ONLINE DRIVERS MEDIA

Creatine, obviously monohydrate and no expensive and often impotent spinoff (Jäger. 2011) is useful for any athlete.

The number of items on the list of health and performance benefits of creatine is about as high as the number of boring articles about "the benefits of creatine" you can find all over the Internet. And even here at the SuppVersity they have been piling up in a way that has me ignore the majority of "creatine supplementation increases strength gains in XY" studies that appear on a monthly, sometimes weekly basis. Against that background I will cut todays creatine post short and get straight to the facts, Giuseppe Potrick Stefani et al. report in their latest paper in (how else could it be) the peer-reviewed Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition (Stefani. 2014).
In what turns out to be another rodent study Stefani et al. investigated whether creatine supplementation exerts intra and/or extracellular antioxidant effects and if it plays a synergistic role in the adaptation of antioxidant enzymes associated with resistance training. The actual aim of the study was thus

"to evaluate the effects of monohydrate creatine supplementation associated, or not, with RT on oxidative stress and antioxidant enzymatic activity in the plasma, the heart, the liver and the gastrocnemius of rats." (Stefani. 2014)

And the results were unambiguous. As you can see in Figure 1, the anti-oxidant capacity of plasma, heart and liver of all 40 male Wistar rats which had been divided into four groups, i.e.

• sedentary (SED),
• sedentary + creatine  (SED-Cr), and
• resistance training (RT) and resistance training + creatine (RT-Cr),

increased significantly in response to the provision of creatine (0.3 g/kg/day of creatine for seven days, 0.05 g/kg for the rest of the 8-week study period).

Figure 1: Oxidative stress in heart, liver and muscle after 8 weeks of intervention.Concentrations of MDA and CAT activity. Values are mean ± SD; n = 10 for all groups (Stefani. 2014).

As you can see, both treatments, creatine-only and creatine + resistance training led to significant improvements in heart, liver and muscle antioxidant status - and that, this is important, in the absense of those direct free radical scavenging abilities that turn vitamin C, vitamin E & co into highly questionably agents with potential anti-adaptational effects (learn more).

Works w/ and w/out exercise, but with the latter creatine really excels

Compared to the sedentary animals the rats in the exercise group did yet significantly increased catalase levels (=good, because it catalyzes the decomposition of hydrogen peroxide - the bad stuff - to water and oxygen - the benign stuff) in the heart and - obviously - increased strength gains.

Figure 2: Absolute and relative 1RM strength before and after the intervention (Stefani. 2014).

What is (positively) surprising, at first, is the fact that the latter, i.e. the increases in 1-RM strength in response to creatine supplementation occurred even in the absence of resistance training.

If you look closely, you will yet realize that the relative increase in strength, a much better gauge for lasting real-world strength gains, in the sedentary rodents was ZERO. So that it is very likely that they would disappear with the increased water the rats were holding, as soon as the creatine supplementation is seized.
References:

• Jäger, Ralf, et al. "Analysis of the efficacy, safety, and regulatory status of novel forms of creatine." Amino Acids 40.5 (2011): 1369-1383.
• Stefani, Giuseppe Potrick, et al. "Effects of creatine supplementation associated with resistance training on oxidative stress in different tissues of rats." Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition 11.1 (2014): 11.

Resistance training alone wont make up for a sloppy diet - no matter if you do it before or after meals.

I am not sure how feasible this is going to be for you, but if you are a type II diabetic or anyone concerned about the potential detrimental health effects of the rise in glucose and triglycerides after a meal, working out 45 minutes after dinner is the way to go.

Abnormally elevated postprandial glucose and triacylglycerol (TAG) concentrations are strong risk factors for cardiovascular disease (CVD) in patients with type-2 diabetes. Therefore, scientists expect that interventions that reduce postprandial glucose and TAG concentrations should lower the risk of CVD (Krook. 2003; OGorman. 2008).
Previous studies have shown that acute exercise typically lowers postprandial glucose and TAG concentrations (Tobin. 2008) in patients with type-2 diabetes, but as Timothy D. Heden et al. point out, there is considerable heterogeneity in the responses with some individuals not experiencing beneficial changes in these risk factors (Gill. 2007; van Dijk. 2012).

"One potential explanation why some patients with type-2 diabetes do not have beneficial changes in postprandial glucose and TAG with acute exercise is because of the timing of the acute exercise session relative to meal consumption. Limited evidence suggests that the timing of aerobic exercise around a meal may be important and might explain why some individuals are exercise “insensitive” or “non responders”." (Heden. 2014) 

The only study to directly compare the effect of pre-meal and post-meal aerobic exercise on postprandial glucose concentrations in patients with type-2 diabetes showed that post-dinner, but not pre-dinner walking, lowered postprandial glucose concentrations (Colberg. 2009).

