cn, Creatine Creatine, fifty percent, fifty percent creatine, urination athletes, percent creatine, burke 2001, effects creatine, author article, creatine athletes, supplement actually,
Approximate Word count = 663
Approximate Pages = 3 (250 words per page double spaced)