Figure 1: Previous studies indicate that aerobic workouts after meals have more beneficial effects on the potentially unhealthy increases in glucose or triglycerides (Collberg. 2009)

Although no study has directly examined the effect of exercise timing on postprandial TAG in patients with type-2 diabetes, there is evidence that exercise performed the day prior to a high fat meal has no effect on postprandial TAG responses (Dalgaard. 2004; Gill. 2007), while post-breakfast aerobic exercise reduced the postprandial TAG response (Tobin. 2008). Taken together, it appears that aerobic exercise may have its most powerful effect to lower postprandial glucose and TAG responses when performed after a meal, possibly because of slowed gastric emptying and/or greater skeletal muscle glucose and TAG uptake and utilization at this time.

The question that remained was: Is the same true for resistance training?

Since resistance exercise (RE) has a more pronounced long(er)-lasting effect on ones metabolism than aerobic training, the researchers from the University of Missouri tested the hypothesis that post-dinner RE, compared to pre-dinner RE, would in fact be more effective at improving two clinically important postprandial risk factors (glucose and 109 TAG) for CVD at a time of day when they are typically highest in obese patients with type-2 diabetes.

The standardized test workout consisted of the following exercises (in this order): leg press, seated calf raises, seated chest flyes, seated back flyes, back extensions, shoulder raises, leg curls, and abdominal crunches. All exercises were performed for three sets (1-2 min rest between sets) of 10-repetitions for each RE. During this session, the first set for each exercise was a warm-up set and the weight used was 50% of the participants 10-RM. After the warm-up set, the weight for the next two sets was the participants previously determined 10-RM.

Figure 2: Postrandial lipid response in the obese type II diabetics (Heden. 2014)

As you can see in Figure 2 the scientists suspicion was right, the postprandial workout (M-RE) had significantly more pronounced beneficial effects on the lipid metabolism of the type II diabetic subjects who consumed a standardized breakfasts (English muffin, cheddar cheese, one large egg, ham, hash brown, ketchup, and apple or orange juice) lunch (white bread, ham, mayonnaise, cheddar cheese, a granola bar, and apple or orange juice) and dinner meals (spaghetti noodles, spaghetti sauce with beef added, garlic bread, a lemon lime flavored soda, and 1.5 g of acetaminophen (to assess gastric emptying)) containing ~50% carbohydrate, 35% fat, and 15% protein.

Similar effects were observed for the insulin and glucose responses (see Figure 3) which were significantly improved and should thus complement the beneficial effects of the reduced triglyceride and very low density lipoprotein (VLDL) levels.
References:

• Colberg, Sheri R., et al. "Postprandial walking is better for lowering the glycemic effect of dinner than pre-dinner exercise in type 2 diabetic individuals." Journal of the American Medical Directors Association 10.6 (2009): 394-397. 
• Dalgaard, Marian, Claus Thomsen, and Kjeld Hermansen. "Effects of one single bout of low-intensity exercise on postprandial lipaemia in type 2 diabetic men." British Journal of Nutrition 92.03 (2004): 469-476.
• Gill, Jason MR, et al. "Effect of prior moderate exercise on postprandial metabolism in men with type 2 diabetes: heterogeneity of responses." Atherosclerosis 194.1 (2007): 134-143.
• Heden, Timothy D., et al. "Post-dinner resistance exercise improves postprandial risk factors more effectively than pre-dinner resistance exercise in patients with type 2 diabetes."
  Journal of Applied Physiology (2014). Ahead of print.
• Krook, Anna, et al. "Reduction of risk factors following lifestyle modification programme in subjects with type 2 (non?insulin dependent) diabetes mellitus." Clinical physiology and functional imaging 23.1 (2003): 21-30.
• OGorman, Donal J., and Anna Krook. "Exercise and the treatment of diabetes and obesity." Endocrinology and metabolism clinics of North America 37.4 (2008): 887-903.
• Tobin, L. W. L., Bente Kiens, and Henrik Galbo. "The effect of exercise on postprandial lipidemia in type 2 diabetic patients." European journal of applied physiology 102.3 (2008): 361-370.
• van Dijk, Jan-Willem, et al. "Exercise and 24-h glycemic control: equal effects for all type 2 diabetic patients?." Medicine and science in sports and exercise (2012).

2015 may offer a chance to get spice up your routine with kettlebells.

"Moderate evidence indicates that kettlebell training may be safe and effective for increasing certain functional strength and power measures and may show positive results with postural control in young, healthy populations," says a recent review of the literature in Physical Therapy Reviews (Girard. 2014) and does thus sound positively optimistic, but by far not as euphoric as some kettlebell warriors on the Internet.

Those of you who know me are probably aware that I am not a fan of kettle bells, but I am true to the motto of being open to good scientific evidence, like the one from the previously cited review by Girard et al. (2014).
Speaking of which, the previously cited review found only five studies satisfied the eligibility criteria and were included in this review. The populations studied age range was 18–72 years old. Methodological scores based on the PEDro scale ranged from 3 to 7 out of 10. In those studies, ...

[k]ettlebell training demonstrated improvements for a number of strength measures: time 6 group for bench press ( P < 0.05) and back extension (P = 0.053), main effect for clean and jerk (P < 0.05) and certain power measures such as improved explosive strength comparable to a jump squat control (19.8% increase). Improved postural control was demonstrated in one study (P = 0.04)" (Girard. 2014).

What the kettlebells did not do in any of the five studies by Otto et al. (2012), Manoccia et al. (2013), Lake et al. (2012) and Jay et al. (2011 & 2013) was to have an effect on aerobic endurance as measured by VO2 Max.
The non-significance of the oxygen uptake and thus the non-existence of conditioning effects may come as a surprise for those of you have already done kettlebell swings. Rightly so, as I would argue, because this result of the review is based mainly on the results of Jay et al. (2011) who invited 57 employees of a large pharmaceutical company for a physical examination. Of those only 43 showed up (motivation to work their assess off ?) of whom 40 men and women in their mid-forties then trained for 20 minutes included a 5 –10 minute warm up and a 10–15 minute interval training consisting of 10 intervals of 30 seconds with rest period of 30–60 seconds which began with ZERO workload and was progressively intensified by the participants choice!

Kettlebell, weights, or ergometer, you have to work your ass off to make progress!

Thats much in contrast to Fortner et al. (2014) who had their 14 young (18-25y), non-obese volunteers train three times a week for 8 weeks with 4.5kg and 8kg kettlebells for the female and male subjects, respectively in a "tabata style", i.e. at a twenty-second work to ten-second rest ratio and compared the VO2 response to a traditional protocol, consisting of four sets of work separated by ninety seconds of rest.

Figure 1: Subjective Borg RPE response to Tabata versus traditional kettlebell swing protocols in healthy, young adults. TAB- Tabata, TRADtraditional (left). % of peak VO2 value achieved during Tabata and traditional kettlebell swing protocols in healthy, young adults (right | Fortner. 2014).

As you can see in Figure 1 the response to the two different workouts was very different - despite the fact that the total number of swings from each individuals "tabata condition" (TBA) was equally divided into four sets for their "tradititional condition" (TRAD). From non-kettlebell studies, we know that training at an intensity like this, even if its done for only a few minutes, will just as Fortner et al. say "safely and effectively provide multi-faceted exercise adaptations with a relatively short time investment" (Fortner. 2014) - an assumption thats backed by a 2011 study by Falatic et al. that used a 15s/15s protocol and elicited significant increases in VO2max in seventeen female NCAA Division I collegiate soccer players.

Figure 2: Energy expenditure during two-hand kettlebell exercise and graded treadmill walking (Thomas. 2014).

Furthermore, James et al.  (2014) were recently able to show that a KB routine consisting of 2-hand swings and sumo deadlifts with 3-minute rest periods produces similar metabolic responses to those of a moderate-intensity treadmill walking protocol designed for the improvement of aerobic fitness in 5 women, 5 men between 21 and 31 years of age - and, as you can see in Figure 2, it also burned a few extra calories.

A comparison with treadmill walking is yet not enough to confirm that kettlebell training is also superior to "regular" HIIT training. Personally, I suspect it isnt but its at least a good way to diversify your training routines and create a new exercise stimulus that may even help you break through a plateau.
References:

• Falatic, Jonathan Asher. "The effects of kettlebell training on aerobic capacity." San José state University (2011).
• Fortner, Howard A., et al. "Cardiovascular and metabolic demands of the kettlebell swing using a Tabata interval versus a traditional resistance protocol." International Journal of Exercise Science 7.3 (2014): 2. 
• Greenwald, Samantha Leigh. The impact of an acute bout of kettlebell exercise on glucose tolerance in sedentary males. Diss. State University of New York at Buffalo, 2014.
• Jay, Kenneth, et al. "Kettlebell training for musculoskeletal and cardiovascular health: a randomized controlled trial." Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health (2011): 196-203.
• Jay, Kenneth, et al. "Effects of kettlebell training on postural coordination and jump performance: a randomized controlled trial." The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 27.5 (2013): 1202-1209.
• Lake, Jason P., and Mike A. Lauder. "Mechanical demands of kettlebell swing exercise." The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 26.12 (2012): 3209-3216.
• Manocchia, Pasquale, et al. "Transference of kettlebell training to strength, power, and endurance." The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 27.2 (2013): 477-484.
• McGill, Stuart M., and Leigh W. Marshall. "Kettlebell swing, snatch, and bottoms-up carry: back and hip muscle activation, motion, and low back loads." The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 26.1 (2012): 16-27. 
• Otto III, William H., et al. "Effects of weightlifting vs. kettlebell training on vertical jump, strength, and body composition." The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 26.5 (2012): 1199-1202.
• Thomas, James F., et al. "Comparison of Two-Hand Kettlebell Exercise and Graded Treadmill Walking: Effectiveness as a Stimulus for Cardiorespiratory Fitness." The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 28.4 (2014): 998-1006.